Deal under fire: Israeli strikes threaten U.S.-Iran truce

The US-Iranian truce was in danger of collapse almost immediately after signing. Negotiations between the parties were supposed to take place in Switzerland today, but they were postponed amid a sharp escalation in Lebanon. On the night of June 19, Israel attacked Hezbollah targets in the south of the country. The victims were 24 people. The escalation plays into the hands of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose position weakened on the eve of the Knesset elections. Why Tel Aviv is hitting on Trump's deal with Tehran and how Washington can influence its main ally in the Middle East — in the Izvestia article.

Lebanese Front hits out at deal

U.S. Vice President Jay D. Vance did not go to Switzerland for talks with the Iranian side. The meeting was scheduled to take place on June 19 and would be the next stage in the implementation of the memorandum of understanding signed by Washington and Tehran this week.

The talks were postponed amid the escalation in Lebanon: the IDF attacked targets of Hezbollah, a Shiite movement that remains one of Iran's main allies in the Middle East. "In response to repeated and egregious violations by Hezbollah, the Israel Defense Forces attacked 80 targets," the Israeli military said in a statement.

In fact, this was the first violation of the terms of the memorandum signed on June 17 by the Presidents of the United States and Iran, Donald Trump and Masoud Peseshkian. The 14-point document explicitly stated that the ceasefire must be respected on all fronts, including Lebanon.

Against this background, alarming reports have also been received from the Strait of Hormuz, where shipping began to recover on June 18. According to Bild, warning shots were fired there, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) allegedly radioed a demand for ships to stay away from the waterway. The Iranian Foreign Ministry later denied this information.

In addition, the parties have not yet announced the disruption of the entire peace process. However, Iran has requested guarantees of a cessation of hostilities in Lebanon as a condition for resuming negotiations with the United States, CNN reported, citing a diplomatic source. Consultations in this area are underway.

At the same time, as reported by Reuters, progress has already been made: Israel and Hezbollah have nevertheless agreed on a cease-fire. These agreements were allegedly reached with the participation of negotiators from the United States and Qatar, as well as with the assistance of Iran.

Russia expressed hope that attempts at a diplomatic settlement would be continued. "We have a common assessment of the situation in the Middle East, around the Islamic Republic of Iran. We hope that the signed memorandum between Washington and Tehran will prevent the resumption of violence," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said after talks with his Madagascar counterpart Alice Ndiaye.

At the same time, the escalation also hit Trump's positions inside the United States. Democrats have previously accused him that the war with Iran should not have started at all. After the signing of the memorandum, criticism only intensified: some of the American media presented the deal as an admission of Washington's defeat, which, in their assessment, did not achieve its stated goals and was forced to fix a compromise on terms favorable to Tehran.

"We didn't meet because of desperation. It was Iran that was desperate!" the American president said. He also stressed that the deal remains in effect, and repeated that Tehran "will not receive money, not a dime." Earlier, the media reported that the memorandum provides for the creation of a $300 billion investment fund for the reconstruction of Iran, but Trump denied this information.

Conflict of interest

The escalation in Lebanon has exacerbated the differences between Washington and Tel Aviv. US Vice President Jay Dee Vance made it clear that Israeli politicians should not attack the agreement with Iran, especially given the scale of American aid to Israel. He called on the leadership of the Jewish state to look at the situation more realistically, saying that a country with a population of nine million cannot solve every security problem by force.

Later, at a briefing at the White House, Vance spoke even harsher: "Donald Trump is the only head of state in the whole world who currently sympathizes with the State of Israel. If I were a member of the Israeli government's cabinet, I probably wouldn't be attacking my only remaining powerful ally in the world."

In turn, Netanyahu threatened that Israel would maintain a security zone in southern Lebanon as long as the country's interests required it. He also warned that the state would not tolerate attacks on its military or territory, and Hezbollah would pay a heavy price for such attacks.

Relations between the United States and Israel have experienced crises before, but the current situation is special. Experts are convinced that for Trump, the memorandum with Iran has become a personal foreign policy asset, and for Netanyahu, it has limited freedom of action in the Lebanese direction.

At the same time, yielding to American pressure carries serious risks for the Israeli prime minister. Knesset elections are due in Israel in the fall, and it is important for Netanyahu to prove to voters that he has not allowed the United States and Iran to impose security rules on his country.

For the prime minister himself, the current campaign is a matter of political survival. Corruption cases continue against him, and part of society holds the current leadership responsible for the failure on October 7, 2023 (when Hamas militants broke through the border with the Gaza Strip). If the crisis is resolved without an obvious Israeli victory, Netanyahu may lose the main argument of his campaign — the image of a leader who keeps the country at war for the sake of security.

So far, the only thing playing in his favor is that the opposition camp remains fragmented: former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, former chief of the IDF General Staff Gadi Eisenkot and MP Avigdor Lieberman are running for the post. But they don't have a single strategy, a common list, or a clear rotation mechanism. In these circumstances, Netanyahu retains the opportunity to form a parliamentary majority through an alliance with ultra-orthodox and far-right parties.

What the experts say

Israel has the opportunity to complicate the implementation of the truce, but not in the format of a direct disruption of the US-Iranian memorandum, but through the expansion of operations against Hezbollah and the constant presentation of new security threats on the northern border, political analyst Igor Graschenkov does not exclude.

— Trump's reaction is likely to be twofold. Publicly, he will not completely abandon his support for Israel, because it is too important a part of American domestic policy. But non—publicly, the pressure on Netanyahu may increase dramatically: from limiting diplomatic cover to linking individual elements of military assistance with compliance with the new rules of the game, the expert notes.

According to him, such a signal is especially sensitive for Netanyahu on the eve of the elections. In addition, Trump has previously made it clear that his support for the Israeli prime minister is not unconditional. "I need to see who is running. I have a good relationship with Bibi, but he needs to be more rational. I am ready to meet with him," the American president said. This is an unpleasant signal for Netanyahu, as one of his main domestic political arguments is his ability to maintain special relations with Washington even in times of crisis.

"If the crisis is resolved without an obvious Israeli victory, it risks being trapped: peace was not made by it, the conditions were dictated by Washington, and society may ask why the escalation continued," admits Grashenkov.

At the same time, INF expert Anton Mardasov draws attention to the fact that the United States is already preparing mechanisms that can allow Washington to gradually withdraw from the conflict.

— Earlier, Trump said that the mechanism of passage through Hormuz should be the topic of negotiations between Iran, Oman and the Gulf countries. This looks like another confirmation that Washington is trying to shift some of the responsibility onto regional players," the expert believes.

In his opinion, the United States initially fell into a trap by including the Lebanese case in the agreement. From the point of view of Washington's interests, it would be more logical to divide the memorandum into two tracks — Iranian and external, related to Tehran's allies in the region. Because of this, the opinion began to spread among the elites of the Arab states that the differences between the United States and Israel may be partially faked: Washington allegedly tacitly authorizes the IDF strikes in order to be responsible only for the implementation of agreements with Iran.

— It was probably true to some extent. However, recent events show that the differences between Washington and Israel have intensified. Netanyahu sees the memorandum as zeroing in on the results of the war, while Trump seeks to quickly fix the deal as a foreign policy success. This creates a trap for Iran: Pezeshkian had to sign a document that, in fact, remains a draft. Trump's desire for a quick deal may look like weakness, although the Americans are likely to convince the Israelis otherwise.