Moustafa Rizk was detained by the Israeli army for three days when he attempted to return to Houla, his village near the border with Israel, in late January. Under the terms of the November Lebanon-Israel ceasefire agreement, Israeli troops were supposed to withdraw from south Lebanon that day.
Instead, Israeli forces remained in position, killing 22 Lebanese civilians attempting to return to their homes and arresting seven others, including Moustafa.
The ceasefire, extended until mid-February, has long since expired. Yet Israeli troops still occupy five locations in south Lebanon – including an outpost near Houla that lies more than 100 metres inside Lebanon, beyond the UN-demarcated Blue Line between Israel and Lebanon.
“They’re a two-minute drive away from my house,” Mr Rizk told The National bitterly. “It was a residential area, not unused land. My uncle’s house was there. But now they’ve blocked off the road. We can’t access the area.”
His anger echoes a broader frustration in Lebanon: the ceasefire required both an Israeli withdrawal and Hezbollah’s disarmament. Yet while Hezbollah has largely stood down and allowed the Lebanese army to deploy in its place in southern Lebanon, Israel continues to occupy and bombard Lebanese territory.
Hezbollah, once a powerful paramilitary force, is now constrained by a truce it cannot afford to break. The Lebanese army has so far dismantled more than 90 per cent of the group’s military infrastructure south of the Litani River.
Israel has refused to relinquish its foothold, undermining Lebanon's sovereignty. Defence Minister Israel Katz said Israeli forces will stay “indefinitely”. It also continues to launch near-daily attacks, including on areas well north of the Litani, in what analysts say is a pressure campaign to force Lebanon to fully disarm Hezbollah.
The US is also pressing Lebanon for a deadline to completely disarm not only Hezbollah but allied militias across the country – a demand Lebanese leaders say cannot happen under fire.
“We’re trying to ‘convince’ the American administration of our point of view over how to deal with this [disarmament] in the most pragmatic and reasonable way,” a political source close to talks with the US and Hezbollah told The National.
“We are trying to explain that there are limits to pushing in Lebanon.”
Hezbollah has shown co-operation with the Lebanese army in handing its weapons and military sites south of the Litani. Military sources told The National that the army is absorbing viable Hezbollah weapons and ammunition.
But Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem has refused to consider the group's complete disarmament while Israel continues to launch attacks.
"Does anyone expect us to discuss a national defence strategy as warplanes fly over our heads and there is occupation in south Lebanon," Mr Qassem asked in an April speech. "Let Israel withdraw first."
Former intelligence chief Abbas Ibrahim, who maintains ties with both the US and Hezbollah, doubts diplomacy alone can shift Israel’s stance.
“At the political level, Lebanon has taken a decision to use diplomatic channels. It’s not because we’re generous – it’s because we don’t have the [military] capability to deter Israel,” he told The National.
For now, Lebanese officials can do little more than accuse Israel of violating Lebanon’s sovereignty. But many fear that this fragile moment mirrors a dark chapter of the country’s past.
The end of the Israel-Hezbollah war was a decisive defeat for Hezbollah that ruptured a years-long power struggle in Lebanon between pro-Iran players and the pro-Western bloc. Hezbollah’s waning political and military dominance has exposed Lebanon to unchallenged American and Israeli pressure.
Suddenly, after years of state paralysis, the country had a new President, new Prime Minister, and a fully empowered cabinet. President Joseph Aoun, formerly the head of the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), has committed to disarming non-state actors, but not at the expense of national stability.
Yet US policy risks undercutting that goal. Analysts, military officials, and political insiders familiar with continuing talks with Washington told The National that American pressure to disarm Hezbollah fails to consider Lebanon's complicated history.
With the LAF chronically underfunded and under-equipped, officials warn that fully disarming Hezbollah and allied militias while Lebanon endures daily Israeli attacks and a military occupation could deepen instability and provoke renewed conflict.
