Lebanon’s Pivotal Role: How Its Future Could Shape Regional Conflict Dynamics

The 10-day truce between Lebanon and Israel is nearing its end with no definitive agreement in sight to permanently halt their hostilities.

As the ceasefire reaches its midpoint, analysts note that tensions persist, with both nations frequently blaming each other for breaches of the ceasefire.

This ongoing conflict is having wider implications for regional stability, affecting oil supplies and impacting Australia’s fuel and food security.

There have been calls from international leaders for peace negotiations between the two countries, emphasizing the need for the disarmament of Hezbollah, the Iran-aligned Lebanese militant group.

Additionally, some voices are advocating for Israel to pull its troops from southern Lebanon, where they currently occupy a strip of land extending five to 10 kilometers deep along the border.

Israel has said it aims to create a “buffer zone” to shield northern Israel from attacks by Hezbollah.

The renewed calls for a long-lasting truce come as US President Donald Trump has extended the US ceasefire deal with Iran, hours before it was set to expire, on Wednesday AEST.

Iran said on Tuesday it had yet to decide whether to attend peace talks with the US in Pakistan.

Jessica Genauer, an expert in international conflict at the University of New South Wales, told SBS News the multiple conflicts and mediation attempts reflect a broader pattern of interconnected challenges across the Middle East.

The dynamics between Israel, Hezbollah, and Iran blur the boundaries of any single dispute, she said, making localised agreements “inseparable” from global disputes.

What did Lebanon and Israel agree to?

Israel and Lebanon agreed to implement a “cessation of hostilities” for an initial period of 10 days to enable peace negotiations between the two countries. The initial deal ends in five days.

The deal says Lebanon’s government, with international ‌support, would take “meaningful steps” to prevent Hezbollah and other groups from carrying out attacks against Israeli targets.

It also says that Israel and Lebanon recognise the Lebanese security forces “as having exclusive responsibility for Lebanon’s sovereignty and national defence”, a reference to a bid by the government since 2025 to disarm Hezbollah.

Under the agreement, “Israel shall preserve its right to take all necessary measures in self-defence, at any time, against planned, imminent, or ongoing attacks.”

Beyond this, “Israel will not carry out any offensive military operations against Lebanese targets, including civilian, military, and other state targets, in the territory of Lebanon by land, air, and sea,” the deal says.

The 10-day period can be extended by mutual agreement as talks progress and depending on whether “Lebanon effectively demonstrates its ability to assert its sovereignty”, ⁠it adds, in another reference to Lebanon’s efforts to disarm Hezbollah.

The deal does not require Israel to withdraw from southern Lebanon.

Calls for negotiations

French President Emmanuel Macron and Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam on Tuesday urged negotiations to shore up a ceasefire in Lebanon and called on Israel to respect its neighbour’s territorial integrity after talks in Paris.

Broader regional stability, Macron said, “can only be achieved through an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory and the disarmament of Hezbollah”.

Salam said Lebanon remains committed to direct negotiations with Israel.

“We are continuing along this path, convinced that diplomacy is not a sign of weakness but a responsible act,” he said, adding that the talks would require sustained international support.

Still, Salam insisted that “there can be no lasting stability without a complete Israeli withdrawal” from Lebanese territory.

Dr Randa Slim is a distinguished fellow and the program lead for the Middle East Program at the Stimson Center, an independent foreign affairs think tank.

She told ABC Radio National that the attempts at conflict resolution in the Middle East can be seen as “two theatres” with the Lebanon–Israel ceasefire on one hand and the US–Iran on the other.

While Trump and Netanyahu have said the two deals are not linked, Slim said they cannot be separated.

“The timing of the ceasefire in Lebanon, followed shortly by an Iranian announcement of opening the state of Hormuz, makes this linkage too blaring,” she said on Monday.

“[If] the situation on the US-Iran front escalates, I think there is definitely a danger for the situation in the Lebanese-Israeli front to escalate.”

Iran has repeatedly closed and reopened the Strait of Hormuz in response to what it has described as violations of its ceasefire with the US.

Israel ‘not willing to compromise’

Slim said that the current Lebanese government has shown consistent interest in negotiating a lasting peace.

“What’s not clear is whether the Israeli political leadership, which sees its political survival contingent on keeping Israel on a war path with its neighbour, is really seriously interested in moving forward on this negotiation path,” she said.

She described the Israeli government as motivated by “expansionism”, pointing to its takeover of Lebanese territory.

“This is very much in line with an Israeli government that works according to an expansionist agenda, occupying territory in Syria, and next thing the West Bank,” she said.

Syria has been seeking to reclaim the Golan Heights, a region captured by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War. Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights and the West Bank is considered illegal under international law.

Israel passed legislation in the 1980s applying its laws and government over the Golan Heights. It considers the West Bank to be “disputed” territory and wants its status to be resolved in the peace negotiations.

Israel says its current military operation in southern Lebanon is intended to expand the security buffer zone until Hezbollah’s threat to Israel is eliminated.

Genauer said that Israel appears to be willing to negotiate, but “has a number of red lines that they’re not willing to compromise on”.

“They’re willing to agree to a cessation of hostilities, but that doesn’t mean that there wouldn’t be violations,” she said.

“And they’ve said as much, saying that if they think that Hezbollah has violated the ceasefire, they will definitely respond, and they will also violate the ceasefire.”

Perhaps the most important figure is Trump, she said, who could pressure Israel into a deal with Lebanon, as a means of reducing US tensions with Iran.

“As long as there’s the headline sort of statement that there’s a ceasefire in place — regardless of Israeli occupation or ceasefire violations — I think Trump will be quite happy to accept that and move on,” she said.

What happens next?

Slim said there is a risk that Israel may look to retain large portions of southern Lebanon as part of a future deal.

“I think this is a danger is that this kind of occupation can, if sustained in the long term … lead to annexation of this territory by Israel. And that will be a disaster for Lebanon,” she said.

Whether or not Hezbollah will agree to a deal between Lebanon and Israel is also a key factor looking ahead.

Genauer said that the Lebanese delegation in previous negotiations had not included an official with strong ties to the group.

She said Hezbollah could become “increasingly dissatisfied” with Lebanon’s negotiations with Israel, further destabilising peace efforts.

“That flows into Lebanese politics and could create further fractures in an already quite volatile, and in some ways, an unstable domestic environment where Lebanon has been facing a lot of challenges in recent years and decades, both politically, economically and security-wise.”

— With additional reporting from the Associated Press and Reuters news agencies.