The call came as a separate US-backed framework between Lebanon and Israel faces growing criticism over provisions seen as linking Lebanese sovereignty to Israeli security demands.
Ghalibaf told Berri during the call on Sunday that talks held last week in Switzerland focused on ending Israel's war on Lebanon, restoring Lebanese sovereignty, and securing the withdrawal of Israeli forces from occupied Lebanese territory.
He said the Lebanon file formed "an important part of the first clause" of the Islamabad memorandum of understanding (MoU) between Iran and the United States.
Ghalibaf added that, after Iran's negotiating team raised violations of that clause during the Swiss talks, the sides agreed to establish a "deconfliction cell" involving Iran, the US, and Lebanon to monitor implementation in Beirut.
He said Tehran's objective remained "the end of the war in Lebanon, the return of displaced persons to their homes, and the removal of occupation and withdrawal of the Zionist regime from Lebanese territory," adding that Iran was pursuing that goal seriously.
Berri thanked Iran and its negotiating delegation, saying their position reflected the interests of the Lebanese people. He also warned that "the Zionist enemy is attempting to bypass the issue of restoring Lebanon's sovereignty and territorial integrity under the framework of the Islamabad MoU through alternative channels."
On Saturday, Berri, the head of Amal Shia movement who acts as mediator between the government and Hezbollah, appealed for calm as political tensions mounted over the deal, urging Lebanese factions not to be drawn into internal strife.
Berri called the Beirut-Tel Aviv deal one-sided and demanded an "unconditional ceasefire by land, sea, and air."
He described the agreement as "booby-trapped," noting it requires Hezbollah to halt operations and withdraw north of the Litani River while failing to secure a parallel Israeli withdrawal from occupied territory.
The US-backed framework links any Israeli withdrawal from parts of southern Lebanon to the Lebanese Armed Forces taking control of designated areas and the disarmament of Hezbollah.
In the 14-point agreement, Tel Aviv reserves the right to maintain its military actions and occupation of parts of Lebanon "as a consequence of the attacks, threat posed by, and hostile intent of non-state armed groups, particularly Hezballah," and postpone the return of displaced Lebanese to the south until it deems that there are no more so-called security threats to Israel.
"The Government of Israel stresses that its military actions in Lebanon are solely a consequence of the attacks, threat posed by, and hostile intent of non-state armed groups, particularly Hezballah. The Government of Israel underscores that the termination of this threat, through the disarmament and dismantlement of such groups in all of Lebanon and additional security arrangements to be agreed upon between the two countries, will eliminate any future need for its military action or presence in Lebanon. Pursuant to the above, the Government of Israel declares that it has no territorial ambitions in Lebanon," read article 5 of the agreement.
In the first statements after the signing of the deal, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun considered the agreement "a first step" to restoring his country's sovereignty.
“The framework agreement signed today is a first step” that will enable Lebanese to return to their fully liberated lands, and to their certainly rebuilt homes… under the sovereignty of the Lebanese state that has no partner in its sovereignty over its land and people,” Aoun said according to a statement released by his office.
“We swear to continue to work until this is fully achieved. There will be no more occupation, prisoners, subordination or tutelage,” he added.
Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said the agreement “aims to achieve Israel’s withdrawal from all Lebanese territory, restore state sovereignty over it” and see the return of displaced Lebanese.
“I look forward to the blessed moment when Israel begins to withdraw — so that our dear people can return to their homes with safety and dignity — and to the launch” of reconstruction efforts, Salam added, according to a statement.
Opponents of the deal argue that the arrangement rewards Israel’s occupation by allowing it to set the terms of withdrawal while placing binding obligations on Lebanon before Israeli forces fully leave its territory. They point to Israel’s long and documented history of ceasefire violations and stress that any agreement must first secure a full and unconditional Israeli withdrawal.
The competing diplomatic tracks have left Lebanon caught between two rival approaches.
The Iran-US MoU, signed on 17 June, calls for an immediate and permanent end to hostilities across all fronts, including Lebanon. Tehran maintains that any lasting settlement requires a complete Israeli withdrawal, the safe return of displaced civilians, and the full restoration of Lebanon’s territorial integrity.
The Lebanese government, meanwhile, has pursued a separate US-backed framework aimed at restoring state authority.
Hezbollah decries deal
Naim Qassem, the Secretary General of Hezbollah, who have been battling against the Israeli occupation forces in southern lebanon, rejected the agreement, calling it a “grave blunder” by Beirut.
“The framework agreement in Washington is humiliating, shameful, and a surrender of sovereignty. This agreement is null and void, and the provisions of the Iranian-American memorandum of understanding must be implemented,” Qassem stated, accusing Lebanese authorities of “legitimizing” Israeli occupation.
Hezbollah MP Hussein Hajj Hassan said the group “does not recognize” the agreement and that it “will not be implemented” as long as “the resistance and its weapons remain.”
“This is not an agreement but a capitulation and the complete surrender of the Lebanese authorities to the United States and the Zionist enemy,” he said. “The obligations contained in the agreement are binding on Lebanon, while no commitments are imposed on Israel.”
Amal, the Shia movement led by Berri, also rejected the agreement, saying it was unbalanced and carried political and sovereign risks.
“The movement considers this agreement to be unbalanced and, in most of its provisions, to entrench realities favourable to the enemy at the expense of Lebanon’s national interest. It carries political and sovereign risks and cannot be accepted, as it does not provide the basis for a fair agreement that safeguards Lebanon’s rights,” it stated.
Sunni MP Jihad Samad, an ally of Hezbollah, said “the framework agreement effectively legalizes Israel’s occupation of Lebanon,” accusing the government of trying to undermine the Iranian-American agreement concerning Lebanon.
MP Halime Kaakour also criticized Clause 13 of the deal, which requires both parties to refrain from “hostile or antagonistic action in international political or legal forums.”
“How can you accept such a clause?” she asked President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam. “Does this mean abandoning efforts to prosecute the enemy for war crimes and crimes against humanity? In other words, you are entrenching impunity, denying justice to the thousands of victims of war crimes and violations of international humanitarian law, and depriving Lebanon of an important avenue for obtaining financial reparations.”
On the other side, supporters of the Beirut-Tel Aviv agreement have described it as a chance to restore state authority and secure an Israeli withdrawal.
Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea, a fierce opponent of Hezbollah, called it “the Lebanese state’s most important political initiative in half a century.
In tandem, Kataeb leader Samy Gemayel said Lebanon “emerges victorious” if the deal leads to the end of the war, Israeli withdrawal and the restoration of state authority.
Those political tensions have already surfaced along Beirut Airport Road, where the Lebanese government dismantled pro-Iranian slogans reading “Thank you, loyal Iran” alongside images of Iran’s supreme leadership and replaced them with official state banners proclaiming “Lebanon First”.
Hezbollah supporters later reportedly defaced and burned the billboards, condemning the government’s agreement with Israel as a surrender of national sovereignty.
Israel escalated its attacks in Lebanon on 2 March and has since occupied more parts of southern Lebanon.
According to Lebanon’s health ministry, Israeli strikes since 2 March have killed at least 4,247 people, injured over 12,000, and displaced nearly 1.4 million.
Between the November 2024 ceasefire, under United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 1701, and the escalation of the war on 2 March, Israel carried out 669 airstrikes in breach of the truce, averaging roughly two attacks per day.
Short link: