The deal, reportedly brokered through international mediation efforts, aims to halt military operations and prevent a wider regional conflict.
***
While the truce offers an opportunity for diplomacy, analysts warn that significant challenges remain. The durability of the agreement will depend on both sides adhering to its terms and avoiding provocations. Regional factors, particularly Iran’s influence on Hezbollah and broader security concerns, continue to pose risks. Observers say the ceasefire represents an important step toward stability, but not yet a lasting solution.
Israeli political scientist Yuri Bocharov told News.Az that the ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hezbollah should be viewed as a pragmatic security decision rather than a sign of weakness by either side.
Photo: Yuri Bocharov, Israeli political scientist
According to Bocharov, Israel’s security doctrine has always been based on protecting the state and its citizens from external threats.
“During military conflicts, decisions made by the Israeli leadership are guided primarily by national security considerations. Israel generally responds to attacks with retaliatory actions, but when intelligence services obtain information about an imminent threat, preventive strikes may also be carried out,” he said.
Commenting on the ceasefire, Bocharov noted that the agreement reflects current security assessments rather than political concessions.
“The ceasefire should not be interpreted as weakness. It is a pragmatic decision based on existing threat assessments and security interests,” he said.
The expert pointed to reports indicating that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not planning additional retaliatory strikes against Hezbollah. At the same time, he noted that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) will remain in the security zone in southern Lebanon for as long as necessary to protect Israeli communities near the northern border.
Bocharov stressed that the long-term viability of the agreement will depend on the conduct of the parties after the ceasefire takes effect.
“It is too early to speak about full stabilization. The history of conflicts in the Middle East shows that such agreements often become temporary pauses that allow the parties to reassess the situation and adjust their future actions,” he said.
However, he added that if the ceasefire is respected by all sides, it could create conditions for a more sustainable reduction in regional tensions.
The Israeli analyst identified Iran as a key factor in determining the agreement’s future.
“For many years, Iran has financed, armed, and supported Hezbollah while maintaining influence through a network of allied and proxy groups across the region. Therefore, the question is not only what Hezbollah will do, but also what policy Iran chooses to pursue toward its allies,” Bocharov said.
According to him, the issue extends beyond Lebanon. It includes Iran-backed groups operating in other regional flashpoints, including the Houthis in the Red Sea and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
“The future of the agreement will largely depend on whether Iran remains interested in de-escalation or once again uses its proxy forces to exert pressure on Israel,” he said.
Bocharov noted that from Israel’s perspective, many rocket attacks and armed incidents are viewed as provocations that require a response in self-defense.
“Any serious violation of the ceasefire could quickly trigger a new round of confrontation,” he warned.
The political scientist also said that the ceasefire creates opportunities for diplomacy, but cautioned that lasting regional stability remains far from guaranteed.
“The agreements reached so far, as well as the proposed memorandum between the United States and Iran, leave many important questions unanswered. It remains unclear what a long-term arrangement would look like, what monitoring mechanisms and security guarantees would be established, and how issues related to Iran’s nuclear program, ballistic missile development, and maritime security would be addressed,” he said.
Bocharov described the current situation as a temporary diplomatic opening rather than a definitive breakthrough.
“For now, we can speak about a diplomatic window that could facilitate negotiations over the coming months. However, considerable uncertainty remains. Any major disagreements during the talks or changes in the political calculations of the parties could lead to renewed tensions,” he said.
According to the Israeli expert, the ceasefire should be seen not as a final solution to regional security challenges but as a test of whether all parties are genuinely prepared to pursue more sustainable mechanisms for peace and stability.
