What we know about the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire

On Thursday, Ali Fayyad, a Hezbollah politician, told Al Jazeera Arabic that the group will approach the newly announced ceasefire with “caution and vigilance” and any targeting of Lebanese sites by Israeli forces will constitute a breach of the truce.

“The next phase is thorny and fraught with pitfalls and challenges,” Fayyad said, adding that the “worst-case scenario” for Lebanon would be the resumption of civil strife.

Israel has demanded that the Lebanese government disarm Hezbollah, which refuses to give up its arms as long as Israeli forces remain on the ground in Lebanon and pose a threat to the country.

What has Israel said about the ceasefire?

Late on Thursday, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said his government now has the opportunity to “make a historic deal” with Beirut.

He said that Israel had “agreed” to the temporary, 10-day ceasefire but its forces would remain in Lebanon with an “extensive” security zone up to the Syrian border.

He highlighted that Israel’s key demand remains the disarmament of Hezbollah and said that Israel would not agree to Hezbollah’s request that it withdraw troops beyond its border.

Former Israeli diplomat Alon Pinkas dismissed the Israeli government’s framing of the deal, telling Al Jazeera: “Netanyahu says a lot of things. I wouldn’t take him at face value. He’s saying this because he was coerced into this by President Trump. This is not a ceasefire that he wanted.”

On Netanyahu’s suggestion that the truce could pave the way for a historic peace deal, Pinkas pointed to repeated failed efforts in the past.

“I think Netanyahu failed … he failed in his stated objective of disarming Hezbollah,” he said, adding: “I honestly cannot see any peace agreement being signed between Israel and Lebanon, with Hezbollah still armed.”

Yair Lapid, Israel’s opposition leader,  also slammed the ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel announced by Trump.

“Not for the first time, all the promises of this [Netanyahu] government are crashing against the ground of reality. The confrontation in Lebanon can only end in one way: the permanent removal of the threat to the northern settlements,” Lapid said in a post on X.

“In this government, it will no longer happen; we will do it in the next government,” he added.

What does this mean for people in Lebanon?

After the ceasefire was announced on Thursday, celebratory gunfire was heard in Beirut as the truce began.

But displaced people in downtown Beirut told Al Jazeera they didn’t trust the Israelis to uphold the ceasefire and would wait before returning to their homes – if they have homes to return to at all.

On Friday, the Lebanese military said there had already been a number of ceasefire violations, “with several Israeli attacks recorded, in addition to intermittent shelling targeting a number of villages”.

In a post on X, the Lebanese army also renewed its call for citizens to “exercise caution in returning to southern villages and towns” as the ceasefire takes effect in Lebanon.

The Lebanon 24 media outlet has reported that Israeli forces fired a machinegun and an artillery shell towards an ambulance team affiliated with the Islamic Health Authority in Kunin in the Nabatieh Governorate of Southern Lebanon. The news outlet said casualties have been reported.

Earlier, Israeli military spokesperson Avichay Adraee issued an “urgent message” to the residents of southern Lebanon , warning them to remain north of the Litani River despite the commencement of the ceasefire.

In a statement on X, Adraee said that while the ceasefire agreement has entered its implementation phase, Israeli forces are maintaining their current positions to counter what he described as “ongoing terrorist activities” by Hezbollah.

“Until further notice, you are requested not to move south of the Litani River,” he said.

In a statement carried by Lebanon’s National News Agency on Thursday, Hezbollah had also urged displaced people to remain cautious amid uncertainty over the truce.

“With the announcement of the ceasefire, and in the face of a treacherous enemy that is accustomed to breaking covenants and agreements, we call on you to be patient and not to head to the targeted areas in the South, the Bekaa and the southern suburbs of Beirut, until the course of events becomes fully clear,” it said.

Pinkas told Al Jazeera that despite a ceasefire, key details in the agreement remain unresolved, particularly in southern Lebanon.

“There is a Hezbollah kill zone in the south of Lebanon, and it’s not at all clear that the ceasefire will include that area. And once the ceasefire becomes partial, it ceases to be a ceasefire,” he said.

But people are eager to return to their homes in the south despite the ceasefire violations.

Reporting from Nabatieh in southern Lebanon, Al Jazeera’s Zeina Khodr said people returning don’t want to give up their land.

“There is a lot of anger. But at the same time, people here tell you that they have managed to remain steadfast,” she said.

What does this mean for people in northern Israel?

On Thursday night, in the run-up to the ceasefire, Hezbollah said its fighters had launched 38 attacks on Israeli forces inside Lebanese territory and 37 attacks in northern Israel.

On Friday morning, however, sirens which sound before a missile strike remained silent across Israel.

But leaders of regional councils in northern Israeli regions, which include the worst-hit areas from the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, expressed unhappiness with the ceasefire.

Moshe Davidovich, head of the Mateh Asher Regional Council in the western Galilee of northern Israel, told local media in a statement that the ceasefire and the establishment of a security zone up to the Litani River “is not a diplomatic achievement” but risks further violence.

“The residents of the north are not mere statistics in a show of international public relations,” he added.

Shimon Guetta, head of the Ma’ale Yosef Regional Council, also in northern Israel, rejected outside influence over Israel’s security policy, and demanded that any agreement must guarantee “complete disarmament of Hezbollah” and “absolute security” for northern communities, adding that “agreements on paper are meaningless” without clear enforcement.

Political commentator Abed Abou Shhadeh has told Al Jazeera that Israelis, especially those in the north of the country, have borne the brunt of attacks from Hezbollah and that has left them frustrated with news of the ceasefire.

“First of all, they were surprised that Hezbollah was able to maintain military capabilities and fight until the last minute of the ceasefire,” Shhadeh told Al Jazeera.

“Second, this is not what they were promised,” he said.

“They were promised absolute victory. They were promised that Israel would turn all of southern Lebanon into a buffer zone. And they [Israeli forces] weren’t able to do it,” he added.

Shhadeh said the ceasefire also underscores the impression among many Israelis that they were being lied to by their own government.

“There’s this feeling that they weren’t told the truth [or] everything regarding the American-Iranian ceasefire agreement. Iran and Pakistan said and mentioned that the ceasefire includes Lebanon,” he said.

“At first, Israel and the United States refused to acknowledge that. And now the person, or the politician, who told the Israeli public about the ceasefire was Donald Trump,” he added.

Could this truce reset Israel-Lebanon ties?

Thursday’s ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah comes after a previous one, which had ostensibly been in effect since November 27, 2024. But the United Nations has counted more than 10,000 Israeli ceasefire violations since then, as well as hundreds of Lebanese deaths.

Israel has repeatedly told the Lebanese government that Hezbollah must be disarmed for any truce to last.

Hezbollah has long been considered the strongest military force in Lebanon, though it has been weakened by the war with Israel and much of its leadership has been killed. But the group still retains the support of Lebanon’s Shia community, from which it emerged.

The Lebanese government has been uneasy about Hezbollah’s influence in the country. Last December, the government said it was close to completing the disarmament of Hezbollah south of the Litani River before a year-end deadline as part of the 2024 ceasefire deal with Israel.

At the start of the latest conflict, the Lebanese government also outlawed Hezbollah’s military wing.

But in January, Israel said Hezbollah still had a presence close to the border and was rebuilding its military capabilities “faster than the [Lebanese] army is dismantling [them]”.

For its part, Hezbollah has said that Israel needs to withdraw from the country’s southern region first as part of the 2024 ceasefire deal agreed between the armed group and Israel. That fighting erupted in October 2023 after Hezbollah fired rockets at Israel in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza. More than 3,768 Lebanese people were killed and 1.2 million were displaced in Israeli attacks.

