How renewed fighting between Israel and Hezbollah could scupper the U.S-Iran deal

TEL AVIV — It was the kind of attack that could have derailed the highly anticipated truce between the United States and Ira n: Israel’s military said Sunday evening it was preparing for an incoming salvo of Iranian missiles.

Get unlimited access to ad-free articles and exclusive content.

But the attack never came and hours later, plans for the United States and Iran to sign a more permanent ceasefire deal in Geneva were being announced.

The white-knuckle diplomatic whiplash demonstrated once again how Israel’s more focused fight against the Iran-backed Hezbollah militia in Lebanon still has the power to disrupt the broader American efforts to resolve its regionwide, monthslong war with Iran.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has yet to comment publicly on the deal and an Israeli official briefed on the matter told NBC News that he is seeking a meeting with President Donald Trump in order to discuss it.

In recent days, Trump has publicly taken Netanyahu to task for continuing to strike Hezbollah, which Iran insists be protected from Israeli attacks under any ceasefire accord with the U.S.

“He’s a very difficult guy,” Trump said of Netanyahu in an interview with The New York Times shortly after the agreement was announced. “To be honest with you, he should be very thankful to us for doing this. Because if Iran had a nuclear weapon, Israel wouldn’t be around for two hours.”

Iran’s threat to strike Israel Sunday came in response to Israeli airstrikes on a southern suburb of Lebanon’s capital, Beirut. Israel said it was retaliating against Hezbollah attacks on the north of the country earlier that day.

It was the second three-way exchange of fire in a week: During the previous tit-for-tat attacks, Iran followed through on its threats and fired missiles at Israel, most of which were intercepted and caused no casualties.

As praise for Trump’s announcement rolled in from world leaders, Vice President JD Vance told CNBC on Monday that Israel “is going to have a seat at the table” and there were elements inside the country “that like the deal quite a bit.”

But by then, it was already clear that if Israel does accept the deal, it will be under protest.

Defense Minister Israel Katz said Monday morning that the Israel Defense Forces would not withdraw from the multiple theaters of war where it is deployed.

He said in a statement that together with Netanyahu, he was “leading a clear policy that determines that the IDF will remain in the security zones in Lebanon, Syria, and Gaza.”

The statement, which did not reference the ceasefire, added that Israel was opposed to the idea of its military withdrawing from Lebanon “despite all the existing pressures and those that will still come.”

Netanyahu had made this clear to Trump, he said, without saying when. Katz added he had also made it clear yesterday to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Israel’s northern border with Lebanon was largely quiet following the ceasefire except for one drone that the country’s military said crossed from Lebanon into northern Israel overnight. The Israeli military said it intercepted the projectile and that warning sirens weren’t activated.

By Monday morning, Israeli politicians from across the spectrum were already slamming the deal, despite the fact that its details remain largely ill-defined.

“Trump’s agreement does not bind us. Israel is not subject to the United States, and we are an independent and sovereign nation!” Itamar Ben-Gvir , Israel’s ultranationalist minister of national security, wrote in a post on X on Monday. “We must not compromise on anything less than the dismantling of Hezbollah, we must not withdraw from any territory that our fighters have captured and cleared.”

Far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich also took to social media to call the deal “bad for Israel and for the entire free world,” while insisting Israel would “have to continue the campaign to topple the regime ourselves and in creative ways, and ensure that Iran will never have nuclear weapons.”

Others, including Yair Lapid, a former prime minister and now the centrist leader of the country’s parliamentary opposition, used the deal to attack Netanyahu. Lapid said in a statement that Netanyahu had stood on the sidelines “weak, ill, isolated, and powerless” while the U.S. and Iran “made over Israel’s head.

In a statement Sunday, he said he hoped the reports about the agreement with Iran were not true, “but if they are, this is one of the most shocking failures of Israel’s foreign and security policy.”

And former Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman, a one-time Netanyahu ally turned bitter critic, called the deal “a catastrophe from Israel’s perspective.”

All of it is bad news for Netanyahu who faces considerable political pressure to keep up Israel’s fight against Hezbollah whose drones regularly land in northern Israel, a mostly rural area that has historically been an important source of electoral support for his Likud Party.

Facing the most formidable challenge to his decades of rule in elections this fall, support from northern Israelis, as well as his right-wing coalition partners such as Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, could prove critical to Netanyahu’s bid to remain in power.

With Netanyahu’s fragile government coalition relying on the support of far-right members, Sanam Vakil, the director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House, a London-based think tank, said Netanyahu was likely to “try to assert his priorities and interests over the deal.”

Trump, she said, would “have to play referee” if he wants to see the peace deal advance.