Kataeb MP Nadim Gemayel asserted that the true conflict in Lebanon is not between Lebanon and Israel, but rather between Israel and Hezbollah with Iran.

He emphasized that Hezbollah initiated the war in Lebanon, and it is their responsibility to resolve it, not that of the Lebanese people.

“We have heard this from both the Prime Minister and the Speaker of Parliament, who is leading negotiations each time deferring decisions back to the party to suit its interests,” Gemayel said in an interview with Al-Hurra television.

The Kataeb MP noted that the issue lies in Israel’s unwillingness to adhere strictly to UNSC Resolution 1701. While parts of it were implemented in 2006, little was done over the following decade, leading to renewed conflict in 2024.

He stressed the need for a genuine resolution to the issue, pointing to a multifaceted problem involving Israel, Hezbollah, and Lebanese citizens.

He also urged Hezbollah to acknowledge its failure in maintaining a balance of terror with responses to Tel Aviv and elsewhere.

He argued that Hezbollah’s arsenal has become a serious threat and that this party (Hezbollah) must hand over its weapons to the Lebanese state. “Today, more than ever, this issue must be addressed. The war will not end until Hezbollah surrenders its arms.”

Gemayel stated that Hezbollah has devastated Lebanon, pointing to the presence of one million displaced persons on the streets.

He insisted that Hezbollah must admit defeat to resolve the crisis through alternative means.

While rejecting the notion of supporting Israel’s freedom to operate within Lebanon, Gemayel emphasized that Lebanon must address its issues, and Israel should fully withdraw from the 1949 Armistice Line.

On arming the Lebanese Armed Forces, he remarked that the forces already possess enough weaponry to assert control. "Why give the army more weapons if they cannot enter the southern suburbs or camps without political authorization?"

In response to a question, Gemayel argued that Hezbollah’s military power has faded and that its field capabilities are now weak, as it is unable to protect southern villages. While its political influence persists, he called for transforming the on-the-ground conflict into a political discussion—“but without a gun on the table.”

He noted that Lebanon's objective is clear: Hezbollah must surrender its arms to the state. The bigger question, he said, is, “Does Hezbollah intend to rearm and bring further ruin to Lebanon, or will it engage in the political process alongside other factions as it did after the Taif Agreement?”

Gemayel firmly stated that while there is no desire for civil war, Hezbollah must understand that it needs to treat other Lebanese groups with peace and goodwill, as they have treated it.

On the upcoming presidential election, he remarked, “If the situation remains as it is, the new president will appease all parties. However, if Lebanon seeks a fresh direction, a president will be elected who upholds the authority of the state, leads a genuine dialogue with other Lebanese factions, and does not merely manage crises.”