With the US, Iran, and Switzerland about to sign the agreement, could Lebanon become a "deal killer"?
2026-06-17 09:02:53
Iran's Supreme Joint Military Command issued a statement on Tuesday (June 16) strongly warning Israel to immediately cease its military attacks on southern Lebanon, or the Iranian armed forces would take strong retaliatory measures. This comes shortly after the US and Iran reached a provisional memorandum of understanding aimed at ending the regional conflict.
This warning highlights that the situation in Lebanon has become a key variable in the implementation of the interim US-Iran agreement. Since March 2nd, the Israeli military has launched a combined air and ground operation against the Iranian-backed Hezbollah and currently still occupies parts of southern Lebanon, leading to ongoing conflict.
Hezbollah stated through its media office on Tuesday that Iran will not sign a final nuclear agreement with the United States unless Israel withdraws its troops from Lebanon. This marks the first time the organization has explicitly linked the Israeli withdrawal to the US-Iran nuclear deal.
Hezbollah emphasized that it has received assurances from Iran that any violation of the ceasefire agreement by Israel will directly affect the progress of subsequent negotiations.
Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi stated on the same day that ending the regional war must include ending all conflicts in Lebanon, particularly "ending the occupation of Lebanese territory."
He made it clear that if Israeli troops continue to be stationed in the areas occupied during the war, or launch any attacks, it will be considered a violation of the US-Iran memorandum of understanding.
Although the fighting in Lebanon eased somewhat after the signing of the memorandum of understanding between the US and Iran, it did not completely stop.
Israel has stated that its troops will remain in southern Lebanon to safeguard its security interests. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu previously emphasized that he would not easily withdraw from the areas he already controls.
The statement from Iran's Supreme Military Command, released on the eve of the formal signing of the framework agreement in Switzerland on Friday, highlights the potential interference of regional proxy conflicts with major power negotiations. Hezbollah opposes Israel's continued occupation, arguing that it directly threatens the sustainability of the agreement.
Israel's March invasion of Lebanon stemmed from attacks launched by Hezbollah in support of Iran. The conflict has since resulted in numerous casualties and displacements.
While the interim agreement between the US and Iran provided a framework for extending the ceasefire for 60 days and opening the Strait of Hormuz, the issue of Lebanon was not fully included in the core terms, becoming one of the focal points of subsequent negotiations with Switzerland.
Statements from all parties indicate that the US hopes to expedite nuclear negotiations, while Iran and Hezbollah consider Israeli troop withdrawal a necessary condition for comprehensive regional peace. Israel, however, insists on the legality of its military actions and argues that they are not directly bound by the US-Iran agreement.
Many foreign institutions believe that if the interim agreement between the US and Iran proceeds smoothly and a more binding final agreement is reached in subsequent negotiations in Switzerland, geopolitical risks in the Middle East will be significantly eased, global oil supply stability will be improved, and oil prices will face downward pressure.
A recent Goldman Sachs report indicates that the full opening of the Strait of Hormuz and the resumption of Iranian oil exports will increase market supply by approximately 1.5-2 million barrels per day in the short term. The bank predicts that if the agreement is implemented smoothly, Brent crude oil prices may fall back to the $65-75 per barrel range within the next 3-6 months, alleviating current energy inflationary pressures.
JPMorgan analysts share a similar view, believing that a successful agreement would boost market confidence, prompting investors to lower risk premiums. Coupled with moderate global demand growth, oil prices may exhibit a volatile downward trend, but adjustments to OPEC+ production policies should be monitored. Conversely, if the agreement breaks down or is hindered by disagreements over troop withdrawal from Lebanon, or if the conflict between Iran and Hezbollah escalates, oil prices will face significant upside risks.
BlackRock's fixed income and commodities team warned that if the Strait of Hormuz faces another blockade or if the Iranian Revolutionary Guard intensifies its intervention, about one-fifth of global oil shipments will be affected, and Brent crude could quickly break through $90-100 per barrel, or even higher.
UBS commodity strategists say a failed agreement would reignite market concerns about supply disruptions, especially given current low global inventories, and geopolitical premiums could push oil prices up by 20-30%. In the short term, heightened risk aversion will benefit crude oil futures bulls, but in the long term, if the conflict expands to a wider region, slower global economic growth could conversely suppress demand, leading to a highly volatile market.
Overall, the oil market is closely watching Friday's signing ceremony in Switzerland and the progress of subsequent negotiations, with geopolitical factors remaining the core variable driving short-term oil price movements.
Iran's military warnings and Hezbollah's hardline stance highlight the challenges facing the US-Iran interim agreement regarding troop withdrawal from Lebanon. Israel's continued military presence and Iran's retaliatory threats have increased regional tensions, and the prospects for nuclear negotiations depend on whether all parties can balance their core interests in subsequent talks in Switzerland. The effectiveness of the agreement's implementation will test the mediation capabilities of major powers and the difficulty of resolving regional proxy conflicts.