“The [US] needs to understand Lebanon’s history, and they have to trust how we can achieve the goal of restoring sovereignty and stability,” the political source close to the talks said.
Grim history
Lebanon’s history is littered with failed foreign-led disarmament efforts.
In 1982, following a series of cross-border clashes with the Palestine Liberation Organisation – which was operating in southern Lebanon and Beirut as a state-within-a-state – Israel invaded Lebanon and besieged Beirut. Under a US-brokered deal, the PLO was forced to disarm. Just weeks later, one of the deadliest massacres of Lebanon’s 15-year civil war unfolded, when Israeli forces facilitated the Christian Phalangist militia’s slaughter of more than 1,200 civilians in the Shatila refugee camp for Palestinians.
Israel withdrew from Beirut shortly after, and another US-brokered 1983 agreement promised full Israeli withdrawal pending the Lebanese army’s deployment throughout the country. But the Lebanese army was too fractured to enforce it.
Instead, Israel maintained its occupation of south Lebanon until the year 2000, when it was forced to withdraw following guerrilla resistance from Hezbollah – itself born from the 1982 Israeli invasion.
Today, on the heels of yet another war, Lebanese leaders are warning the US and Israel not to make the same mistake again.
Lebanese officials have already reached an agreement with the Palestinian Authority to disarm factions – among them Hezbollah ally Hamas – and allow the Lebanese state to extend its control into Lebanon’s Palestinian refugee camps. And with Hezbollah largely dismantled in the south, the Lebanese army is preparing to extend its control north of the Litani River.
How that happens will be decisive.
The LAF’s Limits
Since taking office, Mr Aoun has actively campaigned to bolster Lebanon’s national army.
To do that, the LAF needs funding, equipment and sustained foreign support. But it also needs strength, according to retired general Mounir Shehadeh, who previously led the Lebanese government's co-ordination with Unifil, the UN peacekeeping force between Lebanon and Israel.
“The Lebanese army does not have the kind of weapons necessary to defend itself from or even deter external threats,” he said. “Even if it had the finances, the army wouldn’t be allowed to have weapons that could break the current balance of power.”
The LAF was not involved in the conflict between Hezbollah and Israel. Still, “during the war, Israel deliberately attacked clearly visible Lebanese army positions,” he added.
Two soldiers have been killed since the ceasefire, and over 40 others were killed during the war, according to Lebanese security sources.
Active military occupation
US envoy Morgan Ortagus is expected in Beirut in June to push for an accelerated timeline for disarming Hezbollah and its allies, illustrating the disconnect between US policy and Lebanon's political reality.
Avoiding a repetition of history will require convincing the US to pressure Israel into withdrawing and halting its attacks on Lebanon – including three on Beirut since the ceasefire.
“If Israel continues to strike, for example, Beirut, it will be impossible to proceed with reforms,” said the Lebanese political source. “It would be as if they’re trying to topple the new government.”
Maj Gen Ibrahim put it more bluntly: “The Americans are reading the situation badly. First, you have to free the country from [Israeli] occupation. After that, you can oblige Hezbollah to disarm,” he told The National.
He warned that Israel’s continued presence “legitimises Hezbollah’s claim that resistance is necessary”.
“There is no way to solve any problem in Lebanon by force. Our history proves that. And if we can’t learn from history, then nothing will ever teach us.”
‘What sovereignty?’
When Mr Rizk finally returned to Houla, he found his home – and most of the village – destroyed.
He scoffs at the notion that the army’s presence guarantees sovereignty when an Israeli military outpost sits less than two kilometres away.
“What sovereignty?” he asked. “When they put soldiers on the border, but they don’t have the power to deter attacks? When Israeli missiles strike wherever they want, where’s the sovereignty? A sovereignty of prostration and subservience?”
His frustration illustrates what Lebanese leaders are warning their Western counterparts.
“As long as there’s occupation, there will be resistance,” he said. “The resistance isn’t about Hezbollah or any political party. It comes from the people. We’re the people.”
