How Lebanon and Iran’s war of words became backdrop for latest Israel war

Published 8 June 2026 · world

Iran has warned that talks could be stopped and attacks could resume if Israel keeps hitting Lebanon. Tehran, Iran – An ongoing war of words

Iran has warned that talks could be stopped and attacks could resume if Israel keeps hitting Lebanon. Tehran, Iran – An ongoing war of words between Beirut and Tehran has highlighted the central role Lebanon has played in a ceasefire between Iran and the United States. Iran on Sunday responded to an Israeli strike on an alleged Hezbollah site in southern Beirut – an unofficial red line for Tehran – by launching a barrage of missiles at Israel. Israel then hit Tehran and other cities on Monday, threatening to end a two-month ceasefire between Iran and the US. Tensions had already heightened after Israeli forces crossed the Litani River last month – a point Israel had unilaterally set as a buffer zone to be cleared of Hezbollah elements – leading the Lebanese government to appeal for an end to foreign interference in the country. Last week, it was reported that US President Donald Trump had convinced Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to target Beirut, understanding that such an escalation could end a regional ceasefire in place since April. The Israeli invasion has deepened tensions between Iran, which backs Hezbollah, and the Lebanese government, which is seeking exclusive control over weapons in the country. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) on Thursday warned “there will be no calm in the region” if Israel continued its occupation of southern Lebanon. Lebanese President Joseph Aoun stressed that there is no way to end the war in the country “except through negotiation and diplomacy” and slammed Tehran for “using Lebanon as a bargaining chip in their negotiations” with the US.

He said “Hezbollah must understand that [there is] no other way but to sit and talk”, something Beirut is trying to achieve via direct talks between Israeli and Lebanese officials in Washington, DC. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi responded by saying Aoun appeared to believe Iran, not Israel, was occupying Lebanese territory. “Had Lebanon been a bargaining chip for Iran, we’d have a deal long ago. Save Lebanon from your real foe, Mr. President,” he posted on X on Saturday, likely referring to Israel and Aoun. Hezbollah opposes direct talks with Israel and wants Iran to play a greater role in mediated talks to end the crisis, and the situation has led to an increasingly voracious back-and-forth between Beirut and Tehran. A conditional “ceasefire” currently in effect between the Lebanese government and Israel, negotiated by Washington and excluding Hezbollah representation, set conditions that included the removal of armed groups south of the Litani River. It also sought the establishment of “pilot zones” in southern Lebanon, where the Lebanese army would have sole authority, allowing the region to come under direct state control. Negar Mortazavi, a senior fellow at the Washington, DC-based Center for International Policy, noted that while Israel had demonstrated patience regarding its continued offensive in the south, the targeting of Beirut’s southern suburbs, known as Dahiyeh, would be a serious escalation. “Where exactly is the red line? So far, it seems that Tehran has tolerated attacks in southern Lebanon to some extent as part of a messy ceasefire, and instead allowed Hezbollah to engage with Israel,” she told Al Jazeera before Israel bombed Beirut suburbs on Sunday.