-Fadi Eid
The controversy surrounding Hezbollah’s role in the Lebanese state forms the core of understanding the structural crisis that Lebanon has been suffering from for decades. An experienced politician believes that the existing equation is based on a deep imbalance in the distribution of responsibilities, as the party monopolizes the decision on war, while the state is left with the task of dealing with the consequences of this decision on the humanitarian, economic, and social levels, which has produced a hybrid model in which the state turns into something similar to a “relief agency,” instead of being the sovereign decision-maker.
The same politician adds that this reality, which has been going on for more than thirty years, weakens the concept of the state and strips it of its basic function. The absence of accountability for those who make the decision to go to war, in exchange for holding the state accountable for its consequences, leads to the establishment of a vicious cycle of crises, where wars are repeated without real deterrence. In this context, the proposition emerges that any state that does not monopolize the decision to decide peace and war remains a weak entity, unable to extend its authority or protect its citizens.
On the other hand, the politician points to indicators of a shift in Lebanese official performance, which were evident in a series of decisions taken by the government recently, including seeking to disarm the party, ban its military and security activities, and finally the decision to consider the appointed Iranian ambassador persona non grata. These steps, although symbolic in some aspects, reflect an attempt to redefine the state’s position and role, and send a clear message rejecting Lebanon’s continuation as an arena of foreign influence.
The veteran politician believes that the decision to deal with the Iranian diplomatic representation goes beyond the protocol framework, to carry broader political connotations, considering that it reflects the beginning of a shift in the Lebanese state’s approach to the relationship with Tehran, whose role in Lebanon is seen through its close connection to the party. This decision also comes in a changing regional context, as some Arab countries are moving towards stricter policies towards Iranian influence.
As for the internal level, the politician himself believes that these steps represent part of an integrated attempt to restore balance to state institutions, benefiting from the convergence of positions between the Presidency of the Republic, the government, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This intersection, if it continues, may constitute a political basis for confronting the pressures exerted by the party, which in turn seeks to contain or impede these transformations.
However, the politician asserts that the main challenge lies in turning these decisions into a tangible reality, especially since previous experiences show that sovereign decisions often collide with a complex field balance of power. Therefore, the success of this path depends on the state’s ability to impose its decisions, and on the presence of a sustainable political will that does not back down under pressure. What is happening today may represent the beginning of a long path towards the state restoring its role, but it is still in its early stages, and it is still unclear whether Lebanon will be able to transition into an actual state that monopolizes its decisions, or whether the balance of power will reproduce the same reality?
