Iran is warning that Israel’s continued operations in Lebanon could trigger a harsh response, adding a fresh and immediate test to the U.S.-Iran framework before its planned formal signing in Switzerland.
The new pressure point is not just whether Tehran and Washington can complete the ceremony. It is whether the wider battlefield can stay quiet long enough for the deal to matter. Iran now says Israel has violated the Lebanon truce dozens of times since the memorandum was agreed, while reports from southern Lebanon describe new Israeli attacks that killed four people.
Al Jazeera reported Wednesday that Iran accused Israel of violating the truce in Lebanon 84 times and warned of a harsh response if the attacks continue. The Guardian’s live coverage reported that Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya central command said Israel must stop aggression in southern Lebanon or face retaliation.
Lebanon Is Now The Deal’s First Stress Test
The U.S.-Iran framework is supposed to move toward a formal signing at Switzerland’s Burgenstock resort on Friday, followed by a 60-day negotiation window on sanctions relief, Iran’s nuclear program, and the Strait of Hormuz. But the Lebanon front is becoming the first practical test of whether the agreement can hold beyond the diplomatic table.
The Guardian reported that Lebanon’s National News Agency said Israeli warplanes targeted Nabatieh al-Fawqa and that a drone strike hit Ansariyeh on the coast. The same report said the Israel Defense Forces had earlier stated it intercepted several rockets launched by Hezbollah toward Israeli troops in southern Lebanon and struck the launcher.
That sequence shows the danger clearly. Israel says it is responding to Hezbollah threats. Iran says Lebanon is part of the wider war-ending framework. Hezbollah has not claimed the latest attacks cited in the reports. The result is a ceasefire argument that could become a military escalation before the ink is dry on the U.S.-Iran document.
Iran Says Withdrawal Still Matters
The warning follows comments from Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who said the conflict cannot be considered fully over without an Israeli withdrawal from territory occupied during the war. The Associated Press reported Tuesday that Araghchi described withdrawal from Lebanon as a requirement of the tentative deal, a condition Israel has rejected.
That rejection is why the situation is so unstable. Washington and Tehran may be able to agree on a framework, but Israel is not treating Lebanon as closed. If Israeli operations continue, Iran can argue that the deal is being breached on one of the fronts it considers central. If Iran responds directly, the U.S.-Iran framework could be dragged back into active conflict.
The Times of Israel, citing Reuters and its own staff, also reported that Iran’s top military command warned Israel should expect a hard response if it keeps attacking southern Lebanon. The outlet noted that Tehran insists the memorandum requires Israel to halt its Hezbollah offensive, while both Jerusalem and Washington dispute that interpretation.
Trump Is Also Pressuring Israel
The dispute is creating visible strain between Washington and Jerusalem. The Guardian reported that President Donald Trump criticized Israel’s conduct in Lebanon, saying Israel had been fighting Hezbollah too long and that too many people were being killed. Al Jazeera also reported that Trump said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has to be more responsible in Lebanon.
That matters because Trump is trying to present the Iran agreement as a path out of a regional war. Continued strikes in Lebanon make that harder. They give Iran a reason to question U.S. leverage over Israel, give Israeli leaders a reason to insist security operations must continue, and leave Hezbollah as a potential spoiler outside the main U.S.-Iran negotiating room.
For now, the framework remains alive. But the latest warning makes clear that Friday’s planned signing is not the only deadline. The more urgent clock is running in southern Lebanon, where another strike, rocket launch, or retaliation could decide whether the deal reaches Switzerland as a real de-escalation plan or as another fragile announcement overtaken by the battlefield.