Justice Minister Adel Nassar criticized Iran’s role in Lebanon, saying Tehran’s interference has repeatedly drawn the country into conflicts that do not serve its national interests, while arguing that negotiations remain Lebanon’s only realistic option for ending the current crisis.

In an interview with Al Arabiya, Nassar said many Lebanese have come to realize that the wars fought on Lebanese soil over the past years were not aligned with the country’s interests.

“Iranian interference in Lebanese affairs has had negative repercussions for Lebanon and has dragged the country into conflicts that do not serve its national interest,” Nassar said.

He argued that Hezbollah’s decision to open a support front for Gaza, as well as its involvement in the Syrian conflict, had no connection to Lebanon’s national priorities.

“The war in support of Gaza was not in Lebanon’s interest, and neither was the involvement in the Syrian war,” he said. “Hezbollah is implementing an Iranian agenda and receives funding, weapons and support from Iran. The party itself has acknowledged this.”

Nassar said such a reality could no longer continue, holding it responsible for drawing Lebanon into confrontations that have produced repeated disasters. At the same time, he stressed that criticism of Hezbollah’s role should not be interpreted as a justification for Israeli military actions.

“That does not justify Israeli attacks or the systematic destruction being inflicted on Lebanese regions,” he said.

The minister said Lebanon now faces a stark choice between remaining trapped in a cycle of war and devastation or pursuing diplomacy.

“Lebanon stands today before two options: either to continue down the path of war and destruction or to move toward negotiations,” he said. “Given the imbalance in military power, negotiations are the only viable option available.”

Nassar argued that Hezbollah’s position is weakening Lebanon’s ability to negotiate effectively with Israel, saying the group’s insistence on retaining its weapons undermines the state’s leverage.

“Hezbollah’s stance obstructs the Lebanese State’s ability to achieve its negotiating objectives,” he said. “The party’s insistence on keeping its weapons weakens the state’s position at the negotiating table with Israel. What is required is that arms be exclusively in the hands of the Lebanese state in order to strengthen its negotiating position.”

Reflecting on developments since Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, Nassar said the country had paid a heavy price for the choice of armed confrontation.

“What has happened since 2000 — from the July 2006 war, to internal unrest, participation in the Syrian war and the conflict triggered in support of Gaza — shows that the Lebanese have paid a very high price for the choice of weapons and war,” he said, deploring the fact that part of southern Lebanon remains occupied while many southern towns continue to face destruction.

Addressing the Shiite community, Nassar rejected describing Hezbollah as representing all Shiites in Lebanon.

“I reject the term ‘support base,’” he said. “Hezbollah does not represent the entire Shiite community. It is a political party with supporters, like any other party.”

He argued that a significant segment of Lebanon’s Shiites no longer supports the policies advocated by the group.

“There is a broad segment within the Shiite community that is no longer convinced by the choices Hezbollah is presenting,” he said.

Nassar added that residents of southern Lebanon from all sects are bearing the cost of the conflict.

“The people of the south, from all communities, are paying the price in blood and destruction,” he said. “What future is Hezbollah offering the Lebanese if the proposed course is to continue the war until Iranian interests are achieved?”

He also said opposition to that approach exists within the Shiite community itself and suggested that some within Hezbollah share concerns about the current trajectory.

“There are multiple voices within the Shiite community that reject this path,” he said. “Even within Hezbollah, there are those who realize that this course offers no clear horizon for the future.”

Turning to Lebanon’s relationship with Iran, Nassar said Beirut has no interest in entering disputes with any country but would not accept foreign interference in its internal affairs.

“Lebanon does not seek to influence the policies of other countries,” he said. “Any country that respects Lebanon’s sovereignty and refrains from interfering in its internal affairs should not be a source of conflict for us.”

He also rejected what he described as subordination to Iran’s regional agenda.

“We reject being tied to the Iranian project or committed to Tehran’s regional policies,” he said. “Attempts to expand Iranian influence in Lebanon and across Arab countries are unacceptable.”

Nassar concluded by saying Lebanon finds itself caught between Israeli military actions and Iranian influence, while reiterating his opposition to both.

“Lebanon today is living between Israeli attacks on one side and Iranian interference on the other,” he said. “We condemn the Israeli attacks and the destruction and losses they cause, but Iran has also contributed to dragging Lebanon into a war that is not in its interest.”

“The solution lies in continuing along the path of negotiations,” he said.