Alwaght- On August 5, the Lebanese cabinet held a session led by President Joseph Aoun. The most important agenda of the session was restriction of arms in the hands of the Lebaness army, something directly referring to the disarming of Hezbollah resistance movement.
The meeting lasted for five hours and Shiite ministers (of Hezbollah and Amal Movement) walked out in protest at its agenda. The outcome was adoption of a decision to disarm Hezbollah within a specific time frame.
Though the decision on disarming Hezbollah was easy for the government, implementation of such a dangerous decision looks a hard job given the popularity of this resistance movement.
American goals stated by Lebanon government
Though it was the government of Lebanon that approved the disarming, it is actually an official document presented by the US envoy Thomas Barrack to the Lebanese officials. About two months ago, Barrack presented to the Lebanese leaders a document calling for their commitment to disarming Hezbollah in return for steps by Israel including retreat from five Lebanon border points, end of Israeli air and land offensive, demarcation of the borders, and support to the Lebanese army. At that time, after meeting with the Lebanese president, Barrack stated that a sense of hope and opportunity had emerged for him and that Lebanon must adapt to the changes in the region.
The adoption of Hezbollah's disarming by the cabinet is one of the clauses of Barrack's document, and in fact, the Lebanese government, under pressure and with Washington's promise, has decided to build pressure on Hezbollah. This is despite the fact that Hezbollah is still the most powerful military actor in Lebanon, and implementing the government's decision to disarm this resistance movement by force could open the door to security chaos in the country.
Regional aspects
Regionally, disarming Hezbollah is directly related to the actions and behavior of three various and decisive actors:
Iran: It should be taken into account that despite damage it sustained during the 12-day war Israel waged against it, Iran still maintains its regional influence. Tehran still works to expand its regional influence while talking to Washington over its nuclear program, and if these talks yield a positive outcome, they can influence Hezbollah position and role in Lebanon. So, Iran is a determining element in support of Hezbollah and opposition to its disarming.
Israel: In contrast, the Israeli regime sees the issue of Hezbollah's disarming as a strategic opportunity to sink the movement, because it believes that Hezbollah's capabilities have been exhausted. The Israelis insist on the complete disarmament of Hezbollah, and the current agenda of the Lebanese government is in line with Tel Aviv's goals.
The US: Though Washington follows long-term common agenda with Israel in Lebanon for Hezbollah disarming, it at the same time believes that if this is impossible, they can stop at destroying just Hezbollah's missile capabilities to eliminate the threat on Israel and cut its political influence at home. This American goal depends on the Hezbollah's resistance to the government's disarming agenda and the Americans are likely to walk back from their call for fill Hezbollah disarming.
Domestic conditions
Since some Lebanese parties expect the upcoming parliamentary elections to be held in May 2026, the plan to disarm Hezbollah has now been put forward at a crucial time to tip the scales of political power in Lebanon. Therefore, some political parties back Hezbollah’s disarmament with the aim of changing the equations in the upcoming vote.
On the other hand, Hezbollah believes that the government’s request for it to disarm is an American decision and that the US has raised its demands beyond the ceasefire agreement with Israel, while Hezbollah has complied with the requirements of the agreement, but Israel has not withdrawn from the five points and continues to violate the ceasefire and carry out drone assassinations. Therefore, the movement has so far resisted this demand.
Challenges ahead of disarmament
At present, given the home and international conditions, Lebanon faces multifaceted challenges disarming Hezbollah.
Security and sovereignty uncertain after Hezbollah disarming in southern Lebanon: It is unclear whether the Lebanese army will be able to fully secure the southern regions of the country, where Hezbollah has the upper hand and undisputed power if Hezbollah disarms. The residents of southern Lebanon, who are mainly Shiites, strongly oppose Hezbollah disarmament, and according to polls, up to 64 percent of southerners have reacted negatively to Hezbollah disarmament. Accordingly, the negative reaction of southerners to Hezbollah disarmament will be one of the major challenges for the Lebanese government to secure these regions.
Hezbollah a legitimate force defending Lebanon's borders: Hezbollah is the only actor in Lebanon that can respond militarily to the Israeli aggression against the country. The movement has already flexed its muscles to Israel in several military conflicts. The military wing of Hezbollah has always acted as a deterrence force defending Lebanon against Israeli aggression. This view of Hezbollah has been legitimized during key events, such as the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000 and the 2006 war. Hezbollah’s resistance during the 2006 war, despite the widespread destruction Israeli airstrikes caused, enhanced its credibility among segments of Lebanon’s Christian and Arab populations as a legitimate resistance force.
Hezbollah's deep-rooted influence: Hezbollah not only has a military institution, but also numerous economic and social institutions. Hezbollah's bank, the Qard Al-Hassan Bank, provides the movement with economic independence and control in Lebanon. Hezbollah also operates an independent educational network, parallel to the official Lebanese education system, and continuous funding for this educational organization flows even from outside Lebanon. In the areas of food, healthcare, fuel, and energy, Hezbollah is the main provider of services to its support base, especially in the south. This deep-rooted social system has strengthened the public's dependence on the movement in southern Lebanon, thereby enabling Hezbollah to emerge stronger than before. Furthermore, despite the recent military conflict with Israel, coinciding with the Gaza War, Hezbollah still maintains its political dominance at the electoral level, and disarming an organization with such a wide range of activities and popular base is not an easy job.
Limited ability of army: Another challenge ahead of Hezbollah disarming is the limited capabilities of the Lebanese army. The army is facing a frustration caused by the gaps between the international demands and its limited capabilities and resources. The army includes a considerable number of Shiite forces (around 45 percent), many of whom support Hezbollah. This demographic reality can trigger clashes and ideological tensions at home and potentially block an effective and reliable disarming process. According to various reports, senior Lebanese army officers have previously warned that any disarmament process could lead to divisions within the army itself. Therefore, the Lebanese army is hesitant and internally divided about implementing the disarming.
No guarantee Israel will withdraw from occupied Lebanese territories: Even if Hezbollah is disarmed, there is no guarantee Israel will exit the occupied territories in the south. Despite the ceasefire agreement, over the past few months, Israel assassinated commanders and senior officials of Hezbollah inside Lebanon in clear violation of the deal, and odds are after disarming, Tel Aviv will broaden the range of the assassinations. Therefore, even among Lebanon's political and military figures, there is no confidence in the country's situation post-disarming, and therefore this agenda is being followed with doubt and despair in Lebanese society.
