Donald Trump announced on Thursday that Israel and Lebanon have agreed to a 10-day ceasefire, set to begin at midnight local time. It sounds like progress. It sounds like breathing room. But look closer and you’ll find something more fragile, more conditional, and far less certain than the headlines suggest.
The fighting between Israel and Hezbollah has raged for six weeks, though the roots run deeper. According to BBC reporting, the latest conflict began on 2 March after the US and Israel launched a joint attack on Iran. Hezbollah responded by firing rockets into northern Israel, claiming retaliation for the assassination of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The toll has been staggering: over 2,000 people killed in Lebanon, more than a million displaced, roughly 37,000 homes destroyed or damaged.
Israel has accepted the ceasefire. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed participation but added a crucial caveat: Israeli troops will maintain a 10-kilometer “security zone” in southern Lebanon. “We are there, and we are not leaving,” he said. That’s not a footnote. That’s the whole story for what comes next.
The Disarmament Question Nobody’s Answered
Here’s the thing that makes this ceasefire feel more like an intermission than an ending: nobody has solved the Hezbollah problem. Netanyahu has made disarming the group a fundamental demand for any future agreement. Lebanon’s government committed to preventing Hezbollah from carrying out attacks, but the group itself insisted the ceasefire include “a comprehensive halt to attacks” and “no freedom of movement for Israeli forces.”
Those demands are incompatible. Netanyahu rejected them both.
Lebanese authorities have long argued that disarming Hezbollah cannot be forced and would require negotiation with the group. That’s not just a technicality. It’s a political reality that suggests the central issue driving this conflict remains completely unresolved. A previous ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah in 2006, which ended 13 months of fighting, still saw near-daily cross-border strikes. History is not encouraging here.
Trump’s Diplomatic Gamble
Trump said he’d be inviting Netanyahu and Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun to the White House for “the first meaningful talks between Israel and Lebanon since 1983.” He expects them within one or two weeks. The symbolism matters. Direct negotiations between these countries are rare, which is precisely why they’re fragile.
Trump also signaled ongoing talks with Iran about nuclear weapons, saying the US and Tehran have agreed that Iran won’t develop nuclear capabilities “beyond 20 years.” He warned, “If there is no deal, fighting resumes.” Iran’s foreign ministry welcomed the Lebanon ceasefire, though it had previously insisted its own two-week truce with the US include Lebanese affairs, a demand the US and Israel rejected.
The diplomatic chess moves are real. The question is whether they can outlast the military realities on the ground.
The Ground Truth
In the hours before the ceasefire started, Israel and Hezbollah were still launching cross-border strikes. On Thursday, the Israeli military destroyed the last bridge linking southern Lebanon to the rest of the country. According to BBC Verify analysis, over 1,400 buildings in southern Lebanon have been destroyed since 2 March, with towns and villages across the region being systematically levelled.
Netanyahu framed Israeli occupation of the territory as necessary to “block the danger of invasion.” Israeli officials have previously indicated they intend to keep security control over the territory even after the current war ends. That’s not a temporary presence. That’s a long-term occupation of another country’s land.
The Lebanese government has condemned these demolitions as “flagrant crimes.” The numbers are staggering enough to suggest this isn’t collateral damage in a conflict but rather systematic territorial control.
What Actually Changes in 10 Days?
The ceasefire buys time, but for what? Trump’s invitation to negotiations is real. Hezbollah’s participation is conditional. Netanyahu’s commitment to withdrawal is nonexistent. Iran’s nuclear timeline is separated by 20 years of uncertainty.
What isn’t resolved: the future of Hezbollah’s arsenal, the status of Israeli forces in Lebanon, the political future of southern Lebanon, or the deeper question of whether these groups can coexist without fighting. A 10-day pause doesn’t answer any of that. It just postpones the moment when everyone has to choose between compromise and conflict again.
The real test comes after Thursday’s deadline expires. Will there be a framework for lasting peace, or just another round of negotiations that stalls until the next escalation? The ceasefire is welcome news for civilians who’ve endured six weeks of bombardment. But calling it a solution would be generous, and pretending the next 10 days will resolve what decades of conflict have left unresolved would be naive.
