Lebanon stands at a pivotal crossroads, facing one of the most complex and sensitive challenges in its modern history: disarming Hezbollah without plunging the country into internal conflict, while simultaneously reclaiming its sovereignty from an increasingly entrenched Israeli military presence. President Joseph Aoun’s decision to pursue dialogue with Hezbollah represents a prudent, if precarious, attempt to resolve the longstanding issue of the group’s arms. However, success will depend not only on Lebanese diplomacy but also on the role of external powers – particularly the United States – in reining in Israel’s aggressive posture.

Today, Israel continues to conduct near-daily airstrikes in southern Lebanon, claiming to target Hezbollah’s arms depots. It has deployed troops across five strategic southern locations, asserting their presence indefinitely. Israel justifies its operations by claiming that Hezbollah remains an armed threat, and it casts doubt on the Lebanese state’s capacity to manage the disarmament process. In reality, Israel’s unilateral actions undermine Lebanon’s sovereignty and, paradoxically, weaken the very Lebanese state that must be strong if Hezbollah’s military role is ever to be phased out.

Israel claims it is acting in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1701, passed in 2006 to end hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah after the brutal war that year. Yet its ongoing strikes, military deployments, and dismissiveness toward Lebanese complaints at the UN reveal a blatant disdain for international norms. Israel’s disregard for diplomacy renders Lebanon’s efforts to seek redress through the United Nations largely symbolic. Worse, it makes Hezbollah’s argument – that arms are essential for Lebanon’s defense – more persuasive to its domestic........

© Blitz