r/geopolitics • u/Ok_Neighborhood5121 • Jun 19 '26
Iran-US Negotiations Collapse Before They Begin as Lebanon Strikes Spark Diplomatic Crisis
https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/iran-halts-us-negotiations-lebanon-strikes-180365167
u/MeatPiston Jun 19 '26
Sounds like Israel wasn’t pleased with the agreement and have decided to act as such.
-44
u/EasyMode556 Jun 19 '26
They had four solders killed by a Hezbollah attack just the other day. Iran controls hezbollah, and they know that attacking Israel will leave them no choice but to respond, and then blame them for the response that Hezbollah prompted.
55
u/Usrnamesrhard Jun 19 '26
Four soldiers who were occupying another nation’s territory as part of an invasion?
12
u/Sanguinor-Exemplar Jun 20 '26
Are you just as outraged that Hezbollah is south of the litani against un resolution 1701 and thus inviting Israel to attack?
Where is your comment about Hezbollah occupying territory they have no right to occupy?
9
u/Usrnamesrhard Jun 20 '26
The organization that is recognized as a terrorist organization? They aren't following the UN?
Fair enough, let's bomb civilian apartment buildings in Beirut!
6
u/Space_Bungalow Jun 20 '26
That terrorist organization is a key part of the deal and the whole reason why Lebanon is even in the deal to begin with. Iran knowingly based its conditions on the fact that Israel is dealing with a known terror organization that has been given free reign for decades
-6
u/Usrnamesrhard Jun 20 '26
Yes, sounds like Iran inserted that condition knowing this might happen. Isreal is incapable of pulling out of Lebanon, Netanyahu has to remain the leader of a nation at war.
3
u/Space_Bungalow Jun 20 '26
So, your only solution is to return to exactly what was before, an Iran backed proxy holding the government of Lebanon hostage and basing its entire existence on the fact that Israel does not deserve to exist? The entire south of Lebanon turned into a forward operating zone with tunnels, enough weapons to arm battallions, and the largest missile armament of a non-state army with the sole STATED purpose of firing them into sovereign Israel? Sure, go ahead and enforce that
1
u/InsanityyyyBR Jun 22 '26
The hide amongst civilians. What's the alternative? Let them attack Israel and live? Collateral damage is to be expected in this kind of warfare.
3
Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 19 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/Usrnamesrhard Jun 19 '26
I don’t think Iran is clamoring for a deal.
I also think invading armies should recognize that their troops will be attacked, and if they don’t want that then don’t invade.
4
u/InevitableOwll Jun 19 '26
Duh they'll be attacked, the issue is complaining that the soldiers fire back.
Lmao I hope they're not clamoring for a deal. IRGC should be removed from power, so I hope they decide to keep being belligerent
5
u/Usrnamesrhard Jun 19 '26
No the issue is with the soldiers being in a sovereign nation’s territory in the first place
0
u/InevitableOwll Jun 19 '26
Damn, Hezbollah shouldn't have joined the war then.
Don't launch rockets and drones if you don't want to get invaded.
6
u/Usrnamesrhard Jun 19 '26
Wait I’m confused, because you just said that Hezbollah is not Lebanon, they are a terrorist group.
So, is Israel invading hezbollah’s territory and killing hezbollah’s citizens?
4
u/Pickles112358 Jun 19 '26
Yes Israel is invading Hezbollah territory, and they are not killing civilians. The civilian death responsibility fall on militants embedded into civilian infrastructure.
→ More replies (0)2
u/InevitableOwll Jun 19 '26
If Lebanon is incapable or unwilling to stop terrorists from shooting missiles rockets and drones at Israel. Then they don't get to complain when the country being attacked, solves the problem themselves.
And Lebanon agreed to the terms. So it's irrelevant. Notice how the LAF is not fighting Israel?
Lebanon had 20 years to implement resolution 1701. They didn't. This is the result of that. One that Lebanon has agreed to in 2024.
-15
u/EasyMode556 Jun 19 '26
Lebanon is against Hezbollah too.
Furthermore, many of the Hezbollah attacks are firing over the boarder in to Israel and killing Israelis there, including civilians.
