Over the past two weeks, Hezbollah has reverted to its familiar rhetoric of threats and intimidation, acting as though the events of last year never happened and time remains frozen in 2023. 

While much has been said about the party’s role in the presidential election stalemate, it’s worth examining a series of incidents that reveal how Hezbollah continues to operate. From the recent investigations involving “fashionistas” linked to its electronic army to the recent altercation at the Beirut airport, Hezbollah's actions continue to raise serious concerns.

Hezbollah’s response to these events has been telling. Using motorcycle convoys, the group blocked access to the courthouse and shut down the airport road, sending a blunt message: its campaign to undermine State institutions and defy legitimate authority is far from over. This approach echoes the claims made by its electronic army that “their foot still holds power.”

For years, Hezbollah has wielded substantial control over the Lebanese State, inflicting disastrous consequences on the country. Yet, the real issue today is the party’s refusal to embrace the principles of a State that serves and protects all its citizens equally.

In stark contrast, after the 2006 conflict, Israel established committees, conducted studies, and reassessed its policies based on the lessons learned. Hezbollah, on the other hand, has refused to engage in any self-reflection, clinging instead to a strategy of denial that risks leading to even greater disasters.

The recent airport incident highlights a more profound issue. It was not just about refusing to search a passenger or inspect an aircraft, but is emblematic of a deeply entrenched culture of rejecting the rule of law, State institutions, and governance systems. Hezbollah continues to act as if certain groups are above the law. For decades, the Beirut airport has been treated as part of Hezbollah’s self-declared “canton,” where intimidation, threats, and even violence are the norm. The party reacted furiously when its affiliates were summoned to court, unwilling to accept that no one should be beyond the reach of state authority.

This mentality extends far beyond the airport. Tomorrow, there will likely be another conflict over halting illegal construction on public property—a concept Hezbollah seems unwilling to acknowledge, treating all land as theirs to exploit. The day after, they may oppose efforts to enforce civil regulations in villages devastated by the recent war.

At the heart of the problem lies the challenge of convincing Hezbollah that the State exists to protect everyone equally and that citizenship entails both rights and duties—not sectarian privilege. This is something that Hezbollah, more than any other faction, must uphold amidst the sweeping changes taking place in the region.

If Hezbollah continues to reject statehood, the cycle of destruction, poverty, and institutional collapse will persist, driving more Lebanese to leave their homeland. Resorting to tactics reminiscent of May 7—marked by militia takeovers, violence against civilians, and the destruction of homes and institutions—only solidifies Hezbollah’s image as a sectarian militia. This fuels demands for protection through rearmament or even separation, posing a grave threat to Lebanon’s unity and, ultimately, to Hezbollah’s own survival.