Published on 6/14/2026
The Israeli military strike on the southern suburb of Beirut has placed the field political scene at the heart of a complex crisis, at a time when US President Donald Trump is committed to moving forward with signing the memorandum of understanding with Iran, amid unofficial reports about the postponement of the electronic signature.
This military attack caused heavy political action in Tehran, and opened the door to major questions about response options and adherence to red lines.
This afternoon, the Israeli army carried out a raid on the southern suburb of Beirut, targeting the Ghobeiry vicinity, following Israeli calls to demolish buildings in the suburb, in response to Hezbollah attacks on northern Israel.
Official Iranian media quoted Muhammad Jaafar Assadi, deputy commander of the Khatam al-Anbiya military headquarters, as saying on Sunday that “the crimes of the Zionists in the southern suburb of Beirut will not remain unanswered,” while Iranian Parliament Speaker Muhammad Baqir Qalibaf warned of the possibility of negotiations with the United States halting if Israeli attacks on Lebanon continued.
Tehran’s dilemma
Abdul Qader Fayez, a journalist specializing in Iranian studies, believes that the attack on the suburb came as a “significant gift at a sensitive and deadly time” to the movement opposing the memorandum of understanding inside Iran, which captured the event to promote the inability to trust the United States, and the evidence is what Israel is doing.
However, Fayez confirms – during his speech to Al Jazeera – that this event will not derail the negotiation train from its context, as Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian announced that the path towards the memorandum is a “strategic option” approved by the National Security Council and cannot be departed from unless another decision is issued by it.
Regarding the possibilities of the Iranian response and understanding its position in the mentality of the Revolutionary Guards, Fayez points out that the military body was insisting internally on a clear clause in the memorandum guaranteeing a ceasefire on all fronts, including the Lebanese arena and the Lebanese ally, Hezbollah.
While some believe that a movement within Iran – and even within the Guard – wants to respond to Israel at this deadly time without dropping the memorandum so that both things can happen, what is most likely – according to Fayez – is that Tehran is waiting for the Americans to speak, especially since Trump’s statements that the attack should not have occurred at this sensitive time have received a listening ear in Tehran, despite the fact that the strike greatly complicates the task of the Iranian negotiator.
Tel Aviv “rebellion”.
On the other hand, the expert on Israeli affairs, Muhannad Mustafa, explains that Israel does not think with the mentality of understandings, but rather with the mentality of Israel, as its Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu moves driven by two mentalities:
- The traditional Israeli mentality of the necessity of responding.
- The electoral mentality is under great internal political pressure related to the Lebanon front and the upcoming agreement with Iran.
Mustafa believes that Israel has entered the stage of “rebellion against Trump without clashing with him.” It will not stop bombing the southern suburbs if it sees a need to do so, nor will it completely back down from its attacks in Lebanon. Rather, it may reduce the escalation a little at his request.
He adds that Netanyahu is taking Israel to further escalation on all fronts (Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip) to send a message to Washington and Tehran that he will not accept the equation that is being built and imposed on Israel, and will not submit to it completely.
Washington options
For his part, Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the Washington Times, Tim Constantine, reviews the American power cards, stressing that the United States has multiple tools to pressure Israel, including technical, military, financial and political support, which it has refrained from using in the past.
Konstantin warns that the American position will “intensify” if the delay in the situation extends beyond the “relatively acceptable” Tuesday.
He believes that Israel’s current actions completely destroy a narrow opportunity presented by the American President to sign the “Abraham Accords” and normalize relations with its Arab neighbors.
He stresses that Israel must do what is right in its interest instead of destroying this opportunity, just as Iran must make decisions that serve the interest of 90 million of its population, away from military dictates and pride.
