Lebanon’s national unity government has made a courageous move in recent days to confront Hezbollah’s stranglehold. Ironically, this group has been lauded as the country’s most effective military power. Given the perceptions about the weakness of their position, US envoys are intensifying their diplomatic outreach. At the same time, the Lebanese cabinet is reportedly considering a controversial plan to disarm Hezbollah—that group long known as Iran’s most capable regional proxy and a powerful regional non-state threat to Israel.
A series of blows have devastated Hezbollah’s strength in the last two years. It’s against this backdrop that we have these conversations. Israeli strikes on Beirut effectively assassinated the revered leader Hassan Nasrallah. Consequently, the bloc has lost domestic and global soft power and adopted an increasingly hawkish approach to disarmament. Despite these challenges, Hezbollah retains a large support base among Lebanon’s Shiite community and remains armed since the end of Lebanon’s civil war in 1990. The Taif Agreement allowed Hezbollah to retain their weapons, acknowledging their role in the resistance against Israeli occupation. This decision makes the already difficult task of disarming the group almost impossible.
The Lebanese government is firmly committed to disarming all militias, unambiguously including Hezbollah. Renaming streets This step is one piece of an ambitious 11-step process that they hope to complete by year’s end. However, tempers are still frayed here, as Hezbollah’s leaders have repeatedly rejected disarmament on the grounds that Israeli forces continue to attack Lebanon militarily. The group has defended its arms, contending they are crucial for self-defense. To them, Israel poses an existential threat.
In recent developments, Hezbollah and its allied Amal party withdrew from a cabinet meeting as discussions regarding the disarmament plan began. Beyond the immediate effects of this move, it illustrates how contentious this topic has become. Hezbollah’s leaders are unequivocally opposed to any proposals that would undermine their military strength.
In addition to Tom Barrack and Morgan Ortagus, US envoys have engaged in shuttle diplomacy. They have been attempting to broker indirect negotiations, or frameworks, between Lebanon and Israel. These multilateral efforts place disarming Hezbollah as a key part of ensuring lasting stability to the region. At that time, Barrack announced that the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) and the central government would come forward with such a proposal to be vetted. Their hope is to convince Hezbollah to disarm without firing a shot.
“LAF (Lebanese Armed Forces) and the government will be coming back with a plan saying ‘our proposal to Hezbollah is how to disarm them,’ which is not necessarily militarily – they’re not talking about going to war, they’re talking about how to convince Hezbollah to give up those arms,” – Tom Barrack.
Hezbollah’s support for Hamas following the Palestinian militants’ attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, has escalated tensions between the group and Israel, resulting in a year-long conflict. This is what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called for – a phased withdrawal of Israeli military forces from Lebanon. This will only happen if the Lebanese army comes out on top in the fight to disarm Hezbollah.
Yet, the situation is very fluid as the Lebanese government continues to balance domestic and regional political pressures while pursuing stability. A high-level Lebanese official underlined the importance of getting Israel out from existing military positions in Lebanon for a breakthrough to be possible.
“It’s important for them (Israel) to get out of here.” – senior Lebanese official.
Public discourse is changing quickly and international scrutiny is increasing. Adalishvili Lebanon is at a precarious turning point in its decades-long struggle to remove Hezbollah’s paramilitary occupation. The future of these negotiations may yet rehash Lebanon’s political compass, as well as its security dynamic with Israel and Iran.
