Serge Dagher, Assistant to the President of the Kataeb Party for Political and Electoral Affairs, has urged Hezbollah to hand over its weapons to the Lebanese State as part of a settlement that would secure an Israeli withdrawal, the return of prisoners and reconstruction, arguing that the group’s military strategy has led to further Israeli occupation in Southern Lebanon.

In an interview with Transparency News, Dagher said Hezbollah needed to reconsider its choices, warning that continuing along the same path would only produce the same results. He also pointed to what he described as a shift in State authority under Lebanon’s new leadership, citing Cabinet decisions on weapons control, security operations in Beirut’s southern suburbs and the handling of an explosives shipment seized at Dahar al-Baydar.

Dagher also cautioned against assuming that Benjamin Netanyahu’s departure would necessarily bring a more moderate Israeli leader to power, saying Lebanon should focus less on which Israeli politician is worse and more on how it responds to the reality on the ground.

Dagher: Hezbollah’s resistance has led to occupation

“For the first time, we are seeing a resistance movement that has led to occupation,” Dagher said, referring to the consequences of Hezbollah’s involvement in the regional conflict.

Before the war Hezbollah launched in support of Gaza, he said, no Israeli soldiers were stationed in southern Lebanon. Lebanese residents were able to celebrate Liberation Day and visit the mountains because the territory had been freed from Israeli occupation.

The first war of support ended with five Israeli positions remaining in Lebanese territory, Dagher said, while a subsequent war led to the occupation of additional villages. He warned that the number of affected villages could eventually reach 60 or 70 across a substantial area of southern Lebanon.

Dagher rejected the argument that Israel’s preparations for war, including the pager explosions and other operations, proved that it had been planning a confrontation solely with Hezbollah.

Israel knew it could face a regional conflict with Iran, which maintains ties with armed groups across the region, including Hezbollah, Yemen’s Houthis and several militias in Iraq. Given what Israel sees as an existential threat, preparing for a possible confrontation with those groups was to be expected, he said.

But he questioned the strategic gains Hezbollah and its allies had achieved through years of conflict.

“What grand strategic objective have all these wars actually achieved?” he asked.

A call for Hezbollah to hand over its weapons

Dagher said Hezbollah now had an opportunity to change the equation by agreeing to place its weapons under State control.

“Hezbollah can make one decision that would change everything: openly declare that it is ready to hand over its weapons to the Lebanese State as part of a settlement that secures Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon, the return of prisoners and the start of reconstruction,” he said.

He argued that a series of political developments had demonstrated that Hezbollah could not indefinitely prevent the State from asserting its authority.

The group had opposed Joseph Aoun’s election as president, Dagher said, yet Aoun had taken office. Hezbollah had also opposed an inaugural address calling for a State monopoly on weapons, but the principle was included in the address. Similarly, the group had not wanted Nawaf Salam to become prime minister, but he had secured the position.

Hezbollah had also opposed abandoning the traditional “army, people and resistance” formula in the government’s policy statement, Dagher said. The final text, however, did not retain the formula in the form the group had sought.

Subsequent Cabinet decisions on bringing weapons under State authority marked another important development, he said, describing them as sovereign political decisions that challenged the previous status quo.

“For the first time, the State has made it clear that weapons operating outside its authority cannot continue to be tolerated in the same way they were in the past,” Dagher said.

Security operations signal a shift in state authority

Dagher cited a security operation in Beirut’s southern suburbs as evidence that State institutions were becoming more willing to act in areas long associated with Hezbollah’s influence.

Few people, he said, would previously have expected a Lebanese security force to enter the heart of the southern suburbs and raid a warehouse linked to Hezbollah’s activities, even after a group of young men gathered at the scene. The Lebanese army and its strike force intervened, and the operation proceeded despite the gathering, he said.

He contrasted that episode with earlier practices at checkpoints, where shipments had sometimes passed without inspection or received special treatment. If a shipment was stopped by mistake, the priority had often been to return it or resolve the issue without opening a serious investigation, he said.

“This time, the shipment was stopped, the investigation widened, and investigators began looking into the vehicles that had traveled ahead of it and those that followed. Judicial measures involving people connected to the case also began to emerge,” Dagher said.

He described the developments as evidence of a change in how state institutions operate.

“In the past, Wafiq Safa could go to the Palace of Justice and interfere in the work of the judiciary. Today, things have changed, and the justice minister is exercising his responsibilities with greater independence,” he said.

Dahar al-Baydar case tests the State’s resolve

Turning to the case involving an explosives shipment seized at Dahar al-Baydar, Dagher said the move to refer the case to the Court of Justice was significant and should not be dismissed.

