War is possible again: Lebanon's ongoing negotiations on Hezbollah's arsenal

Shafaq News

12 hours ago

Shafaq News
After months of political back-and-forth, the issue of Hezbollah's weapons has become increasingly central in both domestic Lebanese discourse and international positioning. With time running short and diplomatic options narrowing, the debate is intensifying, signaling the potential for renewed escalation.
Limited Diplomatic Window
Many observers note that the possibility of removing the Lebanon file from US Syria envoy Tom Barrack is unlikely to alter Washington's or Tel Aviv's longstanding demands regarding Hezbollah's disarmament. Speculation surrounding the possible reappointment of former envoy Morgan Ortagus—known for her vocal support of Israel—has further fueled concerns about a diminishing diplomatic posture by the US in handling Lebanon's complex political and security landscape.
Meanwhile, Hezbollah remains adamant about retaining its arsenal for the foreseeable future. In contrast, key international actors, led by the United States, continue to demand concrete steps toward consolidating state control over all weapons.
This outlook is reinforced by a series of high-profile public statements that suggest the window for political resolution is rapidly closing.
Diverging Rhetoric: Aoun's Appeal Versus Hezbollah's Defiance
The Lebanese President Joseph Aoun issued a direct appeal to Hezbollah, calling for the group to hand over its weapons 'today rather than tomorrow,' framing the issue in existential terms, 'to liberate occupied territories, rebuild the state, restore international trust in Lebanon, and prevent further national collapse.' Aoun emphasized that the sacrifices of Lebanon's martyrs must not be in vain.
Hezbollah's leadership, however, is far from the President's appeal. The Secretary-General Naim Qassem reiterated that disarmament is not on the table. He warned against reducing Lebanon to 'an Israeli annex,' regardless of the cost, and instead emphasized other priorities—including reconstruction efforts following the Israeli war and halting Israeli attacks.
'End the aggression and free the prisoners; only then can we have a serious discussion,' Qassem declared, dismissing any calls—domestic or foreign—for disarmament as serving 'the Israeli project,' and argued that Israel's ambitions extended beyond disputed border points, warning that disarming the resistance would pave the way for Israeli expansionism inside Lebanon.
Despite the apparent contradiction between Aoun and Hezbollah, political sources suggest that a quiet but constructive dialogue is ongoing between the two sides. This conversation is expected to culminate in a government session that will formally address the state's monopoly over arms.
Negotiations, Not Disarmament—For Now
Lebanese political analyst Qassem Qassir told Shafaq News that disarmament is not currently on the agenda. He confirmed that negotiations between Hezbollah and the presidency continue, but stressed that any meaningful discussion about Hezbollah's weapons hinges on several non-negotiable conditions: ending Israeli aggression, withdrawing from Lebanese territory, releasing prisoners, and initiating reconstruction.
'These are firm and clear positions,' Qassir said. 'Any consideration of limiting arms to the state can only follow the fulfillment of these demands.'
Qassir also emphasized that Hezbollah's heavy missiles and drones constitute 'a point of strength for Lebanon,' forming a strategic deterrent against Israel. 'These capabilities cannot be relinquished without assurances for their protection.'
He further warned that the US and Israel do not merely seek Hezbollah's disarmament, but rather its destruction—whether those weapons are held by the party or the Lebanese Army. 'Israel may use the pretext of disarmament to justify a new war on Lebanon,' he cautioned.
While internal discussions have floated the idea of placing Hezbollah's arms under unofficial state authority, Qassir concluded that no concrete steps have been taken by the Lebanese state toward actual disarmament. What is unfolding, he said, remains confined to preliminary consultations and general understandings.
Israel Rejects Lebanese Initiative, Heightening Risks of Escalation
With diplomacy faltering, many in Lebanon fear that an escalation is inevitable—possibly resembling the recent conflict that ended with a ceasefire agreement on November 27.
Two developments in particular are fueling these fears. First is the continued pattern of Israeli airstrikes and targeted assassinations, concentrated in southern Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley. Second is a report by Reuters, citing five diplomatic sources, stating that Israel rejected a proposal from Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri. The proposal had sought a halt to Israeli airstrikes as a first step toward fully implementing the ceasefire agreement.
Israel has issued neither confirmation nor denial of the report.
Potential Political Fallout?
Beyond the battlefield risks, internal political repercussions also loom. Despite Hezbollah's entrenched role in the Lebanese government, ongoing external pressure and internal divisions over its weapons could reshape the very structure of governance.
This unresolved contradiction—between Hezbollah's strategic doctrine and growing international insistence on state sovereignty—has yet to reach a breaking point. But the signals from all sides suggest that the margin for ambiguity is rapidly narrowing.