The Lebanese Shia Hizbullah Party is in a bind, and so is the beleaguered multi-ethnic and multi-religious country.
After 13 months of fighting with Israel that has left Hizbullah reeling, it seems that the “Party of God”, once renowned as the world’s strongest non-state militia, is under increasing pressure as it foots the bill for its “resistance” to Israel.
Since the end of the fighting in November through a US-backed plan, the Lebanese government has been under mounting pressure from the US to disarm Hizbullah amid fierce resentment of the Iran-allied Party.
Under the broad terms of the ceasefire, the Lebanese army should “dismantle all infrastructure, and military positions, and confiscate all unauthorised arms” in Southern Lebanon.
The deal also requires putting an end to what it describes as the unauthorised entry of weapons into Lebanon and dismantling any unauthorised weapons production facilities.
The agreement, however, does not mention Hizbullah. It says that “Lebanon’s official military and security forces, infrastructure, and weaponry will be the only armed groups, arms, and related material deployed” in the area south of the Litani River in the country.
In return, it requires Israel to stop offensive operations in Lebanon and fully withdraw its troops under a 60-day deadline, which fell on 26 January this year, as stipulated in the ceasefire.
Israel still occupies several locations along the border with Southern Lebanon and carries out regular strikes on Hizbullah targets in what the Lebanese government has described as violations of the ceasefire deal.
Yet, underneath the disagreement remains Hizbullah’s disarmament, which is believed to be intended as a way to finish the militant role played by the party.
The move is widely expected to spark instability in Lebanon, with many fearing it could drag the country back into prolonged conflict, or, even worse, pit its sectarian groups against each other in a renewed Civil War.
In recent weeks, the US has stepped up pressure on the Lebanese government to fast-track the party’s disarmament in line with Trump administration moves that reflect its unwavering support for Israel.
The fighting with Israel has dealt Hizbullah sweeping damage and brought heavy losses to the party not only militarily but also politically. It also received a significant blow as a result of the killing of its charismatic leader Hassan Nasrallah last year on the heels of the systematic elimination by Israel of most of Hizbullah’s military leadership.
The setback paved the way for ending the so-called “blocking third” veto that the party had earlier maintained to influence Lebanon’s domestic politics, including in electing a president and forming a government.
The new Christian President of Lebanon Joseph Aoun, a former army chief, and the new Sunni Prime Minister Nawaf Salam were picked by the parliament following the ceasefire promising to place Hizbullah’s arms exclusively within the hands of the state.
Nevertheless, a defiant Hizbullah is showing growing resistance to the disarmament plans because it says Israel has not complied with the ceasefire agreement.
Early in August, the Lebanese cabinet, chaired by Aoun and Salam, approved a decision requiring the army to urgently develop a disarmament plan and implement it before year-end.
The decision, marking the acquiescing to US pressure, signalled the most severe challenge to Hizbullah for years and has laid the foundation for a scenario most Lebanese have taken pains to avoid – sectarian confrontation.
Hizbullah has made it clear that handing the group’s weapons to the army or even accepting restrictions on its military is not an option, and it will hold out against it for as long as it deems necessary.
The party and its political ally the Shia Amal Movement announced the day after the cabinet decision that they would “treat the decision as if it did not exist” and accused the government of serving US diktats.
Naim Qassem, Hizbullah’s leader, has vowed not to buckle under pressure and reiterated that the party’s arms are necessary to defend Lebanon against Israeli aggression.
“The resistance will not surrender its weapons while the aggression continues and the occupation persists, and we will fight it… if necessary to confront this American-Israeli project no matter the cost,” Qassem said.
Huge crowds thronged the streets of Beirut chanting vows to Hizbullah’s slain leader Nasrallah and waving yellow and green flags, accompanied by a chorus of horns from passing cars showing their support for the party.
In the past, demonstrations rocked Lebanon in support of Hizbullah when the party was challenged over its “resistance” proclamations, which are not the object of general consensus.
Pressure to disarm Hizbullah is likely to increase as the US and other Western nations continue to support Israel’s strategy to maintain its virtual monopoly on power in the Middle East.
Rather than upholding its end of the ceasefire terms, namely to withdraw its forces and halt its attacks, the Israeli military has continued to strike Hizbullah on a nearly daily basis.
Israel is also reportedly planning to create an uninhabited buffer zone along its northern border with Lebanon to prevent renewed attacks by Hizbullah. The plans effectively annul the entire ceasefire agreement and return the situation to square one.
It is now clear where the party stands, and the next few days or weeks will likely see increasing fear and uncertainty as the Lebanese remain sharply divided over the conflict with Israel and the future of Hizbullah as a resistance group.
The Lebanese have paid a tremendous price for 15 years of Civil War (1975-1990), with an estimated 150,000 killed, tens of thousands wounded, and hundreds of thousands displaced and left destitute.
The conflict is often described as having been one of Christians vs Muslims, but it broke out as a result of growing divisions between the Lebanese factions over the presence of the Palestinian armed groups in the country and their staging of operations against Israel from Lebanese soil.
Hizbullah emerged amidst the Civil War out of Shia factions seeking to promote the community’s interests and also as an Iran-backed resistance group to fight Israel after its invasion of Southern Lebanon in 1982.
Later, Hizbullah grew from being just another powerful militia in Lebanon to being a political force and a social movement. It became engrained in Lebanese society and gained significant credibility and support extending across the national landscape.
For more than four decades, the party succeeded in establishing its representation in parliament, the government, and the national economy to evolve into a “state within a state” and setting many of Lebanon’s domestic and foreign agendas.
The party helped Lebanon’s Shia community, long considered as underdogs, to end its marginalisation and emerge from the shadows and gain social and cultural recognition and a sense of identity.
As a key partner in the Iran-backed “Resistance Axis,” the party grew to become a significant regional power with an expanding military presence and capabilities, especially after the uprising in Syria in 2011 and the conflict in Gaza.
Moreover, the preeminence of Hizbullah contributed to the rise of Muslim Shias across the Middle East, which was triggered by the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979 and significantly boosted by the toppling of Saddam Hussein’s Sunni-dominated regime in 2003.
Forcing Hizbullah to disarm could amount to a humiliating surrender that would reverse the trend that has allowed the Shia majority to gain considerable power in Iraq and encouraged other Shias in the region to pursue empowerment.
There is a growing feeling among Lebanon’s Shias that the campaign against Hizbullah will not stop with disarming the group but will also undercut the community’s growing representation in both the society and the government.
The talk in Hizbullah’s constituencies in Lebanon now refers to a refusal to take the Shias back to the time when they were “shoe polishers and porters”, a reference to their past political, economic, and social marginalisation.
Among Middle East watchers, concerns are growing that a redrawing of Lebanon’s political and sectarian map as the tide shifts towards a new regional order without a “Shia Crescent” could exacerbate Shia-Sunni divides and spark a shift in regional power dynamics.
That would usher in a new Middle East geopolitical landscape exposed to further uncertainty, sectarian divisions, and chaos.
But the worst nightmare scenario for Lebanon and for the region as a whole could come if the Lebanese government and its supporters cling to the idea of disarming Hizbullah and the party feels cornered and thus forced to fight to defend itself.
That could pit a still powerful armed group against a weaker state army that is answerable to a Christian president and a Sunni prime minister and push the country to the brink of a sectarian war.
Lebanon’s fate is now more precarious than ever, and the standoff over Hizbullah’s weapons is a test for the country, as well as for the entire region.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 28 August, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: