The future of Lebanon may well determine whether the recently signed memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran can survive. Even as the ink on the accord is barely dry, Israel has intensified its bombardment of Lebanon, determined to sabotage the fragile peace before it takes root. Despite the announcement of a ceasefire on Friday, Israeli strikes continued into the weekend, hitting southern and eastern regions of the country and leaving behind a trail of casualties. Hezbollah remains the stated target, but tragically, large numbers of civilians have also perished in these relentless attacks.

The brutality has drawn criticism even from Israel’s closest allies. President Donald Trump, who has often stood firmly beside Tel Aviv, expressed displeasure at the bloodshed. Yet the Israeli leadership appears resolute in its course. The prime minister has refused to relinquish occupied territory in southern Lebanon, while the extremist national security minister has gone so far as to declare that “Lebanon must burn.” Such rhetoric underscores the danger: if Lebanon is engulfed in flames, the Iran–US accord and the wider region could also collapse into chaos.

On one side of the spectrum, the signatories of the MoU, along with nations such as Pakistan that have played pivotal roles in facilitating dialogue, are striving to push the negotiation process forward. On the other side, Israel is intent on derailing it. The international community, particularly the United States and Europe, must confront Tel Aviv’s destabilising behaviour. The past months have demonstrated that the greatest obstacle to Middle East peace is not Iran but Israel, which has attacked sovereign states and carried out atrocities in Gaza. Unless checked, it could destroy a hard‑won opportunity for stability.

There are faint signs of a shift in tone from Washington. While successive US administrations have historically indulged Israel, Vice President J.D. Vance recently urged Tel Aviv to “wake up and smell the reality of the situation,” in reference to its opposition to the Iran deal. Such statements suggest growing impatience, but words alone will not suffice. If the US truly wishes to alter Israel’s conduct, it must reconsider the flow of funds and weapons that sustain its military machine. Without this support, Israel’s capacity to wage war would diminish, and it might be compelled to listen.

The MoU is clear: the ceasefire must apply to all fronts, including Lebanon. Israel must silence its guns and withdraw from Lebanese territory, or face isolation and boycott from the international community. The choice is stark — either embrace peace or risk being cast aside by the world.

Lebanon’s fate is now intertwined with the survival of the accord. If Israel continues its destructive path, the region could once again be plunged into war. But if the international community acts decisively, the fragile peace painstakingly negotiated may yet endure.