Hezbollah Says Ceasefire Hinges on Israeli Halt

Lebanon-based armed group Hezbollah has stated that any potential ceasefire in the ongoing conflict will depend entirely on whether Israel ceases all forms of military operations, underscoring deep mistrust as diplomatic efforts intensify to secure a temporary truce.

According to a report cited by Al Jazeera and attributed to Reuters, senior Hezbollah legislator Hassan Fadlallah said the group would not consider honouring any ceasefire arrangement unless Israeli “hostile activities” come to a complete halt.

“If Israel does not stop all forms of aggression, then there is no question of adhering to any ceasefire,” Fadlallah was quoted as saying, signalling firm resistance to partial or conditional agreements.

He further indicated that Hezbollah had been informed by Iran’s ambassador in Beirut of a possible short-term ceasefire proposal that could begin as early as Thursday night. The development suggests that regional diplomatic channels remain active, with Iran playing a mediating role between key actors in the conflict.

Fadlallah’s remarks came shortly before wider international announcements regarding a ceasefire framework, highlighting competing narratives over the timing and terms of any potential agreement.

Trump announces proposed 10-day ceasefire

In a parallel development, former United States President Donald Trump announced what he described as a 10-day ceasefire agreement between Lebanon and Israel, claiming that both sides had agreed to temporarily halt hostilities.

In a statement posted on his Truth Social platform, Trump said he had held “significant discussions” with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, resulting in an agreement to initiate a short-term truce aimed at paving the way for broader peace negotiations.

Ceasefire developments and diplomatic engagement

Trump also claimed that representatives from Lebanon and Israel had met earlier in Washington, marking what he described as an initial step towards structured dialogue. The meeting reportedly included US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, further signalling Washington’s direct involvement in the process.

He added that Vice President JD Vance, Secretary Rubio, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan “Razin” Caine, had been tasked with working alongside both parties to help transition the temporary ceasefire into a more lasting peace arrangement.

Overview of reported ceasefire framework

Competing narratives over truce terms

The contrasting statements from Hezbollah and US political figures highlight the fragility of the proposed arrangement. While Washington and its allies frame the initiative as a structured diplomatic breakthrough, Hezbollah continues to insist that any agreement must be contingent upon a full cessation of Israeli military action.

Fadlallah’s comments suggest that the group views partial or time-limited arrangements with scepticism, particularly if they do not include explicit guarantees regarding Israeli operations.

Broader geopolitical implications

The evolving situation underscores the complexity of securing even temporary ceasefires in a conflict shaped by regional rivalries and external involvement. Iran’s reported role in communicating ceasefire proposals further reflects the multi-layered diplomatic landscape, where indirect negotiations often run parallel to public declarations.

As competing announcements circulate, the reality on the ground remains uncertain, with the durability of any ceasefire likely to depend on whether both sides can agree on enforcement mechanisms and reciprocal conditions.

For now, the prospects of peace remain tightly bound to unresolved disagreements over trust, verification, and the fundamental conditions for ending hostilities.