Tehran – Lebanon is a strategically vital Lebanon located in the heart of Western Asia, and has long been at a crossroads of regional and international interests and conflict.
The land, along with access to Syrian and occupied Palestinian territory and the Mediterranean, has become an important focus for security and geopolitical calculations. Despite its limited territory, Lebanon has repeatedly been a target of political ambitions and military intervention by its external forces and hostile neighbors.
Over the past half century, two words have become inseparable from Lebanon: resistance and aggression. From Israeli invasions in 1982 and occupation of Southern Lebanon to extensive bombings in 2006, from repeated air and drone strikes in Lebanon soils to maritime and airspace violations, Israel has consistently violated the ceasefire agreement. According to the UN and other international reports, in the last 20 years alone, Israel has violated dozens of formal ceasefires and carried out direct military operations that violated Lebanon’s sovereignty. They claim that these attacks have devastated infrastructure and undermined economic stability, as well as sparked a continuous wave of thousands of innocent lives and movement.
Within this context, Hezbollah’s role as a central pillar of resistance was undeniable and decisive. The movement, born from the reality of occupation and the abandonment of the Southern Lebanon population, has been able to change the security equations in the region for over 50 years. The 33-day war in 2006 is a tough example. It was destructive, but demonstrated that Israeli military machines could in fact halt. The charismatic leadership of Said Hassannasrala, the organised unity of the movement, and his widespread popularity support, has made Hezbollah a strategic breakwater to maintain the integrity of Lebanon’s territory.
However, today the Lebanese government’s decision to advance plans to effectively disarm Hezbollah is equivalent to opening the country’s gates to external threats. The history of the region repeatedly shows that the dependence of foreign power on security assurances is an illusion. Syria offers a calm precedent. When certain factions distanced themselves from resistance in the hopes of guarantees from Tel Aviv and Washington, the outcome was an escalation rather than a reduction in Israeli attacks.
In recent years, Israel has violated an unprecedented violation of an agreed ceasefire. From repeated attacks on border villages in southern Lebanon to deep drone invasions into its territory, these actions are often unanswered by the central government. Such silence only boldly put Israel in its stakes the delicate balance of deterrence.
Abbas Aragchi, Foreign Minister of Islamic Republic of Iran, recently emphasized with clear and analytical accuracy that disarming Hezbollah is driven not by Lebanon’s interest in happiness, but by anxiety over the effectiveness and operational capabilities of this resistance. The sharp response of Lebanon’s Foreign Ministry framing his statements as domestic intervention and, at first glance, may seem to be a defense of political independence, but in reality there is a risk of neglecting the very backbone of the country’s security.
Responsible governments must prioritize the security of all citizens and the integrity of their territorial priorities before making strategic decisions. A weakening or dismantling of a force that has been successfully controlled to suppress enemy attacks is similar to removing a country’s defensive shield.
Lebanon is currently at a critical time in its history. There, a single misguided choice can accurately price an unbearable price.