The debate in Cabinet and the justice minister’s decision to pursue the referral reflected a clear assertion of state sovereignty, he said. Dagher credited the minister and the party backing him with playing a central role, while acknowledging the support of other political forces.

He also highlighted the investigation’s expansion, the efforts to establish responsibility and the emergence of names linked to the case.

“Stopping the shipment, broadening the investigation and working to determine who was responsible are all positive developments,” he said. “The people involved have begun to emerge, and the judicial process must move forward. If those summoned fail to appear, the law provides mechanisms to pursue them.”

Referral to the Court of Justice would constitute an additional important step, Dagher said, although it would not necessarily change the investigation’s course.

Its wider significance, he argued, was that the state was treating the case as a matter of law and national sovereignty rather than allowing it to be set aside because of the influence of a particular political group.

Dagher said the Kataeb Party intended to pursue its efforts through State institutions rather than withdraw from them.

“We want to fight this battle from inside the institutions, not walk away from them,” he said. “Being at the table allows us to challenge ministers aligned with Hezbollah directly instead of leaving the field open to them.”

Dagher rejects claims that the new administration has failed

Dagher also pushed back against criticism that Lebanon’s new political leadership had accomplished nothing, saying such judgments ignored the scale of the problems inherited from previous decades.

Lebanon was emerging from years of weak state authority, wars, political divisions and the dominance of militias, criminal networks and alliances that combined political influence, weapons and financial interests. Those problems could not reasonably be expected to disappear in a short period, he said.

The fact that many challenges remained unresolved did not mean the entire political transition had failed, he added.

“One important step is that President Joseph Aoun is now prepared to enter direct negotiations with Israel. That is a concrete move, not just political talk,” Dagher said.

He noted that Aoun’s election and Salam’s appointment as prime minister had taken place within a particular international and political context, amid expectations that the new administration would mark a departure from previous governments.

Kataeb opposes proposed general amnesty law

On the proposed general amnesty law, Dagher said the Kataeb Party opposed the current draft and rejected the approach taken by successive governments to similar legislation.

“People are right to question why a general amnesty law should come around every 10 years, allowing people convicted of crimes to return to society without addressing the underlying judicial and security failures that led to their detention or conviction,” he said.

He also warned that political and sectarian power-sharing continued to influence some decisions, with competing factions dividing positions and benefits rather than applying clear standards and consistent principles.

“If we want to build a real State, we have to distinguish between what has been achieved and what remains unfinished, and between good decisions and bad ones,” Dagher said. “We need to correct mistakes, not simply declare that everything has failed.”

He urged Lebanese not to view the country through an entirely negative lens, recalling that it had endured four or five decades of conflict, divisions and weak state authority.

Militias and criminal networks had dominated at various points, sometimes joining forces to protect their influence and interests, he said.

“I am not claiming that everything is fine now, and I am certainly not denying that serious mistakes have been made,” Dagher said. “But we cannot assume that everything happening in the country is bad or treat every decision and development as though it belongs in the same category.”

Dagher warns against assuming a post-Netanyahu Israel would be more moderate

Dagher cautioned against the assumption that Netanyahu’s departure would automatically lead to a more favorable political environment for Lebanon.

Israel’s political system is complex, he said, and forming a government requires at least 61 seats in parliament. Although Netanyahu appeared to have made electoral gains, the outcome remained uncertain. The significant representation of Arab parties was also notable, he said, adding that such a development had not been seen for a long time.

All options remained open, Dagher said, warning against assuming a new government would be formed immediately after the election.

He also cautioned that the period between the election and the formation of a new government could be particularly dangerous because the caretaker government would remain in office while the usual constraints and accountability mechanisms might be weakened.

Before the election, Netanyahu may have hesitated to take major military or political steps out of concern for their impact on the vote. Having made electoral gains, he could now feel less constrained, Dagher said, urging Lebanon to remain alert to possible developments.

He also rejected the idea that former Israeli military chief Gadi Eisenkot would necessarily represent a better alternative.

“Betting on Eisenkot as a better option is a mistake,” Dagher said. “He has a dangerous military outlook, even if some details of his approach differ from Netanyahu’s. Israel has broader policies and strategic objectives that do not change substantially just because a different person takes office.”

For Lebanon, he added, the central issue should not be determining which Israeli leader is worse, but deciding how the country will respond to the challenges it faces.

“Whether it is Netanyahu or Eisenkot, the real question is not simply who is worse. The question is what we in Lebanon intend to do in response.”