Hezbollah-aligned media have expanded their confrontational rhetoric beyond political opponents and State officials, increasingly directing criticism toward State institutions themselves, in what critics describe as a widening “state versus statelet” dynamic.

The latest escalation centers on a coordinated media campaign targeting the Internal Security Forces’ Information Branch, particularly its Beirut unit, after it carried out a court-authorized operation in an apartment in the Ashrafieh district. The campaign accuses the Branch's Beirut unit of “collaboration through leaking citizens’ data to foreign parties,” solely for requesting the identities of residents.

The allegations were amplified through a sustained media offensive that critics say reflects longstanding hostility toward the Information Branch, recalling in particular the assassinations of two of its most prominent former figures, Wissam al-Hassan and Wissam Eid.

The campaign was led primarily through the platform “Al-Mahatta,” widely viewed as aligned with Hezbollah’s discourse, and involved journalists Ridwan Mortada, Hassan Illaik, and Qassem Qassem. The rhetoric escalated into direct personal attacks on the head of the Beirut Information Branch, Major Ramy Shuqair, and his personnel, with threats to publish the license plate number of an official vehicle belonging to the unit.

Security sources, cited by Nidaa Al-Watan newspaper, questioned the broader objective of the campaign, which portrays Shuqair — who was implementing judicial orders in line with Beirut’s security plan and government policy restricting weapons to State authority — as acting on behalf of foreign powers and violating citizens’ rights.

Thus, Hezbollah’s media reversed the narrative surrounding the discovery of pager devices in residential buildings in Beirut following the so-called “Black Wednesday” strike on the capital into a "scandal" alleging that the Information Branch was the one ‘filming pager devices’.

Security sources told Nidaa Al-Watan that the search of an apartment in Beirut and the request for residents’ identities was “barely the work of a police station, and far from the scope of the Information Branch’s authority.” Other sources suggested Hezbollah’s concern stems from citizen complaints regarding party-linked figures potentially residing in mixed or predominantly Sunni and Christian neighborhoods in Beirut.

The campaign has raised wider questions about Hezbollah’s efforts to expand its influence over the capital, with critics asking whether the pressure on the Beirut Information Branch forms part of a broader attempt to reshape Beirut into what they describe as a “second southern suburb.”

Reversing the narrative

Critics say the media offensive reflects a systematic effort to invert facts. While judicially authorized documentation of vehicle license plates is now portrayed as unacceptable, journalists on “Al-Mahatta” have circulated the plate number of an Information Branch vehicle operating under court orders.

In a podcast episode, Mortada criticized routine procedures carried out by the Beirut Information Branch during an operation in Ashrafieh involving displaced persons. He argued that questioning residents was unlawful and claimed the information could be transmitted to foreign intelligence services.

Hassan Illaik went further, questioning who oversees Major Shuqair and listing senior security and political officials — including Interior Minister Ahmad al-Hajjar, ISF Director General Raed Abdullah, and Information Branch chief Brigadier General Mahmoud Qabresli — arguing that none had authorized such measures regarding displaced persons.

Security sources counter that the operation falls within judicial authorization and is part of Beirut’s broader security plan, backed by government policy restricting weapons to State institutions. They also note that such measures are endorsed not only by security leadership but by the Cabinet and, according to recent statements, by the President.

During the same podcast, Illaik made what critics described as the most serious allegation, claiming there was “major infiltration within Lebanese security agencies before even reaching security coordination with Israel,” while Qassem suggested that security agencies do not consider communications with the United States as foreign contact.

Mortada further argued that security agencies “have no right” to act against residents when their role should be to protect them from neighbors, in reference to concerns over displaced individuals linked to Hezbollah residing in civilian buildings.

Observers note that, following the displacement of more than one million people during recent conflict phases, municipalities across Lebanon have tightened rental procedures to protect both displaced civilians and host communities, aiming to prevent armed or political figures from embedding themselves in residential areas, particularly after incidents such as the strike in Ain Saadeh.

In Beirut alone, nearly half a million displaced people from the southern suburbs and the south have taken shelter. Despite this, critics argue that media narratives aligned with Hezbollah dismiss public security concerns as “illogical” or “intrusive.”

For Mortada, Illaik, and Qassem, the Information Branch’s request for identification in Ashrafieh is described as “illegal, irrational, and a violation of citizens’ rights.”

However, in the same broadcast, the platform urged citizens who “face any abuse by security agencies” to submit complaints via email; a move critics say amounts to collecting structured information on State security operations.

From accountability to “collaboration”

Security sources argue the campaign reflects a broader pattern of transforming routine oversight of State institutions into accusations of treason or foreign collaboration.

They stress that the Information Branch operates strictly under judicial mandates.

“Nothing in the Ashrafieh operation exceeds what would be required even at the level of a local police station,” one source said, adding that all actions are conducted under legal authorization.

Other sources noted that any raid or arrest carried out by the Information Branch requires a judicial warrant, emphasizing that the agency is known for its operational efficiency and its role in counter-espionage, counterterrorism, and major criminal investigations.

Identity checks, officials say, are a fundamental part of security procedures. “No security operation can proceed without verifying identities,” one source said. “It is essential to minimizing risk.”

On privacy, security officials added that the state is legally entitled to know who occupies any property across Lebanese territory under existing property and rental laws.

They also clarified that individuals under suspicion can be summoned for questioning or detained if necessary, while in the Ashrafieh case authorities opted for a controlled entry rather than arrests.

Fear of exposure

According to security sources, the backlash reflects concern that security agencies may expose residences used by Hezbollah-linked figures, particularly amid increasing civilian complaints in various areas.

Repeated targeting of Major Shuqair and the Beirut Information Branch, critics say, underscores the focused nature of the campaign.

The Information Branch is widely regarded as one of Lebanon’s most capable security institutions, credited with dismantling espionage networks, investigating major crimes, and leading counterterrorism operations. It also played a central role in uncovering communications linked to the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, and paid a heavy price with the killing of Wissam al-Hasan and Wissam Eid.

The unit has previously arrested more than 20 individuals accused of collaborating with Israel within Hezbollah’s own ranks — an effort once publicly acknowledged by the group’s former leader Hassan Nasrallah.

Yet today, the same institution is being accused of “collaboration” by Hezbollah-aligned outlets, a contradiction critics say illustrates the politicization of security narratives.

A broader political struggle

Analysts say the media campaign reflects Hezbollah’s broader effort to push back against growing public opposition in Beirut to its armed presence, particularly after recent escalations and the “Black Wednesday” strike.

At the same time, the government’s policy of restricting weapons to state authority has gained traction in the capital, supported by parliamentary and civic initiatives advocating a “Beirut free of weapons.”

Public sentiment has also become increasingly visible through banners supporting Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and posters backing Major Shuqair and Brigadier General Qabresli. In response, critics say, Beirut has made its position clear: it wants state institutions to prevail over parallel armed structures.

Ultimately, the dispute highlights what observers describe as a deeper structural conflict between Lebanon’s state institutions and Hezbollah’s armed-political framework — where institutions acting independently are framed as adversarial.

In this dynamic, even routine law enforcement is recast as “treason,” and State authority is portrayed as foreign interference, thus underscoring the depth of Lebanon’s ongoing institutional struggle.