On 27 June, Israel, Lebanon and the United States signed a framework agreement in Washington that explicitly links a staged Israeli military withdrawal from southern Lebanon to the verified disarmament of all non-state armed groups, chiefly the Iran-backed Shiite movement Hezbollah. Within hours, Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem declared the text "null and void", describing it as a "humiliation" and a "surrender of sovereignty". Israeli airstrikes on Lebanese territory continued the following day, with the state-run National News Agency reporting a strike near Deir Siryan and Taybeh, underscoring the fragility of the new diplomatic architecture.

The Israeli government has framed the accord as a historic strategic victory. In a televised briefing, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said it represented a "blow to Iran and Hezbollah", adding that Israeli forces would remain in a ten-kilometre security zone inside Lebanon "until Hezbollah and the rest of the terror groups are disarmed". Defence Minister Israel Katz ordered troops to prepare for an extended stay. Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun, in a phone call with US President Donald Trump, committed the state to "assume its responsibilities" in implementing the deal, which he called a first step towards restoring sovereignty. Yet Hezbollah lawmaker Hassan Fadlallah warned that enforcing disarmament would require the state to "go to civil war", while Qassem insisted his fighters would keep "our finger on the trigger" and continue resistance.

The text, released by the US State Department, sets out a sequenced process: an initial Israeli withdrawal from two pilot zones, to be replaced by the Lebanese Armed Forces, followed by gradual expansion as Hezbollah is disarmed. It expresses the intent to "conclusively end the conflict" and formally terminate the state of war. Diplomatically, however, the agreement exists in tension with a separate US-Iran memorandum of understanding that established a deconfliction mechanism for Lebanon, in which Iran is included but Israel is not. Viewed from Tehran, the framework is seen as an effort to sideline the so-called axis of resistance and consolidate Israeli military gains—an interpretation echoed by Hezbollah’s media.

Implementation remains deeply uncertain. Hezbollah’s rejection and street protests in Beirut signal the risk of internal destabilisation, while the Lebanese army has historically proved unable or unwilling to confront the group. France has stated its readiness to "contribute" to the deal’s execution, and several Arab states have welcomed the initiative, but the diplomatic track runs parallel to continued military operations. A previous ceasefire agreed in April 2026 collapsed, and UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which mandated Hezbollah’s withdrawal north of the Litani River, was never enforced. The Israeli military has already withdrawn from one pilot zone, but officials in Jerusalem say further steps depend entirely on the Lebanese state’s capacity to impose its monopoly on force. For now, the agreement remains a statement of intent whose translation into practice will test Lebanon’s political cohesion and the credibility of the US-led mediation.