Hezbollah Refuses to Disarm Amid U.S.-Backed Lebanon Plan, Signals Determined Resistance
Hezbollah’s top leader, Sheikh Naim Qassem, made it crystal clear Friday: the group has no intention of handing over its weapons, even under international pressure. Speaking to Al-Mayadeen TV, Qassem warned against a United States-backed plan that would tie disarmament to an Israeli withdrawal and international support for Lebanon's reconstruction.
“The resistance will not hand over its weapons while the [Israeli] aggression continues,” Qassem said. “If necessary, we will fight it as a Karbala-style battle—and we are confident we will prevail.” His reference to the historic 7th-century Battle of Karbala signaled a readiness to resist even at great cost, highlighting the symbolic and ideological stakes behind Hezbollah’s armed position.
Why It Matters
The U.S. has been pushing a plan aimed at disarming Hezbollah by the end of this year. The idea is to trade disarmament for economic assistance and support for rebuilding Lebanon, a country still struggling with a protracted economic crisis. But Qassem’s remarks suggest the plan may face stiff resistance, complicating U.S. and international efforts in the region.
This comes at a delicate moment. Iran’s newly appointed security chief recently met with Hezbollah leaders in Beirut, publicly pledging support amid rising pressure on regional proxy forces to disarm. Tensions in the region have been mounting, particularly after Hezbollah and Hamas suffered military setbacks against Israel during the ongoing Gaza conflict, which began in October 2023.
Historical Context and Regional Pressure
Earlier this year, Hezbollah declared it would refrain from responding to Israeli and U.S. strikes on Iran, out of respect for the Lebanon ceasefire. Iran’s other allies, including the active Houthi forces in Yemen, also avoided military interference. Despite these gestures, the current U.S.-backed plan has reignited fears of forced disarmament.
In his televised speech, Qassem directly accused the Lebanese government of following U.S.-Israeli directives, claiming that disarming Hezbollah would leave the Lebanese people defenseless in case of attacks. This rhetoric underscores the broader regional dynamic, where Hezbollah sees itself as a necessary shield against Israeli aggression, framing its armed presence as vital to national defense.
Iran’s Support
Iran has been vocal in backing Hezbollah, portraying the group as a cornerstone of regional resistance. Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), described Hezbollah’s military capabilities as a “great asset” for both the region and the wider Islamic world during his visit to Lebanon. Larijani met with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, reinforcing Tehran’s strategic commitment to the group.
In a statement covered by the Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA), Larijani praised Hezbollah’s young fighters, calling them a source of pride for Muslims and urging them to maintain steadfastness along the path of martyrdom exemplified by leader Hassan Nasrallah.
Domestic Political Tensions
The Lebanese government has found itself caught in the middle of this international tug-of-war. Last week, ministers affiliated with Hezbollah and its allies walked out of a Cabinet meeting in protest of the U.S.-backed disarmament plan. Lebanon’s leaders are acutely aware that access to crucial international aid—needed to address the country’s economic collapse—might depend on the state asserting control over armed groups.
Israel, for its part, has long pressed for the disarmament of Hezbollah and Iran-linked proxy groups. Border skirmishes and repeated accusations of ceasefire violations underscore the fragility of peace along the Israel-Lebanon frontier. The ongoing tension illustrates how Hezbollah’s weapons remain a highly contentious issue in regional security politics.
U.S. Position
Washington has been blunt about its expectations. On August 7, U.S. State Department Deputy Spokesperson Thomas Pigott emphasized that words alone won’t suffice. “As long as Hezbollah retains arms, the Lebanese government’s credibility is at stake,” Pigott said. He stressed that the Lebanese Armed Forces must fully implement government decisions to show the international community that they can match principle with action.
The U.S. has also linked the plan to reconstruction aid, creating a high-stakes scenario for Lebanese officials. Failure to comply could slow down or even block access to critical international support, deepening Lebanon’s economic woes.
Potential Regional Implications
If Hezbollah digs in, it could signal a resurgence of Iranian influence in Lebanon, with far-reaching consequences. A refusal to disarm might provoke increased U.S. pressure, including potential military involvement, while also heightening the risk of broader regional instability.
The stakes are high: Hezbollah’s weapons, its ideological stance, and Iran’s backing are all central to the regional power balance. Any move to forcibly disarm the group could spark internal unrest, drawing Lebanon into a potentially destabilizing confrontation that has reverberations far beyond its borders.
Voices from Hezbollah
Sheikh Qassem did not mince words regarding domestic political responsibility. “The government is carrying out the U.S.-Israeli order to end the resistance, even if it leads to civil war and internal strife,” he said. “The Lebanese government bears full responsibility for any internal strife and for abandoning its duty to defend Lebanon’s land.”
Meanwhile, Iranian officials continue to publicly bolster Hezbollah’s position. Larijani’s visit and statements underscore Tehran’s message: Hezbollah is not just a Lebanese militia—it’s a linchpin of regional resistance, one that Iran intends to protect politically and militarily.
What Happens Next?
Lebanon stands at a crossroads. If Hezbollah resists disarmament, the U.S.-backed plan could falter, leaving international aid contingent on a compromise that may never materialize. At the same time, Iran’s reinforced support could embolden Hezbollah, possibly encouraging other proxy groups in the region to assert themselves more aggressively.
Analysts warn that any escalation could have broader consequences. A confrontation between Hezbollah and the Lebanese government, or between Hezbollah and Israel, would risk dragging the region into further instability. The international community watches closely, knowing that any misstep could ignite a chain reaction affecting Syria, Gaza, and beyond.
In essence, Hezbollah’s refusal to disarm is about more than just weapons. It’s a declaration of autonomy, a challenge to U.S. influence, and a reaffirmation of Iran’s regional sway. As Sheikh Qassem framed it, this is not just military resistance—it’s a struggle for survival and legitimacy, one with historical, ideological, and political dimensions.
The coming months will be critical. Will Lebanon’s government assert control, risking civil tension? Will Hezbollah and Iran push back, risking wider conflict? Or will diplomacy prevail, offering a fragile compromise between armed resistance and economic survival? For now, the region holds its breath.
Login