Lebanese Unity is Key to Hezbollah's Disarmament

posted on: Aug 20, 2025

By: Ghassan Rubeiz / Arab America Contributing Writer

Lebanon faces an existential choice: disarm Hezbollah or confront threats of Washington and Tel Aviv. (The US supports the Lebanese army with training and weapons; Tel Aviv bombs perceived “terrorist” Hezbollah). The dilemma is between state sovereignty and vulnerability to external intervention.

Under mounting external pressure from the US and Israel, Lebanon’s government has committed to disarming Hezbollah by the end of 2025. But this decision carries enormous risks. For Hezbollah to disarm, the Lebanese state must possess sufficient strength to take on the task, and Hezbollah must be willing to cooperate. Currently, neither condition exists, and mild demonstrations have erupted against the government’s rejection of the Resistance, the local name of Hezbollah.

The Strategic Calculus

Hezbollah’s reluctance to disarm stems from exposure to Israel’s expanding military presence and political dominance across Lebanon, Syria, and the Palestinian territories. Moreover, Iran has recently renewed its pledge of continued support for the Lebanese militia, further complicating disarmament efforts and reminding us that Lebanon’s future is intimately tied to the region’s future.

Setting a definitive deadline for Hezbollah’s disarmament is a direct provocation of what is still a proud and somewhat popular movement, particularly among the Shiite community and Lebanese firm “Arabists”. To Hezbollah’s credit, it has already fulfilled key obligations under the November 27 ceasefire agreement between Lebanon and Israel: withdrawing from southern border areas and accepting the Lebanese army- alongside UN peacekeeping forces-as the primary security presence in these regions. But Israel is demanding that Hezbollah disappear entirely as a military force, not minding its own expanding military adventures.

The Current Standoff

Hezbollah refuses to surrender its weapons until Israel withdraws from all five strategic border positions it occupied during last year’s invasion of southern Lebanon, and stops bombing its facilities and killing its personnel. The movement is almost threatening a new uprising if the government attempts to disarm it by force. Meanwhile, the Lebanese government lacks the capacity to enforce disarmament against a resistance force that retains sizable support within society.

Beyond Military Calculations

Disarming Hezbollah is much more than a military challenge. Resistance forces like Hezbollah have been proliferating throughout the Middle East because of the rapid erosion of international justice and the declining integrity of nation-states. When states fail to protect their citizens, non-state actors emerge to compete with governments in addressing the needs and aspirations of their constituents. Numerous Arab states — Lebanon prominently among them — have miserably failed to maintain national unity, economic security, and border safety. And Israel has a long record of flouting both international and domestic law, most recently evidenced by its toleration of settler violence in the West Bank and its gruesome siege and starvation of Gaza. The adaptation of the international community to the erosion of justice is a factor in stirring local unrest.

A Flawed Strategy

While Hezbollah may have lost significant military capacity to defend Lebanon against future Israeli aggression, it has not forfeited its right to adapt to an uncertain local and regional future. Eliminating Hezbollah’s arms will not automatically resolve Lebanon’s fundamental problems. Lebanon’s destiny remains inextricably linked to developments in Syria and Palestine. The region must first establish pathways to peace through equitable border settlements and responses to legitimate national aspirations.

Lebanese national unity must take precedence. Armed clashes with Hezbollah could risk reviving Lebanon’s civil conflict and potentially trigger another exodus of the Christian minority. Lebanon’s six-month-old cabinet should prioritize resolving the nation’s fundamental economic and security problems before risking the unity of the country and the loss of public trust.

Washington may be miscalculating in pressuring the Lebanese government to threaten Hezbollah prematurely. True stability requires building state capacity and national consensus before confronting powerful non-state actors. Only through genuine national reconciliation and dialogue can Lebanon hope to address Hezbollah’s challenge constructively while preserving the country’s fragile social fabric.

Ghassan Rubeiz is the former Middle East Secretary of the World Council of Churches. Earlier, he taught psychology and social work in his country of birth, Lebanon, and later in the United States, where he currently lives. He has contributed to political commentary for the past twenty years and delivered occasional public talks on peace, justice, and interfaith subjects. You can reach him at rubeizg@gmail.com

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Arab America. The reproduction of this article is permissible with proper credit to Arab America and the author.

Want more articles like this? Sign up for our e-newsletter!

Check our blog here!