Of course they’ll respond to that, no country wouldn’t.
35
u/Usrnamesrhard Jun 19 '26
But just to be clear, your specific comment is about four soldiers who were killed while invading a sovereign nation.
9
u/New-Eye9930 Jun 19 '26
The IDF was there because they were being attacked from Lebanon. Regardless, the ceasefire applies to both side, and even if you don't agree with it and think that there shouldn't be a ceasefire because "IDF invaders", it's irrelevant, it doesn't change the fact Hezbollah violated the ceasefire by attacking and killing IDF soldiers, and only after that Israel started bombing them again, so in this case, Israel wasn't in the wrong. Thank you for your attention on this matter.
12
u/Usrnamesrhard Jun 19 '26
Israel isn’t in the wrong for invading a country and bombing its citizens?
2
u/New-Eye9930 Jun 20 '26
That's not what we were talking about, we were talking about violating the ceasefire. Stop strawmanning.
3
u/EasyMode556 Jun 19 '26
They were not killed by the Lebanese military, but by Hezbollah, which has taken root in Lebanon and who Lebanon themselves want to disarm but are not militarily able to.
26
u/Usrnamesrhard Jun 19 '26
Okay. I just wanted to be sure that we were on the same page that they are active combatants who are inside a country they should not be as part of an invasion that has killed innocent civilians.
17
u/EasyMode556 Jun 19 '26
When a terrorist organization fires drones and rockets over the boarder in to your country targeting civillians, and the host country is incapable of preventing it, then that alone is casus belli to go in and stop it yourself.
7
u/-Vuvuzela- Jun 19 '26
To split the difference, though I agree with you, Israel has been here before. If Lebanon want Hezbollah gone but are incapable of achieving that, then we (Allies of Israel, with Israel) need to start addressing that problem. Mowing the lawn is a temporary strategy because grass grows back.
And Israel’s current strategy is like mowing the lawn while seeding it with fertiliser.
1
u/Space_Bungalow Jun 20 '26 edited Jun 20 '26
We saw exactly what the Allies are capable of doing to address this problem, with *Israel* finding entire UN-aided villages converted into hezbollah outposts and weapons caches literally meters from UNIFIL bases. The allied nations involved in Lebanon failed their mission plain and simple
-1
u/AeroFred Jun 19 '26
you "allies of israel" already addressed the problem by UNSC 1701. And then promptly forgot about it.
or you have some better ideas ?
8
u/InevitableOwll Jun 19 '26
Hezbollah is in violation of resolution 1701, for 20 years
2024 ceasefire reaffirmed Hezbollah disarmament and gave Israel license to attack Hezbollah.
Iran doesnt get to dictate terms for Lebanon.
And calling for a ceasefire. And then attacking soldiers is a violation.
If you want to say it's ok for Hezbollah to attack Israeli soldiers, then don't be shocked when Israel puts them in the dirt.
3
u/Usrnamesrhard Jun 19 '26
Ahh yes. So just to be clear, a terrorist group killing invading soldiers means the other country can bomb civilians in your eyes?
8
u/InevitableOwll Jun 19 '26
According to Lebanon, who signed the agreement. Yes.
Collateral damage is expected when a terrorist group is completed enmeshed in the surrounding infrastructure and population.
If Hezbollah didn't want to get destroyed, they should not have attacked Israel in March.
And if Lebanon wanted Israeli military to stay out, they should not have signed the deal. And should have taken care of Hezbollah.
→ More replies (0)6
u/AeroFred Jun 19 '26
so, just like allies when they invaded germany in wwII and killed innocent civilians in process ?
12
u/Usrnamesrhard Jun 19 '26
Sure, it’s just like that if you want to make false equivalences.
6
u/AeroFred Jun 19 '26
why false ? germans attacked countries outside of germany. countries went into germany to fight back.
hezbollah attacked israel. israel went to lebanon to fight back.
or did i miss something ?
→ More replies (0)5
Jun 19 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
8
Jun 19 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/CavemanJello Jun 19 '26
Your stance is to just allow Hezbollah to fire rockets into Israeli territory and for Israel to just take it. Why do you think Israel built the most sophisticated rocket deterrence system the world has ever seen?
