Hezbollah has again assured Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri that it would not intervene militarily in support of Iran if war breaks out again, with Berri subsequently relaying the message to President Joseph Aoun, according to information obtained by Asharq Al-Awsat.

During a recent visit to Beirut, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Saeed Khatibzadeh also told lawmakers aligned with Hezbollah and Berri’s Amal Movement that Tehran would not ask the Lebanese armed group to enter the conflict if the United States attacked Iran.

Khatibzadeh said Iran was capable of defending itself and had made significant progress in preparing to prevent an attack from achieving its objectives.

Lebanese parliamentary sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that the Iranian official had made clear that Tehran would not seek Hezbollah’s assistance because of the military imbalance between the group and Israel. Hezbollah’s involvement, he reportedly said, would not alter the course of the confrontation.

The sources added that Iran understood Lebanon’s fragile situation and did not intend to draw Hezbollah into a confrontation in which it would be at a disadvantage.

They also pointed to a warning from Washington conveyed to Aoun during a telephone call with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The Lebanese president subsequently relayed the message to Berri and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam.

Hezbollah Faces Pressure From Its Own Support Base

According to the sources, Hezbollah cannot afford to provoke a backlash among its own supporters, prompting it to exercise caution and align itself with Berri’s position.

The group would struggle to cope with another large-scale wave of displacement if Israel carried out Defense Minister Israel Katz’s threat to expand the security zone in southern Lebanon and potentially extend attacks to Beirut’s southern suburbs. Such a scenario could displace approximately one million Shiites, the sources said.

Hezbollah is already struggling to accommodate displaced residents and has been providing financial assistance to help ease their hardship.

The sources warned that the broader Shiite community would not remain silent if Hezbollah once again intervened in support of Iran, as it did last March, breaking its pledge to Berri.

That reversal embarrassed the speaker in his dealings with Aoun and Salam, both of whom he had assured that Hezbollah would stay out of the conflict.

Berri had based those assurances on a message from Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem, conveyed through regular contacts between Qassem’s political aide, Hussein Khalil, and Berri’s political adviser, lawmaker Ali Hassan Khalil.

Potential Intervention Could Deepen Rift Within Shiite Alliance

The sources said Qassem’s failure to honor the pledge had triggered a crisis of confidence within the so-called Shiite duo, the political alliance between Hezbollah and Berri’s Amal Movement.

The disagreement spilled into the open, raising questions about who ultimately makes decisions within Hezbollah and whether Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which wields considerable influence over the group, has the final say.

According to the sources, Hezbollah’s leadership initially told relevant parties, particularly Berri, that the group had no involvement in the rocket launches.

However, it stopped short of issuing a public denial, which might have given Washington an opportunity to intervene with Israel and avert retaliation.

Berri was therefore taken by surprise when Hezbollah’s military media office later issued a statement claiming responsibility for the rocket fire in retaliation for Israel’s assassination of the elder Khamenei, the sources said.

Israel subsequently expanded the territory under its occupation south of the Litani River, extending its reach toward Beaufort Castle and nearby towns.

No Direct Contact Between Berri and Qassem

The sources also referred to Berri’s recent remarks that his relationship with Hezbollah had been closer under its former secretary-general, Hassan Nasrallah. At the time, Berri said, neither man regarded himself as the other’s senior or junior partner.

Berri maintained direct contact with Nasrallah, who could approach Iran’s leadership and seek responses to the speaker’s concerns about developments in Lebanon and the broader regional axis of resistance.

The current security situation, particularly the growing number of Israeli assassinations targeting Hezbollah’s political and military leaders, has made direct communication between Berri and Qassem difficult, the sources said.

Instead, the two men communicate daily through their respective aides. This arrangement, they added, has prevented them from developing the personal rapport and political chemistry needed to contain disagreements as they emerge, unlike the relationship Berri had with Nasrallah.

Political Coexistence Within the Shiite Duo

Relations between the two main figures in the Shiite alliance are now characterized by a form of political coexistence, the sources said. Each side maintains its own positions while seeking to prevent clashes between their supporters, although confrontations have occasionally occurred.

Berri’s comments about his relationship with Hezbollah were also directed at other political forces, the sources said. He was urging them to engage with him rather than treat the Shiite duo as a single political bloc with which compromise was impossible.

According to the sources, Berri has told visitors that Lebanon faces two enemies: Israeli occupation and sectarianism.

That outlook explains his repeated calls to strengthen domestic stability, avoid inflammatory language, prevent divisions among Lebanon’s communities and maintain a moderate political tone.

Berri opposes attempts by political factions to score points against the Shiite duo under the pretext that settling political scores with the alliance is necessary, the sources said.

Visitors quoted him as arguing that resisting an Israeli occupation that could endure for a prolonged period requires political forces to find common ground and strengthen the domestic front by placing national unity first.

Doing so, he believes, requires moving away from the sectarian rhetoric that dominates political debate.

Berri’s Positions Diverge From Hezbollah’s

The sources said Berri’s differences with Hezbollah extend beyond rhetoric to concrete political decisions.

He has emerged as a key political supporter of the government’s survival and continuity and has intervened when necessary to preserve civil peace, which he considers a red line, alongside the role of the military institution.

This helps explain his rejection of attempts to bring down the government through street protests and his efforts to encourage Hezbollah to engage in dialogue with Aoun.

Although Berri does not support direct negotiations with Israel, his position differs from Hezbollah’s in several other respects, the sources said.

In addition to maintaining communication with Aoun and Salam, he rejects threats and accusations of treason. He has also criticized Hezbollah for failing to respond to calls to withdraw from the Ali al-Taher hills to facilitate the deployment of the Lebanese army.

Other points of disagreement include Berri’s opposition to Hezbollah’s military intervention in support of Gaza and Iran, his support for ministers affiliated with Amal who endorsed the principle that weapons should be held exclusively by the state, and his backing for the ban on Hezbollah’s military and security wing.

His parliamentary bloc also voted to give the government a vote of confidence for a third time, while Hezbollah lawmakers withdrew from the session.

Why Arab and Foreign Envoys Continue to Meet Berri

The sources expressed surprise that other Lebanese political forces had not shown greater willingness to engage with Berri.

They questioned how a political settlement could be reached, should circumstances eventually permit one, if the speaker continued to be targeted by political campaigns directed against Hezbollah.

Engaging with Berri is more important than ever, they argued, particularly because direct channels of communication with Hezbollah remain severed.

That, they said, explains why Arab and foreign envoys visiting Beirut continue to meet the speaker.

Such meetings do not mean Berri carries a mandate from Hezbollah, which has at times disregarded commitments he made on its behalf. Rather, they reflect his position within Lebanon’s political system and his considerable influence in the Shiite political arena.

His approach to major issues on Lebanon’s political agenda often differs from that of Hezbollah.

The latest example was his intervention to prevent an internal government dispute over whether explosives seized in Dahr al-Baidar should be referred to the Judicial Council before the investigation was completed. Berri and lawmakers from his bloc refrained from taking a position on the matter out of consideration for Hezbollah, the sources said.