Foreign Policy > Lebanon

Hezbollah’s Lebanon: America’s Failed Experiment

We’ve poured billions into a country too weak to break Hezbollah and, worse, headed by a political class unwilling to do so.

Sam Butler | March 12, 2026

For decades, the United States poured billions into Lebanon, hoping to build a sovereign and stable ally in the Middle East. American aid was meant to strengthen the state, empower its army, and ensure that no weapons existed outside government control. Washington believed that with enough financial support, training, and diplomatic backing, Lebanon could become a functioning democracy and a reliable partner.

By 2025, the latest version of this experiment was underway. Former army chief Joseph Aoun, widely viewed as aligned with the United States, was elected president. Nawaf Salam, a respected former judge of the International Court of Justice, became prime minister. Together with the Lebanese army, they were supposed to restore Lebanon to its former status as a stable and prosperous country—the “Paris of the Middle East.”

The government, promising reform, pledged to assert control over all Lebanese territory and finally bring Hezbollah’s weapons under state authority. The international community celebrated these developments as evidence that Lebanon was turning a corner.

The Lebanese state existed only on paper. Real power always rested with Hezbollah.

Lebanon has never controlled its territory or its security. Hezbollah has long dominated the country’s political and military landscape. The army, presidency, cabinet, and parliament often function less as institutions of sovereignty than as components of an elaborate performance staged for international audiences.

Washington fell for the game, making a fateful mistake: it appointed Michel Issa, a Lebanese-French naturalized American citizen with almost no diplomatic experience, to one of the most dangerous and consequential embassies in the Middle East. Never before had a non-career Foreign Service officer been given such a posting—a move so reckless it bordered on absurd.

Washington forgot that Lebanon’s history is littered with American blood. The 1983 bombings of the U.S. Embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut killed hundreds, a stark reminder of the stakes in this small country.

For all the billions invested, the person meant to enforce Washington’s interests and authority became a symbol of failure, confusion, and embarrassment. Lebanon’s political elite quickly realized Issa was never fully American in outlook. If anything, his appointment made it easier for local actors to manipulate him—a representative of Washington in name only. His English is so limited that all his communication in Lebanon is in Arabic. At times, he even refers to the United States as “the Americans,” as if addressing a foreign power rather than representing it.

From the beginning, Issa has appeared out of his depth—a local actor in a foreign play, undermining every dollar, every initiative, and every ounce of U.S. credibility in Lebanon.

In August 2025, the Lebanese cabinet approved a phased military plan intended to consolidate all weapons under state authority. Salam even claimed that 80 percent of weapons in southern Lebanon were already under state control. In fact, the southern border, touted by Joseph Aoun and Nawaf Salam as under Lebanese Army control, was never truly secured. Theater replaced reality. Hezbollah remained armed, entrenched, and politically protected. Army deployments were largely symbolic—checkpoints erected, statements issued, press conferences held—while the balance of power remained untouched.

Hezbollah does not rule Lebanon alone. It has help from within the government, primarily from Nabih Berri, Lebanon’s longtime speaker of parliament and leader of the Amal Movement. For decades, he has functioned as Hezbollah’s political shield, protecting the militia from accountability while presiding over a political system that preserves the interests of the ruling elite. Any serious reform effort would have begun by confronting Berri’s influence. Instead, he has remained untouchable.

X screen grab, edited to add text.

The limits of the army’s willingness to confront Hezbollah were exposed in February 2026 during a meeting in Washington between Senator Lindsey Graham and Lebanese Armed Forces chief General Rodolphe Haykal. When Graham asked Haykal directly whether he considered Hezbollah a terrorist organization, the general replied: “No, not in the context of Lebanon.”

Graham immediately ended the meeting and later warned that if this is the position of Lebanon’s military leadership, the United States cannot view the army as a reliable partner. The exchange underscored a reality Washington has long tried to ignore: the institution it has spent billions supporting does not even recognize the country’s most powerful militia as an adversary.

Lebanon’s illusion of sovereignty collapsed completely on February 28, 2026, when U.S. and Israeli forces assassinated Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei, triggering a regional war that quickly drew Lebanon into the conflict. On March 2, Hezbollah launched rockets and drones from southern Lebanon into northern Israel, openly claiming responsibility. The strike effectively declared Lebanon an active front in the expanding confrontation between Iran, Israel, and the United States.

Israeli airstrikes soon hit southern Lebanon, the Bekaa Valley, and Beirut’s southern suburbs. Lebanon was no longer pretending to be a neutral state struggling to control militias. It had become an active battlefield.

Even the Lebanese government’s response revealed the gap between rhetoric and reality. The cabinet issued a declaration banning Hezbollah’s military activities and demanding that the militia surrender its weapons to the state. The announcement generated headlines suggesting Lebanon might finally enforce sovereignty, but the declaration changed nothing. Hezbollah continued launching rockets and drones.

In a further attempt to project authority, the army announced arrests of individuals carrying unlicensed weapons, and the government issued orders prohibiting activity by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps inside Lebanon, but it changed nothing. Hezbollah continued launching rockets and drones and operating freely across the country while the government issued statements insisting that the state alone decides matters of war and peace.

For decades, Washington assumed that strengthening Lebanese institutions would eventually enable the state to assert control over the country. But the state never possessed that power. Hezbollah answers to no Lebanese authority. It answers to Iran. The army cannot disarm it. The presidency cannot restrain it. Parliament cannot regulate it. Meanwhile, political figures such as Nabih Berri ensure that the militia remains protected within the political system.

Washington has consistently treated Lebanon as a partner struggling to overcome internal challenges. The truth is more uncomfortable.

Lebanon’s political system has accommodated Hezbollah for decades. Political leaders have protected the militia while continuing to request international assistance and diplomatic support. That arrangement allowed Hezbollah to grow stronger.

President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam have misled the U.S., helped most recently by Issa’s weakness and naivete. The promised disarmament never took place, and the army’s supposed control of southern Lebanon was a carefully staged charade. There is no reason to continue normal dealings with a leadership that has repeatedly deceived us.

Lebanon is not a partner. It is Hezbollah land. It is a proxy for Iran. It is a direct threat to Israel and to American interests. Senator Lindsey Graham and other key Members of Congress should immediately put a hold on any further funding for the Lebanese army.

Also, there is no longer any excuse for keeping Issa in this position. To restore American credibility in Lebanon, he must be removed from and replaced with someone with real experience and gravitas who can enforce U.S. interests rather than serve as an easily manipulated figurehead.

Sam Butler is a senior national security professional and veteran of the U.S. military, intelligence community, and federal law enforcement, with extensive experience in strategic planning, operational leadership, and interagency coordination

SUPPORT AMERICAN THINKER

Now more than ever, the ability to speak our minds is crucial to the republic we cherish. If what you see on American Thinker resonates with you, please consider supporting our work with a donation of as much or as little as you can give. Every dollar contributed helps us pay our staff and keep our ideas heard and our voices strong. Thank you.

© American Thinker