On June 16, US President Donald Trump proposed Syria as an alternative actor in confronting Hezbollah, while criticizing Israel’s campaign in Lebanon over what he described as excessive civilian casualties, arguing that targeting one individual should not require destroying entire buildings.
Speaking at the G7 summit in France, Trump said Israel had been fighting Hezbollah for “too long,” adding that in the process, “too many people are being killed.”
“You don’t have to knock down an apartment house every time you’re looking for somebody, because there are a lot of people in those apartment houses, and they’re not all Hezbollah,” Trump added.
Trump further said he has a “great relationship” with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but that Netanyahu should be “more responsible with respect to Lebanon,” saying that there would be no Israel “without the United States.”
The remarks point to growing tensions between Trump and Netanyahu over the war on Iran. Israeli officials have expressed frustration in recent days over Trump’s agreement with Tehran, from which Israel appeared largely excluded, while Trump has repeatedly voiced irritation over Israel’s position in Lebanon.
In a notable development during his remarks to the G7 on Tuesday, Trump said he suggested to Israel that it “let Syria take care of Hezbollah,” arguing that Damascus would “do a better job” than Israel in targeting the group without killing as many civilians.
Although there has been no official Syrian response to this statement, this is not the first time Trump has raised the prospect of a Syrian role in confronting Hezbollah. Earlier this month, he called for a “more surgical” attack on the Lebanese group and said that Syrian President Ahmad Al-Sharaa “would love to help” reach an arrangement regarding Lebanon.
Al-Sharaa had already rejected the proposal days earlier, labeling the possibility of Syrian intervention as “mere rumors,” saying Damascus wanted no military or security role inside Lebanon.
In remarks earlier this week, he said Syria’s approach was based on supporting an end to the war and strengthening the authority of the Lebanese state, without entering into direct confrontation with Hezbollah.
In a Truth Social post days earlier, Trump said Israel’s attack Sunday on Beirut’s southern suburbs “should not have happened.” His agreement with Iran, meanwhile, was met with anger in Israel, particularly from figures in the ruling coalition.
Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir attacked the deal, saying “Trump’s agreement does not bind us,” and arguing that Israel was not subordinate to the United States.
Israeli political and security officials rejected the US–Iran memorandum of understanding, insisting it does not bind Israel. Defense Minister Israel Katz said Israeli forces would remain in southern Lebanon “without any time limit,” underscoring Israel’s refusal to withdraw despite the agreement.
The dispute comes as Israel continues its strikes on southern Lebanon and Beirut, while Trump seeks to present his agreement with Iran as an entry point to a broader regional de-escalation.
The US and Iran reached a memorandum of understanding, with a formal signing scheduled in Geneva on Friday, June 19.
