Trump rebukes Israel over Hezbollah war, urges Syria to ‘take the lead’ in fighting Iran-backed terror group

Washington: President Donald Trump publicly criticised Israel’s military campaign against Hezbollah, saying the fighting has gone on "too long" and has caused excessive civilian casualties, in comments that inject a new layer of tension into US diplomacy in the Middle East.

Trump also said he had urged Israel to consider allowing Syria to take a more active role in confronting Hezbollah, a suggestion that would mark a significant departure from current regional security alignments.

“Israel’s fighting Hezbollah too long and too many people are being killed,” Trump said in an interview aired on Fox News, where he also voiced opposition to strikes that destroy residential buildings with civilians inside.

"You dont' have to knock down apartment houses everytime you're looking for somebody, because a lot of people are in those apartment houses," Trump said.

"They're not all Hezbollah, that I can tell you," Trump added, in what is seen as a rebuke to Israeli military's use of disproportionate firepower, apparent disregard for civilian casualties and collateral damage.

“If Israel can’t do the job without killing everyone else, he’ll do the job. Syria will do the job,” Trump said, referring to Syrian involvement in containing the group.

Trump heaped praises on Syrian President Ahmad Al Sharaa, labelling him as "very capable". "He's pulled that country together amazingly quickly. He's very capable, and he's been very good for me. He's protected everything that I've asked for."

The remarks come amid escalating violence involving Israel and Hezbollah, the Iran-backed armed group based in Lebanon, and broader efforts by Washington to prevent the conflict from widening into a multi-front regional war.

The comments highlight the increasingly complex diplomatic landscape surrounding the conflict, where multiple state and non-state actors — including Israel, Hezbollah, Iran, and Syria — are operating in overlapping theatres of war, often with competing objectives and shifting alliances.

US officials have long sought to balance support for Israel’s security operations with concerns over civilian casualties and regional escalation.

Trump’s remarks, however, go further than typical diplomatic language by explicitly questioning Israel’s military approach and proposing an alternative regional security role for Syria.

The Israeli government has not immediately responded to the comments.

Hezbollah, designated a terrorist organisation by the United States, UK and other countries including the UAE, has continued cross-border attacks on northern Israel, prompting sustained Israeli air and ground operations in southern Lebanon.

There has been gradual, cautious movement in parts of the region toward re-engaging Syria diplomatically in recent years, driven by Arab League normalisation trends, concerns over spillover from Gaza/Lebanon conflicts,a desire by some regional states to reduce Iranian influence in Syria.

However, analysts say that none of this translates into Syria becoming an immediate counter-force to Hezbollah.

Damascus, they pointed out, still has overlapping Russian and Iranian influence and a limited capacity to project power into Lebanon independently.

So even in a “warming” scenario, Syria “doing the job” as per Trump's framing is not seen as an immediately practical security plan.

Moreover, the remarks could complicate already fragile diplomatic efforts aimed at containing the conflict, even as backchannel negotiations continue through regional mediators.

While Trump’s statement should be read less as a literal operational proposal and more as a signal of frustration and re-prioritisation in how he views the costs of Israel’s campaign against Hezbollah, it is significant.

And while there's no clear evidence of a formal US policy shift making Syria a designated actor against Hezbollah, as such a move would run against decades of established regional alignments, the rhetoric itself is significant.

It reflects growing tension between three pressures now shaping US thinking on the conflict:

In that space, statements that once would have been unthinkable can surface as political signalling, even if they do not yet represent executable policy.