Despite international pressure, including from the United States, for quicker disarmament, the Lebanese government emphasizes preserving civil peace and addressing the issue through dialogue. On the other hand, a fair assessment would be that Hizbullah will not voluntarily lay down its weapons, as it is an extension of Iran’s long-term plans for the region and is more beholden to Tehran than to the interests of the Lebanese people. The latest declarations by Iran’s ambassador to Lebanon Mojtaba Amani (who was seriously injured in the pager operation against Hizbullah’s leadership), confirmed that Iran was orchestrating all Hizbullah’s stances relating to disarmament since, as the ambassador declared in a post published on X that: “The disarmament project is a clear conspiracy against nations. While the United States continues to supply the Zionist entity with the latest weapons and missiles, it prevents nations from arming and strengthening their armies, and pressures other countries under various pretexts to reduce or destroy their arsenals.”
Amani added: “When these countries submit to disarmament demands, they become vulnerable to attack and occupation, as happened in Iraq, Libya, and Syria.”
Amani pointed out that “the Islamic Republic of Iran is aware of the danger of this conspiracy and its threat to the security of the region’s peoples,” stressing, “We warn others not to fall into the trap of enemies. Preserving deterrence is the first line of defense for sovereignty and independence, and it should not be jeopardized.”
Given Iran’s official position concerning disarming Hizbullah, one can conclude that considering Hizbullah’s firm stance on the issue, the Lebanese government’s emphasis on dialogue and national consensus, and the complex regional dynamics, the prospects for Hizbullah’s disarmament in the near future are minimal despite the discussions held recently and some indications of willingness to engage in dialogue.
Hizbullah has consistently maintained that it will not disarm as long as Israeli forces remain in southern Lebanon and continue airstrikes violating Lebanese airspace. Hizbullah’s new leader, Naim Kassem, has emphasized that the group’s weapons are essential for Lebanon’s freedom and survival. At the same time, some Hizbullah representatives have reiterated their deceased former Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah’s famous line that “Hizbullah will cut all hands that try to disarm it.” In a straightforward evasive tactic, Hizbullah set its conditions for an agreed settlement with the Lebanese government: first, stop Israel’s “infringements” on UNSCR1701, the withdrawal of Israeli forces from all five strategic positions it holds in South Lebanon, and engage Lebanese President Joseph Aoun on what he calls “the national defense strategy” at the end of which Hizbullah believes it will still be an armed militia in Lebanon.
Recognizing the risks of provoking open military conflict or a potential civil war, Aoun has made it clear that Hizbullah’s disarmament can only be achieved through bilateral dialogue—not by force—as part of a broader national defense strategy. In response to positions taken by Iran and Hizbullah, Aoun’s government has consistently reaffirmed that any disarmament must result from internal Lebanese consensus, not external pressure. He also stated that the Lebanese army is committed to upholding the ceasefire agreement with Israel and that ongoing discussions aim to incorporate Hizbullah’s weapons into a unified national defense framework. Aoun stressed that Lebanon would not follow the Iraqi model, where the Iranian-backed militia “Al-Hashd al-Sha’abi” was integrated into the Iraqi army, creating a problematic situation of divided loyalties.
In the meantime, Aoun has capitalized on Hizbullah’s relative political weakness to introduce a series of largely symbolic changes in Lebanon. One such move was the removal of all Hizbullah banners along the highway to Rafiq Hariri International Airport in Khaldeh, replacing them with slogans proclaiming the dawn of a new era, administrative reforms, and a renewed commitment to state governance. His government also appointed a new governor to Lebanon’s central bank and filled hundreds of long-vacant management positions in state-owned enterprises—roles previously left unfilled due to Hizbullah’s opposition to many of the nominees. Meanwhile, in southern Lebanon, the Lebanese army has gradually advanced, occupying positions Hizbullah has chosen to vacate.
In conclusion, given Hizbullah’s (and Iran’s) firm stance, the Lebanese government’s emphasis on dialogue and national consensus, and the complex regional dynamics, the prospects for Hizbullah’s disarmament in the near future seem to be close to null. Aoun will do his utmost to evade a clash with Hizbullah and will accept compromises that seem unacceptable today.
