An American report believed that the ongoing talks between Lebanon and Israel, despite their fragility and complexity, may constitute a rare opportunity to reformulate a different approach to the “Hezbollah” file, based on gradual political and security treatment instead of being satisfied with the military option, which, according to the report, has failed to achieve its goals over the past decades.
According to a report by researcher Bilal Saab in the American magazine National Interest, Israel and Lebanon view “Hezbollah” from two completely different angles, which makes any understanding between the two parties very complex, but at the same time it reveals points that can be built upon to reach a common approach.
The report indicated that the Lebanese government considers Hezbollah a multifaceted challenge, not only because of its weapons and its relationship with Iran, but also as a result of its security, financial, political, and social influence within Lebanon.
He added that Beirut deals with the party as an “internal militia” that possesses extensive security and intelligence capabilities, and practices political violence inside Lebanon, in addition to possessing financial networks and illegal activities that contribute to undermining the authority of the state and the official economy.
On the other hand, the report made clear that Israel views Hezbollah from a purely security angle, as its primary focus is on preventing the launching of missiles and drones towards Israeli territory, regardless of the nature of the party’s influence within Lebanon or its political and social repercussions on the Lebanese state.
The report considered that this Israeli security approach pushed Tel Aviv for decades to rely on military force only, starting with the occupation of the south and the establishment of the “security belt,” through the repeated wars with “Hezbollah” in 1993, 1996, and 2006, all the way to the current operations inside southern Lebanon.
However, the report stressed that all previous Israeli military attempts “failed” to eliminate the party or remove it from the scene, but rather often led to strengthening its strength after each confrontation.
The researcher pointed out that Israel has once again returned to establishing a buffer zone inside southern Lebanon, while adopting a policy of widespread destruction of border towns similar to what happened in Gaza, which has made the return of residents to their areas almost impossible at the present time.
Despite the scale of the Israeli strikes, the report confirms that Hezbollah is still capable of carrying out operations against Israel and killing Israeli soldiers inside Lebanese territory, just as it did during the period of the Israeli occupation of the south between 1985 and 2000.
In a reading of the internal Lebanese scene, the report revealed that President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam took a series of steps during the past months to confront Hezbollah’s influence, which included public political stances regarding the exclusivity of weapons in the hands of the state, security and administrative measures inside the airport and the port of Beirut, in addition to judicial and financial moves linked to the party’s institutions.
The report also indicated that the Bank of Lebanon, under the leadership of Governor Karim Saied, prevented banks and brokerage companies from dealing with the “Al-Qard Al-Hassan” institution, the main financial arm of “Hezbollah.”
On the military side, the report explained that the Lebanese army began, since last September, operations to remove tunnels, missile launch sites, and military installations south of the Litani, as part of a government plan to gradually disarm that region by the end of 2025, while acknowledging that the biggest challenge remains north of the Litani, where Hezbollah refuses any consideration of dismantling its military arsenal.
Despite this, the report considered that the Lebanese state’s ability to advance on this path remains linked to stopping the ongoing Israeli attrition of Lebanon, warning that the widespread bombing, destruction of infrastructure, and displacement of the population makes the Lebanese state’s mission in confronting “Hezbollah” more difficult.
The report concluded by stressing that any realistic path to address the “Hezbollah” issue requires gradual and reciprocal steps, including an Israeli withdrawal from parts of the buffer zone, stopping targeting civilian areas, and releasing Lebanese prisoners, in exchange for strengthening the role of the Lebanese state and deploying the army in sensitive areas, including the southern suburbs of Beirut and the areas north of the Litani.
This American proposal reflects a growing realization within some Western decision-making centers that the “force alone” equation is no longer sufficient in Lebanon, and that any attempt to weaken “Hezbollah” inevitably passes through the Lebanese state itself, not above it or on its ruins.
