Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said Hezbollah must fulfill commitments it has already made regarding the State’s monopoly over arms, stressing that Lebanon is significantly delayed in implementing the Taif Agreement and that extending State authority across all territory is a national obligation rather than a matter of political negotiation.

Salam said Hezbollah has repeatedly endorsed key principles tied to State sovereignty through past government commitments and international resolutions.

“I am not asking Hezbollah for anything beyond fulfilling its obligations,” he said. “Through the 2006 government, in which it participated, it committed to implementing U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, which calls for extending State authority across all Lebanese territory, implementing the Taif Agreement, and, most importantly, ensuring that the area south of the Litani River is free of weapons.”

He added that these commitments were reaffirmed in 2024 under the government of former Prime Minister Najib Mikati through the agreement to cease hostilities.

“That agreement also reaffirmed the principle of exclusive State control over weapons and clearly identified the six entities authorized to bear arms,” Salam said.

He stressed that the issue of restricting arms to the State is a Lebanese sovereign decision, not one driven by external pressure.

“We are not limiting weapons to please Israel,” he said. “This is an independent Lebanese matter on which there is broad consensus. We have delayed implementing it for far too long—since the adoption of the Taif Agreement.”

Salam said Lebanon is now 36 years behind in fully implementing the state authority provisions of the Taif Agreement, which he described as a comprehensive national framework that has been applied selectively.

“The Taif Agreement is a complete package, but it has been implemented selectively,” he said. “Administrative decentralization was never implemented, nor was judicial independence achieved.”

He also noted that the agreement includes the objective of abolishing political sectarianism, which requires the establishment of a national commission under Article 95 of the Constitution to design a phased implementation plan.

“We must complete the implementation of the Taif Agreement, correct what was applied contrary to its provisions, address the gaps that emerged in practice, and be prepared to develop it whenever circumstances require,” Salam said.

The prime minister rejected the idea that Lebanon needs new political negotiations to apply the Taif framework.

“From 1975 until 1989, unfortunately, we engaged in dialogue at times through fire and weapons, and we went through dozens of rounds of political negotiations before reaching the Taif Agreement,” he said. “We do not need new negotiations to implement it.”

He added that relevant reforms should be addressed through Lebanon’s constitutional institutions, including Parliament and the Cabinet, as the state seeks to restore their proper functioning.

On Lebanon’s ongoing diplomatic track, Salam said the country joined the Washington negotiations because they represent the least costly path toward achieving a full Israeli withdrawal.

Lebanon, he said, is simultaneously part of a ceasefire-monitoring mechanism established in Switzerland aimed at stabilizing the situation on the ground.

“Lebanon has been briefed on the mechanism established in Switzerland, and we are part of it,” he said. “Its objective is to consolidate the ceasefire. However, the Washington track is separate from it. We entered the negotiations in Washington because it is the least costly path for Lebanon.”

Salam said the goal of the negotiations is clear despite uncertainty over the outcome.

“Will we reach an agreement? No one can know the outcome of negotiations in advance,” he said. “But we know exactly what we want: a full Israeli withdrawal.”

He said Lebanon would reject any partial or incomplete pullout.

“We will not accept the continued occupation of five positions, or even two,” he said. “We are also demanding the release of prisoners and the resolution of remaining disputed points along the border. At the same time, we expect the Israeli side to raise security arrangements, and we will discuss what is acceptable and what is not. I am not pessimistic.”

Salam said Israel’s withdrawal and Lebanon’s broader sovereignty remain central to the negotiations, alongside discussions over security arrangements.

He also reaffirmed the importance of international peacekeeping forces in southern Lebanon, saying their role remains necessary even in the event of a future agreement with Israel.

“We continue to see a need for an international force in the south to carry out three essential functions: monitoring, reporting, and coordination and liaison,” he said. “Even if we reach an agreement with Israel, we will still need that role because of the history between us.”

He noted that U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres has presented three options regarding the force’s future mandate, with the final decision resting with the U.N. Security Council.

Salam said those options could be adjusted depending on the outcome of negotiations and any military arrangements linked to an Israeli withdrawal.