Trump says ‘disarm’ Hezbollah – Beirut says ‘contain’ Hezbollah

In his speech before Knesset, President Trump hailed Lebanon, saying its government is on its way to disarming Hezbollah and choosing peace with Israel. While the Lebanese effort looks real, Beirut has made it clear that disarming the pro-Iran militia is not in the cards, and that Lebanon intends to “contain” Hezbollah‘s arsenal and “put it out of service,” according to a statement by President Joseph Aoun, over the weekend.

Lebanon’s unilateral shift has been made without consulting the international guarantors – America, France, and Saudi Arabia – of these agreements. The pivot also departs from Aoun’s presidential oath, which promised to uphold Lebanese sovereignty and implement disarmament commitments.

Upon assuming the presidency, Aoun moved from the idealism of his oath to a political approach, believing that he should be balancing Lebanon’s competing powers. By settling for domestic politicking, Aoun disappointed a majority of the Lebanese who had put faith in him as a savior, one who would not heed existing interests and instead lead drastic change.

Aoun appears to understand that the Middle East is undergoing a transformation, with the defeated “Axis of Resistance” fading and anticipated peace agreements between Israel and Arab states on the horizon. Yet, he overlooks two critical realities.

First, the new Middle East order positions Israel as a dominant power, replacing the retreating US influence in a region that Washington never fully understood. Second, Israel’s defense doctrine shifted after October 7, 2023, from containment to preemption, meaning it will no longer tolerate threats to its security, even if the threats were still in their embryonic phase.

The November ‘24 ceasefire intended to end the war that Hezbollah launched on Israel hinged on a clear Israeli demand: A mechanism to enforce Resolution 1701, which requires Hezbollah’s disarmament and border demarcation. The agreement established a 60-day timeline for Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah and for Israel to withdraw from occupied Lebanese territory. A military oversight body, including Lebanon, Israel, the United States, France, and UNIFIL, was created to monitor compliance.

Hezbollah, however, neither surrendered its weapons nor transferred them to the Lebanese army. Instead, it began rebuilding its capabilities, prompting Israel to raise concerns with the oversight mechanism. The Lebanese army occasionally addressed Israeli complaints but often ignored them, leading Israel to target Hezbollah leaders and weapons depots to curb the group’s resurgence.

Israel reduced Hezbollah’s strength from a ten to a two. After the ceasefire, it climbed to a three. Israel is now working to prevent it from regaining its pre-war strength.

Inspiration from Gaza

As army commander, Aoun witnessed the ceasefire’s implementation and Israel’s strikes when the mechanism faltered. As president, he initially pledged to disarm non-state actors but later backtracked, citing the risk of civil war. His alternative – freezing or containing Hezbollah’s weapons – draws inspiration from Gaza, where Hamas retained its weapons by rebranding its fighters as internal security forces.

However, Gaza’s arrangement saw Hamas lose 53 percent of its territory and control over border crossings, severely limiting its ability to rearm. In contrast, Israel retains control over Lebanese hills overlooking its towns but not Lebanon’s border crossings, requiring Israel to act as enforcer by striking Hezbollah.

If Aoun seeks to emulate the Gaza model, he would need to cede the five Lebanese hills Israel has designated as a closed military zone.

Israel’s offer to Hamas and Hezbollah is clear: Retain weapons and lose land or surrender weapons and reclaim land. Hezbollah’s narrative – that its weapons enable liberation – relies on recovering land without disarmament. Israel, wary of repeating its 2000 unilateral withdrawal after which Lebanon failed to honor its commitment to disarm Hezbollah, will not accept this.

Aoun and Lebanon’s political elite often blur their international duties with domestic shortcomings. Lebanon insists Israel respect its sovereignty by halting its policing of Hezbollah and withdrawing from five strategic border hilltops. Yet, Lebanon shirks its sovereign duty to disarm Hezbollah, citing fears of civil war.

Lebanon’s demands – that Israel respect its sovereignty while Hezbollah operates unchecked – are contradictory. Either Lebanon disarms the pro-Iran militia, asserting sovereignty and obligating Israel to end its policing and withdraw, or Beirut must accept Israel handling Hezbollah for them.

The core issue is that Aoun and the government believe their flawed arguments are airtight. When their reasoning falters, they pivot to realpolitik, arguing against letting perfection hinder the possible. Fair, but if realpolitik prevails, Lebanon should shelve sovereignty demands until it fully disarms Hezbollah, acknowledging that its failure to act invites Israel’s intervention.

Hussain Abdul-Hussain is a research fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), a non-partisan organization focused on national security and foreign policy.