Lebanon is confronting one of its gravest crises in recent memory, as the country’s fragile authorities near a decisive moment in their standoff with Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed terror organization entrenched across its territory. Amid escalating Israeli military operations and the breakdown of previous arrangements between Hezbollah and the Lebanese government, the nation stands at a crossroads—whether to seek the disarmament of the militia or risk a military confrontation unprecedented in scope.
The fragile balance between Lebanon’s government and Hezbollah began unraveling as the group refused to relinquish its weapons, openly defying the president’s declaration that all arms should fall under the control of the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF). The president reaffirmed the state’s intention to assert its sovereignty over all armed groups within its borders. However, Hezbollah’s prompt and direct rebuttal, declaring unequivocally, “our weapons will remain in our hands,” underscored the militia’s entrenched position and its long-standing challenge to Lebanon’s sovereignty.
Efforts by the LAF to extend its control have been largely symbolic. While recent months saw troops deploying in the south and seizing some weapons and rockets, these steps have failed to achieve the government’s stated aim of monopoly over force within Lebanon—the principle demanded both by the international community and enshrined in United Nations Security Council resolutions. Weapons remain in the hands not only of Hezbollah but also in Palestinian refugee camps and among other armed groups, highlighting the weakness of state institutions.
Meanwhile, Israel has maintained a campaign of near-daily airstrikes and raids targeting Hezbollah infrastructure, as well as operatives affiliated with both Hezbollah and Hamas operating within Lebanon. The Israeli Air Force continues to assert absolute aerial dominance, destroying weapons depots, command centers, and tunnels used for cross-border attacks, with multiple active outposts along the northern frontier. According to open-source tracking and official Israeli military briefings, these operations aim to degrade Hezbollah’s offensive capability and deter further attacks against Israeli civilians—an imperative reinforced after the October 7, 2023, Hamas massacre, the deadliest antisemitic atrocity since the Holocaust.
Despite recent claims that Hezbollah has repositioned some of its forces north of the Litani River, credible reports indicate that the group’s covert infrastructure and personnel networks remain operational in southern regions. In the Beqaa Valley, significant movements and fortification activities have been observed, suggesting Hezbollah is preparing for the potential of an expanded conflict. Lebanese intelligence sources estimate that the terror organization’s pre-war ranks numbered approximately 100,000 fighters, and although more than 11,000 have been killed or wounded during the current hostilities, Hezbollah’s main military assets remain largely intact, shrouded in secrecy and discipline honed through years of support from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and operational experience from the Syrian conflict.
The Lebanese president, under immense internal and external pressure, has thus far resisted calls for a full-scale deployment of the LAF against Hezbollah. Government sources indicate that an emergency cabinet meeting may soon decide whether the group will be formally instructed to disarm or the state will move towards direct confrontation. Either choice entails significant risks: civil strife and destruction if a clash erupts, or the further erosion of Lebanese sovereignty if Hezbollah’s armed state-within-a-state remains unchecked.
U.S. and French diplomatic efforts have continued in the background, with Washington remaining the principal supporter of the LAF and a central actor in regional security. American officials have reportedly avoided pressuring Israel to curb its self-defense actions in Lebanon, while Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has presented President Donald Trump with contingency proposals to expand Israeli operations if required to interdict Iranian-backed threats. Thus, Lebanon’s security situation remains tethered to decisions taken in Jerusalem and Washington as much as in Beirut.
On the ground, Israeli operations have not only targeted Hezbollah but also Hamas operatives present in Lebanon, underscoring the extent of Iranian-backed terrorist entrenchment on Israel’s northern border. Official Israeli statements have emphasized the imperative to prevent another October 7 scenario, highlighting the continuous threat posed by the array of rockets—numbering in the tens of thousands—and attack tunnels extending from Lebanese territory into Israel.
The persistence of the crisis and the state of near-collapse in Lebanon also cast scrutiny on U.S. policy, particularly the recent investment exceeding one billion dollars in a new embassy complex in Beirut. Observers question why the United States is doubling down on its diplomatic presence in a country where national authority is so perilously compromised, and stability is anything but assured.
At its core, Lebanon’s uncertainty lays bare the central dynamic of the modern Middle East: the contest between sovereign statehood and Iranian proxy warfare. Since Hezbollah rose to dominance, Lebanon’s independence has been increasingly circumscribed by Tehran’s agenda. The group’s refusal to disarm is not solely a Lebanese matter, but part of a broader Iranian campaign, waged on multiple fronts from Gaza to Yemen to Iraq, aimed at encircling and destabilizing Israel while undermining order across the region.
Israel’s response—as articulated by its defense leadership and enacted through precision operations—remains anchored in the right to self-defense. While diplomatic channels remain open, Jerusalem has signaled unequivocally that its patience is finite; further attacks or escalatory steps by Hezbollah will draw swift and overwhelming retaliation aimed at dismantling terror infrastructure and safeguarding Israeli civilians.
Lebanon now stands at a historic inflection point. Failure to address the challenge posed by Hezbollah could consign the state to perpetual instability, hostage to the ambitions of Iran and its proxies. Yet moving against the militia directly risks a conflict that would engulf the country and further destabilize the entire Levant. For Israel, for the region, and for the broader international community, the stakes could not be higher: the fate of Lebanon will serve as a litmus test for whether Middle Eastern states can reclaim their security and sovereignty, or whether Iranian-backed terrorism will continue to undermine the prospects for peace.
