Lebanon’s standoff with Iran deepened on Sunday after Tehran’s ambassador to Beirut refused to leave the country despite being declared persona non grata, raising fresh questions about the State’s ability to enforce its own decisions amid mounting political pressure.

An Iranian diplomatic source told AFP on Sunday that Ambassador Mohammad Reza Sheibani would not comply with the expulsion order, citing the backing of Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and Hezbollah. The Lebanese Foreign Ministry had given the envoy a deadline to depart, accusing him of interfering in the country’s internal affairs.

Hezbollah condemned the decision, while ministers affiliated with the group and its ally, the Amal Movement, boycotted a recent Cabinet session in protest. The dispute has since evolved into a broader political confrontation, with implications reaching beyond a diplomatic disagreement.

Despite the passing of the deadline, there were no signs of departure from the Iranian Embassy in Beirut, underscoring the deadlock. Critics say the ambassador has effectively moved from being expelled to remaining beyond the reach of Lebanese authority, staying inside the embassy compound.

The episode has sparked a wider debate over State sovereignty and political influence. Two central questions now dominate the domestic landscape: whether the Lebanese government will act decisively to uphold its authority, and how Hezbollah and its allies will respond in defense of Iran.

Political and media sources told Nidaa Al-Watan newspaper that the so-called “Shiite duo”—Hezbollah and the Amal Movement—will frame the issue along several lines. They argue that Iran is a friendly nation, not a hostile one, and that the expulsion is politically motivated, targeting Tehran rather than addressing a genuine diplomatic violation. They also contend that Lebanese authorities have tolerated more serious breaches of sovereignty while choosing to act firmly only in this case.

The timing of the decision, according to this camp, suggests it is part of a broader regional realignment rather than a technical diplomatic matter. Any move against Iran, they warn, will be perceived by their constituency as an attempt to weaken the “resistance” and strip it of its political and strategic backing.

In effect, the debate is shifting from whether the ambassador violated diplomatic norms to a more fundamental question: whether there is a coordinated effort to push Iran out of Lebanon politically.

Sources say Hezbollah and Amal are unlikely to comply swiftly with the expulsion order, as a quiet departure could be interpreted as acknowledgment of wrongdoing. At the same time, they appear mindful of the risks of escalating into a direct confrontation with Lebanese Presidency Joseph Aoun, which could carry domestic and international consequences.

Instead, the duo is expected to seek a face-saving solution, either by reframing the decision and placing it within the context of an undeclared diplomatic understanding, or presenting any eventual departure as a procedural step rather than a political concession. This approach gained traction following a phone call between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Berri, during which Tehran reiterated its stated respect for Lebanon’s sovereignty.

Reports have also suggested that the duo encouraged the ambassador not to leave immediately, signaling the depth of opposition within this political camp. For now, Sheibani is expected to remain inside the embassy until conditions evolve in a way that allows for his exit.

On another front, Iran appears intent on demonstrating that it retains influence in Lebanon. According to available information, Tehran has limited its contacts with Lebanese officials to Berri, reinforcing his role as a key interlocutor.

In a separate development, Iran had earlier claimed that Israel was targeting its diplomats in Beirut, announcing the deaths of several individuals it described as embassy staff. However, details released alongside their names included ranks within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, suggesting they were engaged in military roles. Documents further indicated links to the Quds Force, despite their entry into Lebanon under diplomatic cover.

Observers also pointed to a previous incident involving a former Iranian ambassador who reportedly possessed a pager that later exploded, raising further questions about the nature of such diplomatic activities.

A former diplomat said the situation highlights the limits of diplomatic immunity, stressing that it does not grant the right to defy the host state or transform an embassy into an operational hub. In his view, the ambassador has effectively become a figure evading state authority while serving a broader political and ideological agenda.

The unfolding crisis now places Lebanon at a critical juncture. Failure to enforce the expulsion order could signal that certain actors operate above the state, undermining its credibility at home and abroad.