Rami Khouri, a distinguished public policy fellow at the American University of Beirut, told Al Jazeera that Hezbollah is at the “centre of the ceasefire, but behind a curtain”.

“The Hezbollah and Lebanese government’s relationship has always been a subtle and complex one,” Khouri said.

“Sometimes, they contest against each other, and often they work with each other,” he said.

While Hezbollah and the government differ on their views on resistance to Israel, Khouri said, the Lebanese army would not try to forcibly take arms from Hezbollah because that would create huge sectarian tensions in the country.

“So, Hezbollah has to carry out behind-the-scenes, informal dialogue with the Lebanese government,” he explained.

Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has welcomed Thursday’s ceasefire and in a post on X, described the truce as “a central Lebanese demand we have pursued since the first day of the war”. But the government has always been apprehensive of Israel’s actions. Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun also previously refused to speak directly with Netanyahu about their differences.

Sami Nader, director of the Institute of Political Science at Saint Joseph University in Lebanon, told Al Jazeera that the truce could represent a significant opportunity to reset relations between Israel and Lebanon, although its success will depend on several critical factors.

“On one hand, it may serve as a foundation for a more sustainable, long-term settlement if both sides are willing to engage constructively. This truce should be different from the one made on the 24th of November 2025 when none of the parties respected it,” he said.

“On the other hand, the Lebanese government faces the responsibility of the disarmament of Hezbollah. Additionally, external support – particularly the exceptional backing provided by the Trump administration – could play a decisive role in achieving this mission,” he added.

On Thursday, Trump revealed that Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu and Lebanon’s President Aoun could meet ⁠in Washington over ⁠the ⁠next week or two to discuss the issues between the countries further.

Reporting from Lebanon, Al Jazeera’s Zeina Khodr said that currently, both the Lebanese government and Israel have very different positions, so a 10-day ceasefire is unlikely to provide time to guarantee permanent peace or an improvement in the two countries’ ties.

“This is why people are still concerned. Because this is a temporary truce. This is not the permanent end to the conflict,” she said.

Is this ceasefire all about getting an Iran-US deal?

“I think that this [ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon] is mostly about Iran and the US. The Iranians want a comprehensive, regional solution, which cannot happen without curtailing Israel. Trump seems game,” Ori Goldberg, an independent Israeli analyst, told Al Jazeera.

On Thursday, after announcing the ceasefire, Trump said a deal to end the war on Iran was “very close” and that peace talks may resume with Tehran in Pakistan’s capital Islamabad as early as this weekend.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry has also welcomed news of the ceasefire in Lebanon, according to Iranian state media, and framed the truce as part of a broader agreement with the US to pause the regional conflict.

Chris Featherstone, a political scientist at the University of York, noted that, so far, Iran has held firm on its negotiation position that the ceasefire between Tehran and the US and Israel should include a ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon.

“This deal between Israel and Lebanon could represent a move to set the ground for further US-Iran negotiations, removing a sticking point to further negotiations,” he told Al Jazeera.

However, Featherstone pointed out that this could also be another example of Trump seeking to take credit for a negotiated truce.

“His manoeuvres to gain attention for ‘ending wars’ as part of his campaign to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize have previously led Trump to claim that he has ended numerous conflicts, real and imagined,” he said.

“This could be another example of this Trump-style claiming credit,” he added.

Nader said that while the ceasefire may be influenced by broader US-Iran dynamics, it should be viewed as a “distinct” issue.

“Iran does retain leverage in the region through its proxy, Hezbollah, which can affect the timing and intensity of escalations,” he told Al Jazeera.

“However, the Lebanese track remains fundamentally and legally distinct and should be understood on its own terms. It is not directly tied to issues such as Iran’s nuclear programme or ballistic capabilities,” he explained.

“Rather, it revolves around bilateral concerns between Lebanon and Israel, including land border delimitation, security for residents on both sides of the frontier, and maritime border issues.”