OTTAWA – A ceasefire intended to de-escalate tensions between the United States and Iran is encountering uncertainty, according to a CBC News broadcast. Disagreements over the conditions surrounding the Strait of Hormuz and the inclusion of fighting in Lebanon are casting doubt on the agreement’s viability.

Disputed Ceasefire Terms

The core of the dispute centers on differing interpretations of the ceasefire’s terms. Tehran asserts the truce extends to Lebanon, while Israel disputes this, and the U.S. supports Israel’s position. Until an agreement is reached on this issue, Iran has indicated it will continue to restrict passage through the vital Strait of Hormuz.

According to Fawaz Jurgis, chair of Contemporary Middle Eastern Studies at the London School of Economics and Political Science, the ceasefire is “very fragile” and marked by “huge divide” between the U.S. and Iran. Jurgis stated that Israel’s actions in Lebanon over the past 48 hours have “multiplied the risks to the ceasefire,” with over 200 Lebanese killed and more than 1,000 injured, many of whom are civilians.

Jurgis further claimed that Israel is attempting to “collectively punish the civilian population” in Lebanon, a claim echoed by the Italian president and the Pakistani prime minister, who mediates between the U.S. and Iran. He suggested that without intervention from U.S. President Donald Trump, talks scheduled in Islamabad between the U.S. and Iran may not take place.

Jurgis also indicated a strained relationship between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, alleging that Netanyahu was not consulted before the ceasefire announcement and is now viewed by some in the U.S. as a liability. He suggested that the U.S. is increasingly critical of Netanyahu’s actions and their potential to draw the U.S. into a conflict with Iran.

During the broadcast, it was also reported that a 2023 law prevents Trump from unilaterally withdrawing the U.S. from NATO, requiring a two-thirds Senate vote or a new law passed by Congress. However, Trump could weaken NATO by cutting funding, withdrawing troops, or refusing to assist member states under attack. The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump’s team is considering withdrawing U.S. troops from countries deemed unsupportive.