Lebanon-Israel deal puts Hezbollah in a tight corner

The Lebanese state's task does not appear easy, particularly given the clash between the interests of Lebanon as a state and as a people and those of Hezbollah. Two days ago, the party rejected the condition that the Lebanese army deploy in Ali al-Taher in return for an Israeli withdrawal from it. Lebanon had no choice but to relay the party's refusal, leaving Israel in control of the area.

Growing pressure

Hezbollah realises that its room for manoeuvre is narrowing. It also understands the scale of the internal and external pressures it faces, and the extent to which Lebanon's fate and future have become linked to its disarmament. Its desperate attempts, shortly after the signing of the framework agreement, to mobilise, demonstrate and intimidate outside the Grand Serail and in other areas of Beirut revealed the extent of its fragility and declining popularity. Some analysts believe the party was trying to absorb the anger of part of its own base, while in reality accepting the terms of the agreement.

Whether it accepts or rejects it, Hezbollah knows that this marks the end of the phase of its control over Lebanon, and that the era of coexistence between state and militia is nearing its end. Later, the question of whether Hezbollah can be turned into a political party will be the next issue to be addressed, although, since its establishment, it has never been anything other than an armed militia that entered politics through the force of its weapons.

Will the Lebanese resort to bartering some provisions of the Taif Agreement to compel the group to disarm? What is certain is that Lebanon's fate is tied to the fate of these weapons. For Lebanon to survive its many crises, these weapons must either be removed or handed over to the state.

Lebanese fears

Some Lebanese fear that the international community, along with Israel, may trade the issue of weapons inside Lebanon for the handover of missiles. This would mean Hezbollah retaining weapons that do not threaten Israel's security, while continuing to hold the state and its people hostage.

The battle over weapons is the battle of the Lebanese before anyone else. It is the battle to reclaim their state, their decision-making, and, most importantly, their destiny and future. The Lebanese must move from passively receiving events to taking action, so that no agreement is reached among major powers for which they once again pay the price.

The success of the agreement depends on the parties' commitment to implementing it, the Lebanese state's ability to extend its control in the south, and Israel's readiness to halt its military operations so that the Lebanese government can fulfil its duties. But Lebanon's salvation depends on the practical steps the Lebanese state takes, according to a clear timetable, to end the era of militia control over the state.