A majority of Lebanese Shiite respondents support transferring Hezbollah’s weapons to the State, while nearly two-thirds favor some form of agreement with Israel, according to a new poll that offers a snapshot of views within the community that forms the group’s main social base.

The survey, conducted by the Statistics Lebanon Institute in September among 800 Shiite Lebanese citizens aged 18 and older across the country, found that 66.4% supported placing Hezbollah’s arsenal under State control. Another 29.6% favored allowing the Iran-backed group to retain its weapons under the current arrangement.

The findings come amid mounting domestic and international pressure on Lebanon to ensure that weapons are held exclusively by State institutions. Hezbollah has continued to reject calls to disarm, citing ongoing Israeli threats and arguing that its arsenal remains essential to Lebanon’s deterrence and defense.

Strong Support for State Authority Over War and Peace

The poll found that 71.1% of respondents believe decisions on war and peace should be the exclusive responsibility of the Lebanese State, underscoring support for a greater government role in decisions involving national security.

Only 5.9% said Hezbollah’s leadership should have a greater role in determining the country’s future.

Confidence in the Lebanese army was also high, with 78.5% of respondents expressing trust in the institution. When asked which institution was best placed to ensure long-term security, 51.1% selected the army, compared with 16.5% who chose Hezbollah.

The findings point to a preference among many respondents for State institutions to assume greater responsibility for security. However, they do not establish that support for Hezbollah has disappeared or that opinion across the Shiite community has shifted uniformly.

Mixed Views on Hezbollah’s War With Israel

The survey also found widespread dissatisfaction with Hezbollah’s performance in the war with Israel. A combined 67.4% of respondents believed the group had either failed to achieve its objectives or achieved only some of them.

Meanwhile, 42.1% expressed negative feelings, including disappointment, anger or concern, about the group’s leadership and its handling of the war and its consequences.

Yet criticism of Hezbollah’s conduct did not translate into a wholesale rejection of the group. Some 37.1% of respondents said they had a great deal of trust in Hezbollah, while another 22.4% expressed some trust. By contrast, 38.5% reported varying degrees of distrust.

The results suggest that views of Hezbollah remain divided, with concerns about its military decisions and leadership coexisting with continued support among a significant share of respondents.

Support for an Agreement With Israel

The poll also indicated openness to diplomatic or security arrangements with Israel. Taken together, 63.3% of respondents supported some form of agreement, whether through direct negotiations, third-party mediation or a broader regional deal.

More specifically, 17% supported the possibility of a bilateral security agreement between Lebanon and Israel to ensure border security, while 24.9% favored a security agreement brokered by a third party. The published figures do not specify the preferred arrangements of all respondents included in the broader 63.3% figure.

The results come as Lebanon faces pressure to bring all weapons under the authority of the army and security forces and fulfill its relevant security commitments. The government must also navigate the political and sectarian sensitivities surrounding Hezbollah’s weapons, which remain a major point of contention in the country.

Debate Over Hezbollah’s Future Role

Asked about Hezbollah’s future, 34% of respondents favored limiting the group to a political party, while 9.4% supported giving it a political and social role. Another 10% wanted it to retain both its political and military activities, and 10.6% favored keeping its armed wing outside State control.

The findings highlight competing views over whether Hezbollah should remain an armed political movement or transition toward a role confined to civilian politics.