Q1: What is the background to the warning issued by Iran's Supreme Joint Military Command?
A: This warning was issued shortly after the US and Iran reached a provisional memorandum of understanding. Israel launched a military operation against Hezbollah targets in southern Lebanon on March 2nd and has maintained its occupation, which Iran views as a continuation of the regional war. The central headquarters of the Prophet's Seal explicitly demanded that Israel cease its attacks, or face a strong response from the Iranian armed forces, aimed at protecting its ally Hezbollah and pressuring for the agreement's implementation.
Q2: How does Hezbollah link the Israeli withdrawal with the US-Iran nuclear deal?
A: Hezbollah stated that Iran will not sign the final nuclear agreement unless Israel withdraws its troops from Lebanon. This is the first time it has publicly linked the two. They emphasized that the withdrawal will be a result of the negotiations, not a precondition, but have received assurances from Iran that an Israeli violation of the ceasefire will affect subsequent negotiations. This reflects Iran's strategic considerations in supporting the "axis of resistance."
Q3: What was the core message of Iranian Foreign Minister Araqchi's statement?
A: Araghchi emphasized that a complete end to the regional war must include ending the conflict in Lebanon and the Israeli occupation. He warned that continued Israeli troop presence or attacks would be considered a violation of the US-Iran memorandum of understanding, highlighting Iran's insistence on a comprehensive regional ceasefire, not just a direct confrontation between the US and Iran.
Q4: What is Israel's attitude towards the US-Iran agreement?
A: Israel is not a party to the agreement, and its officials have stated that the agreement is not binding on Israel. Israel will continue to maintain a military presence in southern Lebanon and reserves the right to retaliate against Hezbollah. While the conflict has eased, it has not ceased, which poses a major risk to the stability of the agreement.
Q5: What impact will this situation have on subsequent US-Iran negotiations?
A: The Lebanon issue has become a thorny topic in Swiss negotiations following the signing of the framework agreement between the US and Iran on Friday. The Trump administration wants to focus on the nuclear program, while Iran and Hezbollah have included troop withdrawal as a condition. These differences may delay the nuclear agreement, but they also provide an opportunity to promote a comprehensive regional ceasefire through multilateral mediation. Overall, proxy conflicts are testing the enforceability and long-term prospects of the interim agreement.
At 09:01 Beijing time, Brent crude oil was trading at $79.44 per barrel.
This warning highlights that the situation in Lebanon has become a key variable in the implementation of the interim US-Iran agreement. Since March 2nd, the Israeli military has launched a combined air and ground operation against the Iranian-backed Hezbollah and currently still occupies parts of southern Lebanon, leading to ongoing conflict.
Hezbollah has a hardline stance.
Hezbollah stated through its media office on Tuesday that Iran will not sign a final nuclear agreement with the United States unless Israel withdraws its troops from Lebanon. This marks the first time the organization has explicitly linked the Israeli withdrawal to the US-Iran nuclear deal.
Hezbollah emphasized that it has received assurances from Iran that any violation of the ceasefire agreement by Israel will directly affect the progress of subsequent negotiations.
Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi stated on the same day that ending the regional war must include ending all conflicts in Lebanon, particularly "ending the occupation of Lebanese territory."
He made it clear that if Israeli troops continue to be stationed in the areas occupied during the war, or launch any attacks, it will be considered a violation of the US-Iran memorandum of understanding.
Israel maintains its position; the conflict has not completely subsided.
Although the fighting in Lebanon eased somewhat after the signing of the memorandum of understanding between the US and Iran, it did not completely stop.
Israel has stated that its troops will remain in southern Lebanon to safeguard its security interests. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu previously emphasized that he would not easily withdraw from the areas he already controls.
The statement from Iran's Supreme Military Command, released on the eve of the formal signing of the framework agreement in Switzerland on Friday, highlights the potential interference of regional proxy conflicts with major power negotiations. Hezbollah opposes Israel's continued occupation, arguing that it directly threatens the sustainability of the agreement.
Background and Impact
Israel's March invasion of Lebanon stemmed from attacks launched by Hezbollah in support of Iran. The conflict has since resulted in numerous casualties and displacements.
While the interim agreement between the US and Iran provided a framework for extending the ceasefire for 60 days and opening the Strait of Hormuz, the issue of Lebanon was not fully included in the core terms, becoming one of the focal points of subsequent negotiations with Switzerland.
Statements from all parties indicate that the US hopes to expedite nuclear negotiations, while Iran and Hezbollah consider Israeli troop withdrawal a necessary condition for comprehensive regional peace. Israel, however, insists on the legality of its military actions and argues that they are not directly bound by the US-Iran agreement.
