The fragile truce in the Middle East has remained intact, albeit with great difficulty, even as it faced multiple outbreaks of violence during the last two months. However, it is currently approaching the point where it could collapse entirely, plunging the area once again into all-out conflict—and the trigger is Lebanon.
Israeli airstrikes targeting Hezbollah fighters in Beirut during the weekend led to retaliatory actions from their main supporter, Iran, marking Tehran's initial attacks on Israel since the truce came into effect on April 7. In response, Israel carried out strikes across various locations within Iran, as Iranian allies in Yemen and Iraq warned of expanding the conflict. The United States and other diplomatic actors quickly moved to contain the escalating violence.
Even if silence is enforced again, the underlying factors that caused the outbreak of violence remain unchanged.
Israel and the United States continue to be at an impasse with Iran and Hezbollah over defining the region’s future structure, as each party believes they are operating from a position of power. U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, both dealing with significant electoral challenges, hold conflicting priorities.
Israel is preparing for its initial nationwide election since Hamas launched an attack on October 7, 2023, which set off conflicts across the region. Netanyahu faces growing demands to demonstrate resilience following his consistent promises to eliminate Hezbollah. Even with multiple conflicts and ongoing battles, Israel has yet to effectively stop Hezbollah from launching attacks into northern regions.
In addition, Netanyahu remains cautious about seeming overly dependent on Trump, as some voices in Israel argue that yielding too much to the United States is hindering the nation’s military objectives. Trump has urged Netanyahu against allowing conflicts in Lebanon to interfere with American attempts at achieving broader regional peace, and he informed the Financial Times that he, rather than Netanyahu, holds ultimate authority.
Although Israel has engaged in direct talks with Lebanon's administration and established multiple truce accords with them during recent weeks, Netanyahu has persisted with military actions in southern Lebanon, capturing a significant portion of the area and advancing beyond the Litani River into northern parts of the country. The Israeli forces have kept conducting strikes in the south, claiming they aim at dismantling Hezbollah's missile and drone stockpiles.
Prime Minister Netanyahu sought to demonstrate strength following an attack by Hezbollah on northern Israel using rockets on Sunday — a move that Israeli authorities had cautioned could lead to Israeli bombing raids in Beirut.
The Hezbollah organization has turned down the truces approved by both Israel and the Lebanese administration, stating it won't stop engaging in combat as long as Israel keeps conducting airstrikes and maintains its military presence in southern Lebanon. This armed faction persists with assaults against Israeli soldiers in southern Lebanon along with rocket barrages directed at northern Israel.
Iran allowed Hezbollah to manage on its own for most of an earlier conflict in 2024. Following that conflict, Hezbollah ceased firing missiles toward Israel—although Israel kept carrying out routine attacks on what it referred to as Hezbollah locations in Lebanon. However, after Israel aligned with the U.S. in striking Iran on February 28th, Hezbollah carried out assaults on northern Israel in solidarity with its ally and due to 15 months of one-sided attacks.
The Iranian response to Israel following the bombing in Beirut demonstrated its readiness to provoke another conflict in the area to protect its interests in Lebanon and its key regional partner.
Hezbollah is experiencing growing pressure as Israeli forces advance beyond the Litani River, moving nearer to the city of Nabatiyeh, a key center where the organization has significant backing. Meanwhile, the group is encountering greater tension with the Lebanese administration, as both the prime minister and president have criticized Hezbollah for resuming hostilities against Israel.
Hezbollah continues to oppose handing over its arms, despite assurances from Lebanese officials that this will occur. The organization has stated it will consider relinquishing its weaponry only within the framework of an overall government "defensive plan," possibly involving integration with the Lebanese armed forces.
Iran's criticism of Israel aimed at supporting Hezbollah involves significant dangers. Should another large-scale conflict break out, Iran could suffer further economic harm along with strikes against its armed forces and top officials.
However, Iranian officials have aimed to convey assurance that the Islamic Republic and its economic system can endure the impact. Over the last two months, they have consistently jeopardized the truce by maintaining a firm stance during talks with the United States.
Iran is wagering that its large-scale interference with maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz provides it with leverage to counter the efforts of the United States and Israel in shaping negotiation outcomes—and believes that Trump’s hesitation to return to conflict will keep the U.S. from encouraging Israeli actions.
Iran has emphasized that Lebanon must be included in any regional solution, and it aims to stop a situation where Israel can attack locations in Lebanon and Iran without encountering retaliation.
The U.S. and Israel planned the attacks on Iran that marked the start of the conflict. However, recent open disputes between Trump and Netanyahu have become visible.
The ongoing conflict poses a threat to Trump's Republican Party ahead of the mid-term elections scheduled for November. Trump claims that these elections and concerns over the economy do not influence his choices regarding the war. However, both his party members and advisors may fear the possible negative impact on voters caused by an intense conflict leading to higher prices for gasoline and various products. Additionally, the president aims to avoid appearing before the public as someone who has led the U.S. into yet another expensive situation in the Middle East.
Similar to what is happening in Lebanon, the United States and Israel are adopting a new approach regarding Iran.
During discussions, the United States has consistently prioritized addressing Iran's nuclear activities and ensuring unhindered maritime traffic via the Strait of Hormuz. Israel, which has historically worried over Iran's nuclear ambitions, now perceives a significant chance to weaken Iran's rocket capabilities and its backing of militant organizations throughout the area.
Even with numerous discussions, there is minimal indication that Iran intends to compromise regarding its enriched materials and the direction of its nuclear program.
The Gulf Arab nations are keen to bring an end to the conflict at the earliest opportunity. Prior to the April truce which stopped much of the combat, Iranian air strikes caused damage to various infrastructures throughout the area. Airports, water purification centers, aluminium refineries, and petroleum installations were all affected.
A resurgence of broader conflict would put these objectives at greater risk. A recent Iranian drone attack on Kuwait's airport served as a warning of the danger.
Meanwhile, Iran's control over the Strait of Hormuz has affected oil and gas shipments from Gulf countries that depend on transporting tankers through this critical passage connecting the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea.
Gulf nations aligned with the U.S. have historically maintained American naval, air, and military facilities, viewing this collaboration as a shield from Iranian threats. However, during the conflict, they remained exposed to strikes, challenging their confidence in an alliance meant to ensure safety.
Gulf nations stand to benefit minimally from an extended conflict but face significant risks if unrest turns into a permanent state in the area.