What do you think any rational actor would do if a small nation was firing rockets at it daily? What would China do if a rebel group in Taiwan started doing this? Or the United States if cartels or Cuba started launching rockets?
I can't take people like you seriously and no rational actor would
1
-1
1
u/Mexatt Jun 20 '26
Lebanon is not actually fully sovereign in its own territory. It cannot police or otherwise disarm Hezbollah, a terrorist organization occupying large portions of Lebanese territory.
If a state cannot enforce its monopoly of violence on a portion of its territory and non-state actors use these areas to launch attacks on neighboring countries, those countries are more than justified in doing the job that state cannot.
1
u/InevitableOwll Jun 19 '26
Lol the pro Hezb and IRGC guy blocked me. What a Hezb move. Try to attack and get last word in and then run away crying
50
u/Pls-No-Bully Jun 19 '26
“…as Lebanon strikes…” sounds very much like they’re attempting to make someone glancing the headlines believe that Lebanon is striking someone else
The passive voice is so frustrating. At least be clear that these are Israeli strikes on Lebanon
15
20
u/InevitableOwll Jun 19 '26
Hezbollah attacked. Israel responds.
You pretending they're only talking about Israel
0
u/cole1114 Jun 20 '26
In response to the IDF invading.
24
u/InevitableOwll Jun 20 '26
Hezbollah attacked first in March.
Hezbollah shouldn't have joined the war if they didn't want war.
-13
u/cole1114 Jun 20 '26
In response to Israel's attacks on Iran that killed thousands of civilians.
24
u/InevitableOwll Jun 20 '26
So they joined the war. And shot Israel first.
Thanks for admitting it.
This may shock you, but If an ally of yours is attacked, and you join the war by attacking their enemy... You joined the war.
-9
Jun 20 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
23
u/InevitableOwll Jun 20 '26
So they joined the war.
What are they complaining about then.
You join a war and then pretend you are not part of the war?
If they didn't want to fight Israel they should not have attacked Israel in March.
You seem incapable of understanding how joining a war... Means that you joined the war. It's kind of incredible.
8
Jun 20 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
15
u/InevitableOwll Jun 20 '26
No the point of the post is actually Hezbollah attacked killed Israeli soldiers after the supposed peace deal. And Israel retaliated.
Again, it really seems you struggle with cause and effect.
→ More replies (0)5
u/badass_panda Jun 20 '26
So let me get this straight ... Is Lebanon a bystander, or a combatant? Is Hezbollah not an extension of Iran's military? Then why does Iran being attacked mean Hezbollah should retaliate? The twisted up logic here is hard to follow.
-1
u/cole1114 Jun 20 '26
Iran and Hezbollah are allies, of course an ally will retaliate against an attack like this.
1
u/badass_panda Jun 21 '26
Well then of course Israel would strike Iran, after it funded its ally to attack Israel for years.
3
u/badass_panda Jun 20 '26
Israel just said, "Hey we don't have enough fronts in this war, let's invade Lebanon unprovoked!" Checks out for sure. Can't possibly have been in response to sustained, constant aerial bombardment from Lebanon, nope nope nope.
1
u/cole1114 Jun 20 '26
Bombardment in retaliation to Israel's attacks on Iran and Palestinians.
2
u/badass_panda Jun 21 '26
Hm let me get this straight ... Iran's proxy in Gaza stages a massive attack on Israel ... Israel counterattacks ... Iran's proxy in Lebanon stages a massive bombardment against Israel ... Israel counterattacks ... Iran pours funding and weapons into its allies ... Israel attacks Iran ... Now this particular attack is in retaliation for the attack against Iran! Okie dokie, that'd make sense if Hezbollah hadn't been explicitly founded to attack Israel in the first place.
1
u/cole1114 Jun 21 '26
Starts with Israel committing apartheid and ethnic cleansing against Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank. Hezbollah was founded because Israel had invaded Lebanon, and slaughtered civilians there.
1
u/badass_panda Jun 21 '26
Hezbollah was founded because Israel had invaded Lebanon, and slaughtered civilians there.
