As regional dynamics become increasingly volatile, the issue of Hezbollah’s weapons has once again resurfaced amid mounting international pressure and an unprecedented wave of U.S. diplomatic engagement. The renewed focus comes as tensions surge along Lebanon’s southern and eastern borders, pushing the country closer to a potentially dangerous turning point that could escalate the current political and security crisis into open confrontation.

U.S. Envoy Brings Disarmament Proposal to Beirut

The arrival of U.S. envoy Thomas Barrack in Beirut has triggered wide political anticipation, with his visit described by officials as “pivotal.” According to informed sources, Barrack is carrying an official paper from the U.S. administration, outlining a proposed comprehensive settlement. The initiative is anchored in United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 and includes a detailed timeline for Hezbollah’s disarmament by the end of December.

Diplomatic sources told kataeb.org that Washington views this period as an opportune moment to help Lebanon reassert state control over its security, starting with the withdrawal of weapons from non-state actors. In return, the U.S. is offering to reengage international aid mechanisms, linking them directly to security and political reforms.

A Flexible Official Stance, Met with Hezbollah Rejection

The Lebanese government has shown preliminary openness to the U.S. proposal, sources at Baabda Palace said, noting that consultations are ongoing among the country’s three top officials to craft a unified national stance. 

However, this tentative flexibility is not mirrored by Hezbollah. Speaking on behalf of the party, Secretary-General Naim Qassem flatly rejected the proposal, insisting that Hezbollah’s weapons are an existential guarantee for the group and that the issue cannot be addressed before Israel fully complies with Resolution 1701. This includes withdrawing from disputed border areas and ceasing all land and air violations of Lebanese sovereignty.

Hezbollah’s Justification: From Israeli Deterrence to Fighting Extremism

Hezbollah has long justified its military arsenal as a deterrent to Israeli aggression. However, in recent years, the party has expanded its rationale, citing the so-called “takfiri threat”—a term it uses to refer to extremist Islamist groups—as an added reason to maintain its armed capacity.

In multiple speeches, Hezbollah officials have cited the Syrian war and its spillover effects in Lebanon as further proof that Hezbollah must retain arms outside the state’s control. They argue that weapons are necessary not only to secure Lebanon’s borders, but also to shield the country from domestic terrorist threats.

From the party’s perspective, any attempt to disarm Hezbollah, particularly in the absence of a comprehensive national defense strategy, would be a reckless gamble that could expose Lebanon to severe security vulnerabilities.

Heightened Alert Along the Borders

On the ground, Hezbollah appears to be responding to the U.S. initiative as a potential prelude to confrontation. Security sources report a visible uptick in the group’s military readiness across strategic areas, from the eastern border regions of Baalbek and Hermel to Lebanon’s southern frontier.

Sources indicate that Hezbollah views the U.S. plan as potential prelude to confrontation. Any attempt to forcefully strip the group of its arms without guarantees, Hezbollah officials say, would be seen as a direct threat to its political and military existence.

Is Southern Beirut a Target?

Amid rising tension, speculation is growing over whether Beirut’s southern suburbs, Hezbollah’s stronghold known as Dahiyeh, might once again become a target for Israeli military operations.

Western intelligence reports suggest that Israel is considering expanding its “target list” to include logistical and command centers in the Dahiyeh, should diplomacy fail and conflict erupt. Sources following the developments told kataeb.org that Israeli leadership appears increasingly inclined toward a strategy of preemptive strikes that go beyond border skirmishes, aiming to establish new rules of engagement by altering the military landscape inside Lebanon.

Barrack Navigates a Fragile Equation

Envoy Thomas Barrack now finds himself navigating one of the most delicate diplomatic missions in the region. He is caught between two highly volatile dynamics: on one side, a growing international consensus calling for Lebanon’s stabilization and disengagement from regional conflicts; on the other, Hezbollah’s insistence on retaining its weapons as a core element of its defensive strategy against Israel.

Caught between these pressures, the Lebanese state faces a critical test of sovereignty, struggling to avoid domestic implosion while preserving fragile internal cohesion.

Lebanon Nearing the Edge?

At this stage, Lebanon’s fate seems tied to a regional and international clock over which it has limited control. As the U.S.-proposed deadline draws near, and military alert levels rise on multiple fronts, a defining question looms: Will Lebanon plunge into another military confrontatio, or will diplomacy succeed in defusing the ticking time bomb?

The answer may come in hours, or days. What is certain, however, is that the next phase will not resemble what came before. Lebanon today stands closer than ever to the edge of a full-blown explosion.