Israel’s army chief says the Lebanon front remains a state of war despite Iran ceasefire

# Israel’s army chief says the Lebanon front remains a state of war despite Iran ceasefire

Israeli army chief Eyal Zamir said on 2026-04-10 that the army in Lebanon was still in a “state of war,” according to Anadolu (sourceId: 11531). He added that while there was a ceasefire in Iran, Israel could return to operating there at any moment.

The statement is significant because it captures two different but linked realities. On one front, Israel was describing its posture in Lebanon as actively wartime. On another, it was treating the Iran ceasefire as temporary and reversible. Together, those positions suggest the conflict had not settled into a stable pause.

The source excerpt says Zamir made the remarks while visiting Israeli troops deployed near Bint Jbeil. That location matters because it places the statement close to the front line rather than in a distant headquarters. Military leaders often use such visits to reinforce morale and communicate strategic resolve directly to troops.

The article should avoid speculating about specific operations that may follow. The source does not identify targets, timelines or troop numbers. It does not say whether the comment was tied to a new offensive order or was simply a reminder of operational readiness. The safest reading is that Zamir was signalling persistence and flexibility at the same time.

For Lebanon, the phrase “state of war” is especially stark. It implies that the Israeli military does not view the current situation as a normal ceasefire environment. That can affect the security climate for civilians, border communities and any diplomatic efforts aimed at stabilising the front.

The reference to Iran is equally important. Saying that the army could return to operating there “at any moment” keeps pressure on Tehran and on anyone trying to interpret the ceasefire as durable. The wording leaves the door open to renewed escalation, which means regional actors cannot assume the conflict is over simply because shooting has paused elsewhere.

Because the source is a news report rather than a direct transcript, the article should attribute the wording carefully and not invent additional quotation marks or detail. The evidence is still enough to show the military chief was drawing a hard line on both fronts.

The broader lesson is that ceasefires can be operationally fragile even when they are formally in place. Zamir’s remarks indicate that the Israeli military was still thinking in war terms, not peace terms. That is a meaningful distinction for any observer trying to gauge whether the region was moving toward de-escalation or simply entering a new phase of waiting.