Adnan Nasser is an independent foreign policy specialist and journalist based in Beirut and Washington, DC. He holds a Bachelor’s degree in international relations from Florida International University. Follow him on X @Adnansoutlook29.
On Aug. 5, Lebanon's governing cabinet instructed the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) to develop a plan to disarm all non-state armed actors in the country—including Lebanese Hezbollah. However, even with the declining military power of the group and the rising role of the Lebanese state, Hezbollah has publicly rejected the effort, pushing back on the timeline established by the government of Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and President Joseph Aoun for the group to hand over its weapons.
This moment was long overdue. Hezbollah, a Shiite political party with a powerful armed wing and support from the Islamic Republic of Iran, has long refused to discuss its weapons, using force to reiterate this point on many occasions. Citing ongoing Israeli attacks and the prospects of a sectarian Sunni state being forged in Syria by the new transitional President Ahmed al-Sharaa, the group argues that it needs weapons to defend Lebanon.
That supposed justification has not held. This year, pressure has mounted on the group after its major setback on the battlefield against Israel in late 2024. Hezbollah's political weight was significantly diminished after its "war of support" with Hamas. It chose to side with the armed Palestinian faction against Israel, launching rocket attacks into the country's north and displacing tens of thousands after Hamas launched Operation al-Aqsa Flood in October 2023.
From that point on, the consequences could not have been more disastrous for Hezbollah.
It lost thousands of fighters battling Israel. Its reputation as a defender of the south, as Israel continues to occupy what it designates as five strategic areas on the disputed border, lies in tatters. The communities it represents are heavily damaged and, in many instances, completely wiped out, with reconstruction support contingent on its dealings with the Aoun-Salam government.
[Hezbollah] chose to side with the armed Palestinian faction against Israel, launching rocket attacks into the country's north and displacing tens of thousands after Hamas launched Operation al-Aqsa Flood in October 2023. From that point on, the consequences could not have been more disastrous for Hezbollah.
- Adnan Nasser
But the greatest loss for many Hezbollah supporters was Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, the man who captured the world's attention with his speeches. Indeed, his words carried gravity. After Israel assassinated him, it targeted other senior Hezbollah leaders, leaving the once proud organization—supposedly the strongest non-state armed group in the world—in shock by how severely exposed it was to Israeli intelligence breaches.
That series of events produced the Israel-Hezbollah ceasefire in November 2024. Before the agreement and fighting, a Lebanese presidency swiftly forming alongside a reformist government was unthinkable. Indeed, the country had been without a government for nearly two years, trapped in the political gridlock that has come to define the small eastern Mediterranean country's brief history.
Prime Minister Nawaf Salam's cabinet has received international backing and the Arab world's endorsement, with the Gulf monarchies prepared to increase financial investments and normalize relations with Beirut. However, it must meet certain political conditions. It is this backing—perhaps pressure more aptly describes the situation—that produced the government in the first place.
Hezbollah argues that the government's decision to confiscate their weapons is a U.S. demand, claiming it "fully serves Israel's interests." They regard the move as dictated by American Special Envoy Tom Barrack—effectively a submission to foreign intimidation. All four Shiite ministers, including two from Hezbollah's political wing, left the cabinet meetings as the timeline was discussed.
"The government of Prime Minister Nawaf Salam committed a grave sin by taking a decision to strip Lebanon of its weapons to resist the Israeli enemy…This decision fully serves Israel's interest," the group said on Aug. 6, just one day after the cabinet decision.
The political environment has drastically changed in Lebanon, with few choices for Hezbollah. The group's military capabilities are the weakest since its founding, meaning it may not be able to use force to achieve its interests without inviting further destruction for itself and Lebanon as a whole.
- Adnan Nasser
The statement went on: "This decision undermines Lebanon's sovereignty and gives Israel a free hand to tamper with its security, geography, politics and future existence. Therefore, we will treat this decision as if it does not exist."
Such a rejection raises fears in Lebanon that if Hezbollah is not disarmed, Israel will ramp up its strikes, risking another full-scale war. Equally concerning for Lebanese leaders is the possibility of a renewed civil conflict if the state is forced to take Hezbollah's weapons without a deal. The group is the only armed actor from the country's 15-year civil war (1975-1990) that has not disarmed and disbanded.
Last week, Hezbollah's new chief, Naim Qassem, stated in a televised speech threatening Israel if it were to resume hostilities: "This defense will lead to missiles falling inside the Israeli entity, and all the security they have built over eight months will collapse within an hour."
In an interview with this author, Lebanese Representative Dr. Najat Saliba provided her views on the cabinet decision, saying, "The decision to [transfer] Hezbollah's arms [into] the hands of LAF was taken eight months ago by President Joseph Aoun during his inauguration and later during the conference ceremony of the cabinet. So, Hezbollah should not be surprised by this move."
Saliba continued: "In the past, Hezbollah preferred not to have a specific timeframe on the question of its weapons. This is why they are panicking now. They believe, when there is no deadline, there will always be room to maneuver and reverse the decision."
When asked about Hezbollah supporters' public dissatisfaction with the government's public declaration, she rebuffed the idea: "It's not true that Hezbollah's constituency is not happy with the decision. We can see some are relieved with the outcome."
"They have had enough war and wish to move on with their lives, rebuild their homes and create a future for their children. It would be inaccurate to say they have the same number of supporters. In all cases, there are still many who follow the decisions of Hezbollah," she concluded.
Lebanon, governed by a sectarian confessional system, has long struggled with non-state armed groups established during the civil war. After that conflict and Israel's later withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, Hezbollah maintained its military capabilities, growing into a powerful political and armed force, backed by Iran and historically supported by Syria.
Now, the political environment has drastically changed in Lebanon, with few choices for Hezbollah. The group's military capabilities are the weakest since its founding, meaning it may not be able to use force to achieve its interests without inviting further destruction for itself and Lebanon as a whole.
That leaves non-military options. Before the arrival of President Joseph Aoun, Hezbollah operated not only with impunity, but also with the power to obstruct and delay any political process if it did not see the result serving its interests. Now, those days are over, as the party cannot upend cabinet meetings with its minimal representation amid widespread Lebanese disdain for its actions.
Ultimately, Hezbollah can either be a party that engages in normal political activities and represents its community at a time when democracy is being rebuilt in Lebanon, or it can continue to endanger the country with its old but tiresome language of "resistance."
The group hardly has a choice today.
