LevantTime .

Uncertainty persisted at the start of the week over when technical talks between Tehran and Washington would resume, after both sides agreed last Tuesday in Switzerland to establish four working groups dedicated to sanctions relief, nuclear issues, and reconstruction. Strained by the military standoff over the Strait of Hormuz — where Iran is seeking to impose total control — and Tehran's refusal to allow IAEA inspectors access to its nuclear sites, talks between the two capitals have nonetheless not broken down, according to multiple corroborating sources cited by AFP and American media outlets.

After the displays of joy and goodwill following its supposed "victory" against the Israeli-American camp, the pro-Iranian axis quickly bared its teeth when confronted with ground realities, as revealed by the chain of events since the signing of the memorandum of understanding between Tehran and Washington on June 18, followed by the agreement between Beirut and Tel Aviv on June 26. Iran, which believed it could call the shots after successfully getting its key priorities included in the text of the agreement with Washington, quickly revealed the limits of the "goodwill" it had touted throughout the negotiations that led to the signing of the document presented as a prelude to a regional peace deal.

After nearly two months of direct negotiations between Lebanon and Israel, a 'framework agreement' between the two countries was signed on Saturday evening (Beirut time), on the fourth day of the fifth round of talks held at the State Department in Washington, under the supervision of Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The ceremony took place in the presence of Mr. Rubio and negotiators from both countries, including, on the Lebanese side, former Lebanese Ambassador to Washington Simon Karam and U.S. Ambassador to Beirut Michel Issa. The document was signed by Lebanon's Ambassador to the United States, Nada Hamadé Moawad, and Israel's Ambassador, Yechiel Leiter, both of whom delivered brief remarks, thanking the Trump Administration for its efforts and highlighting the significance of the occasion.

On the third day of the fifth round of Lebanese-Israeli talks in Washington, what were described as difficult discussions between the two Lebanese and Israeli politico-military delegations were expected to yield a statement of intent outlining the framework for more substantive negotiations and future cooperation between Lebanon, Israel, and the United States. The statement of intent was set to be announced and signed by Lebanon and Israel at 11 p.m. Beirut time, but the announcement was delayed as discussions between the two sides continued. According to several consistent sources, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is throwing his full weight behind efforts to bring Lebanon and Israel to sign the statement.

The second day of the 5th round of direct negotiations between Lebanon and Israel, held on Wednesday, June 24, at the State Department in Washington, focused on examining the concrete mechanism to be put in place to "manage" the partial — and at this stage symbolic — withdrawal of Israeli forces from certain sectors of the border region. In line with the ongoing discussions on this plan, the Lebanese army will need to progressively replace Israeli units as they gradually withdraw. Sources generally considered well-informed note that this handover will be carried out by Lebanese army units supervised and under the "security" and operational control of the American military command.

Diplomatic activity intensified on Tuesday around two issues that have dominated international headlines in recent weeks: the discussions between Washington and Tehran and the direct talks between Lebanon and Israel. The fifth round of Lebanese-Israeli negotiations opened at the Pentagon, but not before President Joseph Aoun issued a firm reminder of the guiding principle that should govern the three-day talks: respect for Lebanese sovereignty. Mr. Aoun, who has repeatedly criticized Iran’s blatant interference in Lebanon’s internal affairs, treated Tehran and Tel Aviv as equally responsible. “We will accept nothing less than an end to the Israeli occupation and to all forms of foreign domination,” he said, in a barely veiled reference to Iran. He expressed hope that the discussions would lead to “the full restoration of Lebanon’s sovereignty over every inch of its territory,” according to a statement released by his office.

Lebanon was at the center of talks on Sunday between Iran and the United States in Switzerland. While Tehran claimed to have closed the Strait of Hormuz and U.S. Vice President JD Vance delivered remarks in an upbeat tone, President Donald Trump responded to the strait's closure with threats against Iran, prompting the Iranian negotiators to suspend the discussions. As for Lebanon, all eyes are on the direct negotiations with Israel, which have drawn the ire of Hezbollah. Sunday, June 21: the start of U.S.-Iran talks in Lucerne, Switzerland. The American delegation was led by Vice President JD Vance, and the Iranian delegation by Parliament Speaker Mohammed Ghalibaf. After a false start — the talks had originally been scheduled for Friday at the same venue — they finally got underway two days later. They were far from smooth, once again laying bare the deep divisions between the former adversaries.

The Strait of Hormuz and Lebanon: two key military-diplomatic "weapons" Iran intends to wield to strengthen its position in negotiations with the United States, which are set to unfold over 60 days according to the memorandum signed Wednesday by both parties. Iran announced on Saturday that it was once again "closing" the strategic Strait of Hormuz in retaliation for Israeli strikes on Lebanon, while stopping short of breaking off talks aimed at reaching a final agreement with the US, which are due to begin Sunday in Switzerland. Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaïl Baghaï warned the United States on Saturday that the initial protocol would be "at risk" if its provisions were not implemented swiftly, in an apparent reference to the situation in Lebanon.

The renewed escalation of violence between Hezbollah and the Israeli military deployed in southern Lebanon, along with the simultaneous postponement of the American-Iranian talks that were set to open today, Friday, in Switzerland, confirms fears surrounding the terms of the memorandum of understanding reached between Tehran and Washington — terms widely seen as favoring the Islamic Republic. These concerns center on the risk of Lebanon being reduced to a mere mailbox in the context of the upcoming negotiations, which everyone knows will be lengthy and grueling, if not riddled with obstacles. The escalation raises, above all, the question of what strategy Iran is pursuing. This is a legitimate question given that Friday's outbreak of violence was triggered by a deadly Hezbollah attack — Iran's military arm in Lebanon — on an Israeli position overnight between Thursday and Friday. The fighting lasted nearly the entire day and ended thanks to yet another ceasefire between the two adversaries, brokered under pressure from Washington, but against a backdrop carrying a very significant Iranian political signal.

The defining feature of this round of talks and negotiations set in motion earlier this week by the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran is, without question, “suspense.” The formal launch of the process is scheduled for Friday in Switzerland, with the participation, among others, of US Vice President JD Vance and the Speaker of the Iranian Parliament – who also leads Iran’s negotiating team – Mohammad Ghalibaf. At this stage, suspense centers on the content of the memorandum of understanding agreed between Washington and Tehran. Only the Iranian “version” of the document has been made public. It is clearly one-sided, appearing to reflect primarily the demands of the Iranian regime. On the American side, officials say the framework agreement will be released to the media on Friday, after the official signing ceremony.