According to webangah News agency, eight months after the ceasefire was announced in Lebanon, security conditions remain fluid in the country’s southern region. The israeli regime persists in targeting Hezbollah’s personnel and military assets to hinder efforts to rebuild infrastructure and restore resistance capabilities. Meanwhile, Israel’s ground forces remain stationed at five strategic points in southern Lebanon, having yet to withdraw from Lebanese territory.Pressure from Washington and Tel Aviv is increasing for disarming Hezbollah.
Reports indicate that Joseph Aoun’s government has conveyed a message to Tom Barrack emphasizing that disarming Hezbollah is by no means an “easy” option under current circumstances and must proceed gradually following Israel’s commitments. Concurrently, escalating military activity by forces allied with Golani in southern Syria-including attempts to suppress Druze groups like the Alawites along the coastal region-signals to Hezbollah that acquiescing to disarmament could meen preparing for a new conflict originating from Syria. Under these conditions, israeli officials have again threatened new waves of attacks against lebanese Hezbollah if disarmament efforts stall.
What Is Tom Barrack Seeking?
Tom Barrack, U.S. Special envoy for Syria, has recently shifted tactics regarding Hezbollah’s disarmament, attempting deception aimed at forcing Israel’s demands on the resistance. The government of Joseph Aoun has explicitly warned U.S. counterparts that serious attempts at coercive disarmament could ignite new clashes and plunge Lebanon back into civil war.
Hezbollah has expressed willingness to discuss its ”resistance weapons” within a framework for drafting a joint national defense strategy with Beirut authorities. Previously, Morgan ortagus, another U.S. special envoy, urged Lebanon’s government to present a timetable for dismantling Hezbollah’s arsenal as part of broader measures including severing financial channels supporting Hamas and disarming twelve palestinian camps. Failure to achieve this prompted Barrack’s proposal allowing selective disarmament based on distinguishing between Hezbollah’s “military” and “political” wings-a move intended to break current deadlocks but which appears unsuccessful thus far.
Barrack reportedly sought direct contact with hezbollah as part of his revised plan; however Khalil Nasrallah-a defense analyst close to the resistance-tweeted that while Barrack initially intended dialog directly with Hezbollah leadership, the group refused direct American communications since it participates officially within Lebanon’s government structure. According to Nasrallah: “Hezbollah supports Lebanese-to-lebanese talks; Washington hinders this process.”
Trigger Fingers Ready
The severing of connections between Lebanon’s banking system and Al-Qard al-Hasan institution reflects sustained U.S pressure aimed at systematically weakening Hezbollah politically and socially across Lebanon-reflecting opposition by Trump-era policies alongside Netanyahu against any successful reconstruction project within Lebanon.
The Alma educational-research institute published an analysis on rebuilding Beirut suburbs stating that Hezbollah operates like a quasi-state engaged actively in reconstructing its military infrastructure.
Likewise,Hebrew media outlet Ma’ariv claimed that under cover of reconstruction activities-in particular rebuilding Dahieh suburbs-Hezbollah is preparing itself militarily for future warfare amid Beirut government institutional collapse filling governance voids while simultaneously regenerating armed capabilities; these narratives aim politically but underscore Netanyahu government’s disregard for international boundaries as it pushes beyond established political-legal-security red lines reshaping Middle Eastern geopolitics dramatically.
A recent message from Hezbollah directed at Nabih berri-the Speaker of Parliament-asserts emphatically that even if Israel withdraws fully from southern Lebanon,
the group will never surrender its weapons under any circumstance.
This stance infuriates Lebanese authorities but appears rooted firmly in unfolding regional geopolitical realities.
Barrack overtly hinted (implicitly comparing Damascus-Baabda) at possible full Syrian occupation over all Lebanese territory.
Meanwhile,
Golani-affiliated force movements near Iraqi-Lebanese borders intensified noticeably,
raising concerns Golani may serve effectively as ground troops aligned with American-Israeli objectives regionally.
In this volatile habitat,
the wisest course seems rejection of illegitimate foreign demands
and preservation of resistance armaments as essential deterrents against external threats.
Deceptive offers suggesting surrendering only heavy weapons while retaining light arms constitute dangerous illusions risking renewed bloodshed among Lebanese civilians.
Accelerating efforts toward restoring hezbollah’s full military strength
would better position this entrenched resistance faction
to engage decisively should future conflicts erupt across regional fronts,
thus tightening pressure on Israeli-occupied lands.The lessons learned during September 2024 conflicts undoubtedly shape strategies helping transform this resistance wing into a phoenix-like force
capable once more turning northern frontlines into nightmarish battlegrounds undermining Zionist interests.