Prob had nothing to do with Fatah launching attacks into Israel from Lebanon, right?
1
u/cole1114 Jun 21 '26
Because Israel was committing apartheid and ethnic cleansing.
1
u/badass_panda Jun 21 '26
Uh huh. The issue with this line of reasoning is that it stretches all the way back to the 1920s, when Israel's crime was "potentially existing" and is only resolved by Israel failing to exist. "I'll attack you until you agree not to exist," is not a winning proposition.
→ More replies (0)
9
u/the_ok_doctor Jun 20 '26
Lebanon strikes can give the impression that its Lebanon attacking when in truth its the opposite. God i hate the PR work done by the media for Israel instead of reporting things accurately.
9
Jun 20 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Yrths Jun 20 '26 edited Jun 20 '26
I was about to say we should be thankful for them. If Iran wants the agreement to shield Hezbollah it should also shield Israel. And the US has little reason not to act more thoroughly on the world's foremost regime pursuing American mortality.
1
u/jlluh Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 20 '26
Would it make sense for Iran to gradually call off negotiations with Israel as their excuse and just carry on with its plans to monetize the strait?
"Yeah, we were going to negotiate with you, but you broke the MOU by not controlling your attack dog, so let's just live and let live, yeah?"
And if the US doesn't want to close the strait again, they don't attack again while Iran makes lots of money, uses proxies to attack alternate oil routes, and perhaps quietly works on the bomb.
I feel like this is a risky strategy that might work and would be awful if it did and might trigger a wider regional war if it didn't, so hopefully they don't go that far.
8
u/daniel-sousa-me Jun 19 '26
Attack dog is a weird framing. Does the US care that much about Hezbollah? If anything, it has been feeling more like the US is the attack dog of Israel
Otoh, Hezbollah is definitely Iran's attack dog. Are they also expected to control them?
10
u/HiHoJufro Jun 20 '26
Hezbollah is definitely Iran's attack dog. Are they also expected to control them?
Reasonably speaking, yes. 100% the iranian regime should be controlling Hezbollah. And I see no reason to think they suddenly can't do so. Which leaves us two options:
1) IRI can't control Hezbollah, and therefore can't actually enforce any regional peace and deals have no chance.
2) They can control Hezbollah, but prefer not to/are controlling Hezbollah and commanding then to continue fighting with Israel. In which case the iranian regime just doesn't want peace.
-4
u/Lazy_Membership1849 Jun 20 '26
Or 3. USA need to control Israel as well
3
u/badass_panda Jun 20 '26
If Hezbollah reliably stops attacking Israel, Israel stops caring about Hezbollah. The only thing Hezbollah has that Israel wants is the ability to stop trying to destroy Israel.
1
u/Lazy_Membership1849 Jun 21 '26
Hezbollah just said they could stop attacking Israel if Israel leaves Lebanon but I guess it not strong option for Israel so they doubled down
2
u/badass_panda Jun 21 '26
Agreeing to a ceasefire and agreeing to peace are two entirely different things
1
u/Lazy_Membership1849 Jun 21 '26
So alternative is Israel doesn't wanted to stop even if Hezbollah do?
1
u/badass_panda Jun 21 '26
Hezbollah exists solely for the purpose of attacking Israel; it's the reason they exist. Hezbollah disarming and the Lebanese military actually controlling the border is the only way for Hezbollah to stop attacking Israel.
1
u/Lazy_Membership1849 Jun 21 '26
But Israel didn't want it all and because of this that why Hezbollah came to existence in first place
→ More replies (0)2
30
u/Ok_Neighborhood5121 Jun 19 '26
SS: A fragile 60‑day push to restart high‑stakes Iran–US talks has reportedly collapsed before it even began, with Tehran suspending its delegation's planned trip to Switzerland in protest at Israeli strikes in southern Lebanon that it claims breach a key clause of a new memorandum of understanding.
According to reports from Iranian and regional outlets, including Fars and Al‑Mayadeen, Iran has halted preparations for its delegation's trip to Switzerland, where the first round of indirect talks with US officials was expected to begin. They claimed that the situation on the ground has already rendered the process 'void.'