End of war includes end of Israel's occupation of Lebanon: Iran foreign min
Context mode is active. Hover over any highlighted term to see its definition. Click a nested term to go deeper.
A nascent US-Iran 'end of war' agreement is already facing a critical diplomatic hurdle, with Iran Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi declaring on Tuesday that Israel full withdrawal from southern Lebanon is an 'inseparable part' of the deal. This bold assertion, made on Iranian state television, directly clashes with Israel firm rejection of any pullout, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insists Israeli forces will remain in a self-declared 'security zone' indefinitely. The public disagreement throws the fragile US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding, slated for a ceremonial signing this Friday in Switzerland, into immediate question and risks derailing a broader peace effort. The stakes couldn't be higher for a region still reeling from months of conflict that began in March 2026. While the undisclosed US-Iran MoU reportedly includes a ceasefire in Lebanon, Israeli officials, including Defense Minister Israel Katz, argue that 'Trump's agreement does not bind us' regarding troop presence. This divergence leaves Hezbollah, which Iran considers a party to the MoU, in a precarious position, having reportedly been assured by Tehran that Israeli withdrawal is a core demand for any final nuclear deal. The ongoing Israeli occupation, which has displaced over 1.2 million Lebanese civilians, coupled with continued Israeli strikes in southern Lebanon despite reduced fighting, underscores the dangerous ambiguity of the agreement. The coming days will test the limits of this uneasy truce. With the ceremonial signing imminent and a 60-day window for comprehensive nuclear negotiations expected to follow, the world watches whether the US and its mediating partners can bridge this fundamental gap, or if Iran insistence on a complete Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon will lead to a collapse of the agreement and a dangerous resumption of full-scale hostilities. The future of regional stability, and indeed global energy markets through the Strait of Hormuz, hinges on resolving this contentious interpretation.