How Ben-Gvir's Vow to Block a US-Iran Deal Coincided with Israel's Deadliest Day of Strikes in Lebanon

The timing was critical. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had signaled just days earlier that "some progress" had been made on a deal that would require Iran to eventually give up its highly enriched uranium stockpile and reopen the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for a lifting of the US blockade . Mediators believed they were edging closer to a 60-day ceasefire extension .

The Bombardment: Over 120 Strikes in Lebanon

As Ben-Gvir spoke, Israel was carrying out one of its heaviest bombing campaigns in weeks. Lebanese security sources reported more than 120 airstrikes across southern and eastern Lebanon, targeting towns including Burj al-Shamali, Kawthariyet El Riz, Habboush, Maarakeh, and Selaa . The Lebanese Health Ministry reported at least 18 people killed, with some sources putting the death toll as high as 31, and more than 40 wounded .

The strikes hit civilian areas hard. In the Western Bekaa Valley, Israeli warplanes launched eight consecutive airstrikes on the town of Mashghara, creating what Lebanon's National News Agency described as a "ring of fire" that killed at least five people . In Tyre, residential neighborhoods were leveled, and civil defense teams worked through the night pulling bodies from the rubble .

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he had ordered the military to escalate its offensive to "crush" Hezbollah . The strikes further frayed a ceasefire that had been announced on April 16, which was already being violated near-daily . Since the renewed hostilities began in early March, over a million Lebanese had been displaced and more than 3,100 people killed .

The Connection: Sabotage Made Explicit

What set this day apart was the explicit connection drawn between the military action and the diplomatic process. Ben-Gvir suggested the bombardment was intended to derail the US-Iran negotiations, a link that multiple international outlets immediately highlighted . The Asia Times reported that "as Israel launched a new bombardment of Lebanon on Tuesday, its far-right Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir suggested that it was trying to derail ongoing peace negotiations" .

This pattern was not new. Hours after a previous US-Iran ceasefire was announced in April, Israel had unleashed a massive bombing campaign on Lebanon, drawing condemnation from Pakistan's foreign minister, who accused Netanyahu of trying to sabotage mediation efforts when both sides were "about to sit down to negotiate" . Analysis from The Business Standard documented a sustained pattern: "for over two years, across Gaza, Lebanon, and now in the shadow of a fragile US-Iran truce, Israel under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly escalated precisely when diplomacy gains momentum" .

Iranian officials were direct in their accusations. Iran's foreign ministry spokesperson, Nasser Kanaani, stated that "one should expect nothing from Israel except the sabotage of any process" . Tehran's negotiating position explicitly demanded that any agreement to end hostilities between the US and Iran must also end Israel's attacks on Lebanon, where officials reported more than 12,000 people killed or wounded .

Domestic Political Fault Lines

Ben-Gvir's declaration also exposed fractures within Israeli politics. While he positioned himself and his Otzma Yehudit party as the guardians of Israeli security against a "bad deal," opposition leaders were sharply critical of the emerging agreement as well—but for different reasons. Opposition leader Yair Lapid criticized Netanyahu's handling of the situation and the fact that Israel appeared sidelined from the negotiation process .

The political maneuvering echoed Ben-Gvir's previous interventions. He had boasted in the past that "through our political power, we succeeded in preventing" a Gaza hostage deal "from moving forward time and time again" . His opposition to diplomacy with Iran represented an extension of a hardline position that viewed any negotiated settlement as a capitulation.

A Deal on the Brink

Behind the scenes, the diplomatic track was showing signs of life even as the bombs fell. The Financial Times reported that mediators believed they were edging closer to a deal to extend the US ceasefire with Iran by 60 days and lay the framework for discussions on Iran's nuclear program . Rubio had suggested a deal could come within days .

But the combination of Ben-Gvir's public veto and the escalating military campaign cast a dark shadow over those prospects. The sequence of events—a public declaration opposing any deal, timed to coincide with a major military escalation explicitly aimed at derailing negotiations—painted a picture of a deliberate strategy to make diplomacy impossible.