Iran's foreign minister stated that a peace deal with the US hinges on Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon. This comes amid rising concerns that Israel may disrupt diplomatic efforts to end the Middle East war.
Key points
Iran's foreign minister links US peace deal to Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon
Donald Trump criticizes Israel's actions in Lebanon at G7 summit
Hezbollah received assurances from Iran regarding Israeli troop withdrawal
Concerns grow over Israel undermining diplomatic efforts to end the war
Mentioned in this story
Abbas AraghchiDonald TrumpBenjamin NetanyahuHezbollah
Iran’s top diplomat has said a peace deal with the US would require Israel to withdraw from Lebanon, as concern grows that Israel could undermine diplomatic efforts to finally end the Middle East war, with Donald Trump even criticising his ally and war partner as irresponsible.
“Without the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories they occupied during this war, the war has not fully come to an end,” said the Iranian foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi.
A Hezbollah media relations official also said the group had received assurances from Iran that it would demand a withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon in its next phase of talks with the US.
The comments came as Donald Trump, speaking at the G7 leaders summit in Geneva, rounded on the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, saying he had to behave “more responsibly in Lebanon”, adding that a recent Israeli bombing attack on Beirut was “vicious”.
“Israel has been fighting Hezbollah for too long and too many people are being killed,” Trump said. “You don’t need to knock down an apartment house when you are looking for somebody because there are a lot of people in those apartment houses, and they are not all Hezbollah, that I can tell you.”
He suggested the Syrian government may do a better job in “dealing” with Hezbollah. While Damascus is run by former rebels who fought against Hezbollah during the Syrian civil war that overthrew President Bashar al-Assad, the government there now seeks stability.
Trump said he maintained an “unbelievable personal relationship” with Netanyahu, and described the fighting as a “pinprick” in comparison with the deal with Iran.
Trump’s remarks suggest he is losing patience with Israel’s apparent refusal to accept a ceasefire, and the threat it is posing to the 60-day ceasefire he has negotiated with Iran. “Without the US, without me,” he said, “there would be no Israel because there is no other president prepared to do what I did”.
Trump added he did not like that Israel had attacked Beirut only two hours before Iran was due to sign the memorandum.
Q&A
What did Iran's foreign minister say about Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon?
Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, stated that a peace deal with the US requires Israel to withdraw from the territories it occupies in Lebanon.
How does Donald Trump view Israel's actions in Lebanon?
Donald Trump criticized Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for his actions in Lebanon, calling for more responsible behavior and condemning a recent bombing in Beirut.
What assurances did Hezbollah receive from Iran regarding Israel?
Hezbollah was assured by Iran that it would demand the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon in the next phase of talks with the US.
What are the implications of Israel's military actions in Lebanon?
Israel's military actions in Lebanon, including recent bombings, have raised concerns about civilian casualties and may hinder diplomatic efforts to resolve the ongoing conflict.
See every story in News — including breaking news and analysis.
On Tuesday, Israeli drone attacks killed at least four people in Lebanon, including a “double-tap” strike in which a drone targeted a car in the village of Mayfadoun and then launched a second strike after people gathered at the scene, local media reported.
The threat to the peace plan posed by Israel’s actions in Lebanon will only deepen fears of European leaders about the durability of the peace plan. Gulf states attending the G7 summit in Évian, France, were quizzed by Europeans about proposals for Arab states to invest as much as $300bn (£223bn) in the Iranian economy as a reward for Iran meeting its commitments to verifiably reject nuclear weapons.
The fund, according to the US vice-president, JD Vance, would only be implemented when the US accepted that Iran had met demands to dismantle its nuclear programme, and would not involve US government finances.
European powers had been at the centre of the talks that led to the 2015 nuclear arms control deal with Iran – the joint comprehensive plan of action (JCPOA) – but have been entirely excluded from the US decision to go to war, as well as from the negotiations to end a conflict that has rattled their economies.
They believe European nuclear expertise must be present in the coming round of talks. The 14-clause memorandum of understanding, a framework to open the strait of Hormuz and restart talks on Iran’s nuclear programme, has still not been published.
European concerns centre on the deal’s lack of detail, while Emmanuel Macron, the French president, called for restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile programme, an issue not directly addressed in the deal.
Some European diplomatic hawks fear the Iranian military will be more inclined to seek a nuclear weapon after successive US attacks, even if the closure of the strait of Hormuz has proven to be an astonishingly effective alternative deterrent.
Trump was also facing backlash from Israel and American conservatives over a section of the agreement stating that waivers of sanctions on Iranian oil sales would take effect immediately upon signing the agreement on Friday, covering necessary services including banking, transportation and insurance needed to facilitate the sales.
There is also growing concern that Trump has effectively conceded that Iran, after 60 days, can charge “maritime service fees” on commercial shipping transiting the strait. Any uncertainty about the future governance of the strait would discourage commercial shipping from continuing to enter the waterway.
There were, however, signs that the US blockade of Iranian ports had been lifted, with a growing number of ships starting to move.
The $300bn Iran investment plan included in the memorandum of understanding proposes a huge financial commitment from Gulf states that have been hit hard by the three-month war, including by Iranian attacks on key Gulf energy installations that led to a near collapse in relations.
The investment fund is an alternative to the Iranian demand for compensation from the US and Israel for launching what Tehran views as an unlawful and unjustified war, even as negotiations over its nuclear programme were continuing.
Three Arab leaders attended the talks: Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, president of the United Arab Emirates; Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the president of Egypt; and Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, the emir of Qatar. The Iran war has taken attention away from the crisis in Gaza, to the frustration of the Arab states.
Apart from the investment fund, Iran is also expecting that half its funds frozen by US sanctions, largely receipts on previous oil trades, will be released. Roughly $24bn of its assets are frozen abroad, including $8bn in Qatar. US officials have been evasive about whether and when this unfreezing may occur.
US officials had conceded the existence of a $300bn reconstruction fund in the deal on Monday, but said the fund was not a grant to Iran but an enabling vehicle for Gulf states to be given priority to make commercial investments in Iran, and so would act as an incentive for Tehran to dismantle its nuclear programme.
Vance said: “We are absolutely open to the Gulf coast countries investing in the reconstruction of Iran, but only if Iran ends their nuclear programme, ends their enriched stockpile of material and is really open to an inspection and enforcement regime that gives American people confidence that they are never going to have a nuclear weapon.”
Iranian sources say the deal sets out options for the disposal of the highly enriched uranium, and downblending of the stockpile to 3.67%, a level of purity sufficient for civilian purposes but not to manufacture a nuclear weapon. The text also keeps open Iran’s right to enrich uranium domestically, Iran’s key red line.
