Pressure mounts for Hezbollah's disarmament

BeirutAt the end of April, Israel broke the ceasefire in Lebanon, in place since November. The latest bombing of Beirut was not just another attack, but an action to make it clear that Benjamin Netanyahu's government continues to set the rules of the conflict. Although Tel Aviv justified it as a reaction to an alleged "flagrant violation" of the truce by Hezbollah, the real objective appears to be something else. For Israel and its allies, the disarmament of the Shiite militia should not be limited to south of the Litani River, but should extend to all of Lebanese territory. It brandishes an ambiguous clause in the agreement with Washington that allows the Israeli army to intervene in the event of any "perceived" threat. All this just before the visit to Beirut of US envoy Morgan Ortagus, who will seek to pressure for the disarmament of the Iran-allied Shiite group and to advance the Israeli withdrawal from the territories still occupied.

However, the path toward this goal is far from linear. Hezbollah reiterated that its arsenal is not on the negotiating table. "The ceasefire only covers the area south of the Litani," its Secretary General, Naim Qassem, recalled. "Any attempt to change this balance will be met with a firm response," he threatened.

Despite the tension, some Lebanese political figures hint at a possible gap in the disarmament talks. Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, a longtime ally of Hezbollah, suggested that the group's arsenal could become a topic of negotiation, provided Israel withdraws from the five disputed border points. The leader of the Amal movement put it bluntly: "As long as there is Israeli employment, weapons are a red line." In parallel, President Joseph Aoun proposed a gradual strategy beginning in the south of the country, continuing with the Palestinian refugee camps, and culminating in a national defense policy that incorporates Hezbollah into the national army.

The dangers of militarization

But several experts warn of the risks. The massive incorporation of militants trained under the Wilayat al-Faqih doctrine—which grants religious and political power to Iranian clerics—could upset the religious balance of the Lebanese army. "Someone who carries out orders as a religious duty can hardly adapt to a democratic and secular institution," warns Khaled Hamade, a military analyst, to ARA. The figure of 100,000 fighters claimed by Hezbollah is probably exaggerated, but even partial integration could destabilize the religious balance of the armed forces. The retired military officer estimates that if the number exceeds 10,000 recruits, the state would have to compensate with new recruits from other faiths.

This debate comes as the United States strengthens its counterterrorism strategy in the Middle East. The Biden administration, like the Trump administration before it, is demanding that its Arab allies curb support for armed groups. In this context, Tehran has adopted an ambiguous stance: it has expressed its willingness to advance nuclear negotiations with European mediation, but insists that any dialogue regarding its allies, such as Hezbollah or the Houthis in Yemen, must be conducted directly with them, without intermediaries.

In the Lebanese case, Iranian ambassador Mojtaba Amani has described the disarmament debate as a "conspiracy against the Lebanese state." The response from Beirut was clear. President Aoun insisted that "avoiding a new civil conflict is a national priority."

Meanwhile, Hezbollah's military capabilities have been affected. Some analysts estimate that more than 90% of its sophisticated arsenal, including missiles and drones, has been destroyed in Israeli strikes. This has pushed the group to a lower profile, ceding prominence to the state and avoiding an escalation that could be catastrophic. "The situation remains volatile," acknowledges a diplomatic source.

On this playing field, the US is seeking to accelerate the process. Ortagus has said that disarmament should be completed "as soon as possible." But as researcher Nicholas Blanford warns, the underlying question remains unanswered: "Will Hezbollah—and Iran behind it—agree to disarm? Everything else is just details."