Israel’s cabinet approved a US-brokered ceasefire agreement with Hezbollah in what was a 10-1 vote in favour. The vote came after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the nation on the evening of November 26, confirming that he would present a ceasefire agreement with Lebanon to his cabinet for approval.

"The duration of the ceasefire depends on what will happen in Lebanon," Netanyahu declared during his speech, suggesting that the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) would be ready to respond to any breach of the agreement by Hezbollah.

The deal comes after months of escalating tensions following Hezbollah's breach of UN Resolution 1701 in the wake of October 7, 2023.

Despite the government's assurances, the agreement has faced considerable domestic opposition. National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, the sole dissenting vote in the cabinet, has emerged as a prominent critic. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich supported the deal only after securing specific concessions, Israel’s Channel 14 reported.

The agreement's implications for northern residents remain unclear. These communities, displaced since the conflict's onset, continue receiving government stipends but lack a timeline for return. Several Knesset members have expressed concerns about the deal's enforcement mechanisms, citing historical precedents of similar arrangements proving ineffective.

Member of Knesset (MK) Dan Illouz, from Netanyahu’s Likud party, relayed the fears of residents of northern Israel, stating that agreements that have relied on the oversight of international bodies have “proven weak and ineffective in the past.”

Ben Gvir took to X to voice his opposition to the ceasefire deal. “The cabinet's decision tonight is a serious mistake. A ceasefire at this stage will not return the residents of the north to their homes, will not deter Hezbollah, and in fact, will miss a historic opportunity to strike them hard and bring them to their knees,” the National Security Minister posted.

For residents of northern Israel, not only are they facing an uncertain future, but there is also a concern that Hezbollah could use the ceasefire to rebuild. According to IDF figures, in 2014, Hezbollah’s missile arsenal surpassed 100,000, making it five times larger than what it was when UN Resolution 1701 came into effect. This figure included short-range, medium-range, and long-range rockets with ranges of up to 700 km.

Public resistance to the agreement has manifested in demonstrations outside IDF headquarters in Tel Aviv in the hours leading up to the Cabinet vote. The protesters included displaced northern residents and right-wing groups, rallying under slogans such as “Agreement = destruction” and “Last Call to Save the Galilee.”

Critics of the ceasefire also drew parallels with Gaza ceasefire negotiations and the concerns that an agreement would enable Hamas to regroup and strengthen both its governmental and military influence over the Gaza Strip once again. Withdrawal from the Philadelphi Corridor may also enable the resumption of arms shipments to Hamas, posing an immediate threat to nearby Israeli villages and kibbutzim.

Still, while critics demand more decisive action against Hezbollah, the practical challenges of sustaining simultaneous military operations on two fronts have influenced the government's approach.

The Netanyahu administration now faces the dual challenge of implementing the agreement while maintaining public confidence, particularly among displaced northern residents.

Transparent and effective communication from the government to the Israeli public will be key, and regular military and governmental updates will need to be provided to maintain the trust of a sceptical population following what has been a severe war on multiple fronts.