Oil price trend analysis
Many foreign institutions believe that if the interim agreement between the US and Iran proceeds smoothly and a more binding final agreement is reached in subsequent negotiations in Switzerland, geopolitical risks in the Middle East will be significantly eased, global oil supply stability will be improved, and oil prices will face downward pressure.
A recent Goldman Sachs report indicates that the full opening of the Strait of Hormuz and the resumption of Iranian oil exports will increase market supply by approximately 1.5-2 million barrels per day in the short term. The bank predicts that if the agreement is implemented smoothly, Brent crude oil prices may fall back to the $65-75 per barrel range within the next 3-6 months, alleviating current energy inflationary pressures.
JPMorgan analysts share a similar view, believing that a successful agreement would boost market confidence, prompting investors to lower risk premiums. Coupled with moderate global demand growth, oil prices may exhibit a volatile downward trend, but adjustments to OPEC+ production policies should be monitored. Conversely, if the agreement breaks down or is hindered by disagreements over troop withdrawal from Lebanon, or if the conflict between Iran and Hezbollah escalates, oil prices will face significant upside risks.
BlackRock's fixed income and commodities team warned that if the Strait of Hormuz faces another blockade or if the Iranian Revolutionary Guard intensifies its intervention, about one-fifth of global oil shipments will be affected, and Brent crude could quickly break through $90-100 per barrel, or even higher.
UBS commodity strategists say a failed agreement would reignite market concerns about supply disruptions, especially given current low global inventories, and geopolitical premiums could push oil prices up by 20-30%. In the short term, heightened risk aversion will benefit crude oil futures bulls, but in the long term, if the conflict expands to a wider region, slower global economic growth could conversely suppress demand, leading to a highly volatile market.
Overall, the oil market is closely watching Friday's signing ceremony in Switzerland and the progress of subsequent negotiations, with geopolitical factors remaining the core variable driving short-term oil price movements.
Editor's Summary
Iran's military warnings and Hezbollah's hardline stance highlight the challenges facing the US-Iran interim agreement regarding troop withdrawal from Lebanon. Israel's continued military presence and Iran's retaliatory threats have increased regional tensions, and the prospects for nuclear negotiations depend on whether all parties can balance their core interests in subsequent talks in Switzerland. The effectiveness of the agreement's implementation will test the mediation capabilities of major powers and the difficulty of resolving regional proxy conflicts.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q1: What is the background to the warning issued by Iran's Supreme Joint Military Command?
A: This warning was issued shortly after the US and Iran reached a provisional memorandum of understanding. Israel launched a military operation against Hezbollah targets in southern Lebanon on March 2nd and has maintained its occupation, which Iran views as a continuation of the regional war. The central headquarters of the Prophet's Seal explicitly demanded that Israel cease its attacks, or face a strong response from the Iranian armed forces, aimed at protecting its ally Hezbollah and pressuring for the agreement's implementation.
Q2: How does Hezbollah link the Israeli withdrawal with the US-Iran nuclear deal?
A: Hezbollah stated that Iran will not sign the final nuclear agreement unless Israel withdraws its troops from Lebanon. This is the first time it has publicly linked the two. They emphasized that the withdrawal will be a result of the negotiations, not a precondition, but have received assurances from Iran that an Israeli violation of the ceasefire will affect subsequent negotiations. This reflects Iran's strategic considerations in supporting the "axis of resistance."
Q3: What was the core message of Iranian Foreign Minister Araqchi's statement?
A: Araghchi emphasized that a complete end to the regional war must include ending the conflict in Lebanon and the Israeli occupation. He warned that continued Israeli troop presence or attacks would be considered a violation of the US-Iran memorandum of understanding, highlighting Iran's insistence on a comprehensive regional ceasefire, not just a direct confrontation between the US and Iran.
Q4: What is Israel's attitude towards the US-Iran agreement?
A: Israel is not a party to the agreement, and its officials have stated that the agreement is not binding on Israel. Israel will continue to maintain a military presence in southern Lebanon and reserves the right to retaliate against Hezbollah. While the conflict has eased, it has not ceased, which poses a major risk to the stability of the agreement.
Q5: What impact will this situation have on subsequent US-Iran negotiations?
A: The Lebanon issue has become a thorny topic in Swiss negotiations following the signing of the framework agreement between the US and Iran on Friday. The Trump administration wants to focus on the nuclear program, while Iran and Hezbollah have included troop withdrawal as a condition. These differences may delay the nuclear agreement, but they also provide an opportunity to promote a comprehensive regional ceasefire through multilateral mediation. Overall, proxy conflicts are testing the enforceability and long-term prospects of the interim agreement.
At 09:01 Beijing time, Brent crude oil was trading at $79.44 per barrel.
- Risk Warning and Disclaimer
- The market involves risk, and trading may not be suitable for all investors. This article is for reference only and does not constitute personal investment advice, nor does it take into account certain users’ specific investment objectives, financial situation, or other needs. Any investment decisions made based on this information are at your own risk.
