作者： admin

Hours after the United States brokered a tentative two-week ceasefire between Israel and Iran, the fragile agreement already faces imminent collapse, as competing interpretations of the deal’s terms and a devastating new wave of Israeli airstrikes have exposed deep cracks in the diplomatic process. In the 24 hours following the ceasefire announcement, hundreds of Lebanese civilians and combatants were killed in Israeli air raids across the country, a move that directly contradicts Iran’s core condition for the truce and raises urgent questions about whether the agreement can survive its first week.

The core dispute at the heart of the emerging crisis centers on Lebanon’s status in the deal. Iran has repeatedly demanded that an end to all hostilities in Lebanon be a non-negotiable component of the ceasefire, while Israel maintains that the truce only applies to the main open conflict between the two states and excludes military operations against Lebanese militant group Hezbollah. This disagreement is no trivial miscommunication: it cuts to the heart of decades of proxy conflict that has defined Israeli-Iranian tensions across the Middle East.

To understand why Lebanon has become the make-or-break issue for this ceasefire, it is necessary to unpack the long-running regional power dynamic that has shaped the conflict. Since the 1979 Iranian Revolution, the Iranian government has poured funding and weapons into anti-Israel armed movements across the region, building a network of proxy forces that include Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and the Houthis in Yemen. For Israel, these proxies represent an ongoing existential security threat, positioned far closer to Israeli population centers than Iran’s formal military.

Over the course of its modern history, Israel has prioritized establishing expanded security buffer zones along its borders to neutralize these threats. Following the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria in 2024, Israeli forces quickly moved into a demilitarized buffer zone in southwest Syria, extending their security footprint. Since the October 7, 2023 attacks by Hamas, Israel has launched intensive military campaigns against both Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, treating the two proxy groups as equal threats to Israeli security. Though both groups have suffered heavy losses over the past two years of conflict, they remain operational, and the Netanyahu government has seized on the broader war with Iran to push for a permanent expanded buffer zone in southern Lebanon. Analysts widely agree that Netanyahu is highly unlikely to abandon this territorial and security goal, and it remains unclear whether U.S. President Donald Trump has any interest in or ability to pressure him to reverse course.

The current crisis, analysts argue, was largely inevitable given the Trump administration’s approach to the conflict. The White House has shown no willingness to address the deep-rooted intractable issues that lie at the core of Middle Eastern tensions, instead prioritizing a quick exit from a conflict that has become deeply unpopular with U.S. voters. With Trump’s approval ratings sitting at record lows, the administration has rushed to frame a messy partial truce as a diplomatic victory, even as it leaves the core status quo that sparked the war completely intact.

Unless the U.S. can force Israel to halt its operations in Lebanon and bring Netanyahu into compliance with Iran’s terms, the two-week ceasefire will almost certainly collapse within days. For Iran, a halt to fighting in Lebanon is not just a tactical concession: protecting its proxy network is central to the ideological identity of the regime, which has defined itself in opposition to Israel and U.S. influence in the region for decades. As negotiations begin for a potential long-term peace deal, Lebanon will remain the critical sticking point, and as long as the underlying antagonisms driving regional conflict remain unaddressed, there is little prospect of lasting stability.

The Trump administration’s exit strategy is fundamentally flawed, critics argue, because it ignores the core historical and political issues that have shaped the conflict. The president’s primary priority is not resolving the Israeli-Palestinian issue or defusing long-running Israeli-Iranian tensions, but rather extricating the U.S. from a war that has dragged on longer than expected and become a major political liability at home. This shift in priorities explains why the administration has reversed course on Iran’s 10-point negotiating framework, which Trump previously dismissed as “not good enough” but now calls a “workable basis” for talks.

Even a cursory look at the terms of Iran’s proposal shows that it includes core demands that the U.S. could never reasonably accept, such as full Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz and Iran’s continued right to enrich uranium – a right that directly contradicts the stated core goal of the U.S.-led war: preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. By moving ahead with talks on this basis, the Trump administration is creating the illusion of progress to justify a hasty exit, rather than securing tangible concessions that would lead to real peace.

In practice, the U.S. has already ceded significant ground to Iran, which has shown no willingness to compromise on its core demands. While Iran’s conventional military capacity to project power across the region has been diminished by the war, its ideological commitment to opposing Israel and the U.S. remains unchanged. With the two-week ceasefire in place, the most likely outcome is that the U.S. will withdraw claiming victory, leaving a trail of destruction in the region and the same underlying tensions that sparked the conflict still in place, setting the stage for future rounds of tit-for-tat violence between Israel and Iran.

In a formal online press briefing held Thursday, China’s Ministry of National Defense has categorically denied unsubstantiated media claims that Chinese entities have provided chip manufacturing equipment and intelligence assistance to Iran’s military, labeling the assertions outright false information.

Spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang addressed the allegations during the briefing, which centered on two specific claims: first, that Shanghai-based Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp (SMIC) had supplied chipmaking gear to Iran’s armed forces, and second, that a Chinese commercial satellite firm had intentionally distributed imagery of United States military installations across the Middle East.

Zhang emphasized that Beijing maintains a firm stance against the circulation of speculative, insinuating, and factually incorrect content crafted to target China. He also pushed back against recent remarks from United States officials, who claimed they had detected coordinated efforts by both China and Russia to bolster Iran’s military capabilities and were prepared to take responsive measures if deemed necessary.

“China’s position on the Iran issue is open, aboveboard, and completely clear,” Zhang stated. “We have long maintained an objective and impartial stance, consistently working to advance peace negotiations and de-escalation, and we have never at any point added fuel to the fire of regional tensions.”

The spokesperson further pointed out that the international community has a clear-eyed view of which powers engage in duplicitous rhetoric versus action, and which actors have been the root cause of widespread war and conflict across the globe. The statement comes amid rising geopolitical scrutiny of major powers’ engagements in the Middle East, as Washington has repeatedly sought to level unsubstantiated accusations against Beijing regarding its regional activities.

Updated on April 9, 2026, the formal denial reaffirms China’s longstanding commitment to regional stability and diplomatic resolution of the ongoing tensions surrounding Iran.

One of Islam’s most sacred religious sites, Al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied East Jerusalem, has reopened its gates to Palestinian worshippers after an extraordinary 41-day closure ordered by Israeli authorities, a shutdown that spanned the major Muslim holidays of Ramadan and Eid al-Fitr.

When the first dawn Fajr prayer was held on Thursday morning, more than 3,000 Palestinian worshippers gathered inside the mosque’s sprawling courtyards to worship for the first time since the joint US-Israeli assault on Iran began on February 28. Viral footage circulated on social media captured jubilant crowds streaming through the reopened gates, their relief and joy palpable after the weeks of forced exclusion. Preparations for the reopening had begun days earlier, with volunteer teams and mosque custodians working to clean and restore the site ahead of worshippers’ return.

Israeli officials have justified the total closure, which blocked all Palestinian Muslim access even for weekly Friday prayers, by citing security risks tied to the conflict with Iran. But Palestinian leaders and community members have openly questioned this justification, pointing out that Israeli authorities allowed large-scale gatherings for Jewish religious holidays were permitted to proceed elsewhere in the region throughout the closure. Many Palestinians argue Israel is using the war on Iran as a cover to tighten its unilateral control over the site, altering longstanding rules governing access, opening hours, and permitted religious activities.

Al-Aqsa Mosque, located within Jerusalem’s walled Old City, has been governed for decades by the international Status Quo agreement, a framework that explicitly recognizes the site’s Islamic identity and grants exclusive authority to Muslim religious bodies for all matters of access, worship, and site maintenance. However, this longstanding arrangement has been repeatedly eroded by Israeli actions, including frequent incursions and unauthorised prayer by ultranationalist Jewish groups, carried out under armed Israeli police protection. The international community almost universally considers Israel’s 1967 annexation and ongoing occupation of East Jerusalem, including the Old City, as a violation of international law, which holds that occupying powers cannot claim sovereignty over captured territory and are barred from imposing permanent structural changes.

The developments following the mosque’s reopening have already raised fresh alarms about escalating Israeli changes to the site. Within hours of worshippers completing Thursday’s dawn prayer, Israeli authorities allowed a new expanded schedule of daily incursions by ultranationalist groups, extending the total daily duration of these visits. On the first day of reopening, dozens of ultranationalist visitors entered the site shortly after 6:30 a.m. local time, immediately after Palestinian worshippers were cleared from the area. Video footage shows the visitors conducting unauthorised prayers and dances inside the mosque compound, surrounded by a heavy detachment of armed Israeli police.

The practice of regular, guarded incursions traces back to 2003, during the Second Palestinian Intifada, and was formalized in 2008 when a limited morning visits of up to three hours were institutionalized. Over the following decades, both the number of participants and the duration of daily visits have grown steadily. Before the recent closure, incursions were split into two daily shifts on weekdays: 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m., and 1:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. Under a new schedule approved prior to the February assault on Iran, incursions now run from 6:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m., totaling six and a half hours of daily access for ultranationalist groups, a major expansion from prior arrangements.

The Jerusalem Governorate has condemned the extended incursion schedule as a dangerous escalation that further undermines the fragile Status Quo agreement. In an official statement following the reopening, the Governorate noted: “The extension reflects an acceleration in efforts to impose new realities at Al-Aqsa Mosque and entrench time-based division, particularly following its reopening after a 40-day closure.”

This report was originally published by independent outlet Middle East Eye, which specializes in original coverage of the Middle East and North Africa region.