Lebanon Summons Iranian Ambassador Over Remarks on State's Monopoly on Arms
The move, a rare diplomatic gesture, comes amid discussions on national sovereignty and external interference.
Sources at the Lebanese Foreign Ministry told Asharq Al-Awsat in remarks published Wednesday that Raji took the decision to summon Amani over statements viewed as a clear interference in internal Lebanese affairs.
The ambassador is expected to appear at the ministry within the next two days, where he will be formally notified of Lebanon's objection to his comments.
Officials described the move as 'unprecedented' because it is one of the few times a diplomat has been summoned over a social media post - specifically on X.
In the post published Friday, Amani wrote that the 'disarmament project is a clear conspiracy against nations.' He went on to criticize what he described as US hypocrisy, saying: 'While the United States continues to supply the Zionist entity with the latest weapons and missiles, it pressures other nations to disarm or weaken their militaries under various pretexts.'
He warned that countries that 'surrender to these disarmament demands become vulnerable to attack and occupation, as happened in Iraq, Libya, and Syria.'
Amani stressed that Iran 'is fully aware of this dangerous conspiracy and its threat to regional security,' calling on others not to fall into what he described as an 'enemy trap.'
While the ambassador did not mention Lebanon by name, his post was widely interpreted as a direct reference to ongoing Lebanese discussions about curbing Hezbollah's arsenal.
President Joseph Aoun has been engaged in talks with Hezbollah representatives on resolving the weapons issue.
On Sunday, Aoun confirmed that a decision had already been made to limit weapons to state institutions, saying he was waiting for the appropriate conditions to implement it. 'These conditions will define the path forward.'
Hezbollah continues to openly acknowledge receiving military and financial support from Iran. However, its opponents accuse Tehran of repeatedly meddling in Lebanon's internal affairs through statements made by senior officials and diplomats.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Asharq Al-Awsat
44 minutes ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
No Armed Groups Allowed in Lebanon, President Tells Hezbollah's Ally Iran
No group in Lebanon is permitted to bear arms or rely on foreign backing, its president told a visiting senior Iranian official on Wednesday after the cabinet approved the goals of a US-backed roadmap to disarm the Iran-aligned Hezbollah group. During a meeting in Beirut with Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's top security body, Joseph Aoun warned against foreign interference in Lebanon's internal affairs, saying the country was open to cooperation with Iran but only within the bounds of national sovereignty and mutual respect. Larijani said the Islamic Republic supports Lebanon's sovereignty and does not interfere in its decision-making. "Any decision taken by the Lebanese government in consultation with the resistance is respected by us," he said after separate talks with Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, whose Amal movement is an ally of Hezbollah. By "resistance", Larijani was alluding to Hezbollah, which was founded in 1982, grew into a "state-within-a-state" force better armed than the Lebanese army and has repeatedly fought Israel over the decades. "Iran didn't bring any plan to Lebanon, the US did. Those intervening in Lebanese affairs are those dictating plans and deadlines", said Larijani. He said Lebanon should not "mix its enemies with its friends - your enemy is Israel, your friend is the resistance ... I recommend to Lebanon to always appreciate the value of resistance." Later on Wednesday, Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said after meeting Larijani that recent remarks on Lebanon by Iranian officials including Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi were totally rejected by his government. He said the comments constituted a "violation" of the principle of mutual state sovereignty. Last week, Araghchi said Tehran supported any decision Hezbollah made and this was not the first attempt to strip the group of its arsenal. Ali Akbar Velayati, top adviser to Iran's supreme leader, also criticized the Lebanese government's move on disarmament. "If Hezbollah lays down its weapons, who will defend the lives, property, and honor of the Lebanese?" he said. The US submitted a plan through President Donald Trump's envoy to the region, Tom Barrack, setting out the most detailed steps yet for disarming Hezbollah, which has rejected mounting calls to disarm since its devastating war with Israel last year. Hezbollah has rejected repeated calls to relinquish its weaponry although it was seriously weakened in the war, with Israel killing most of its leadership in airstrikes and bombings. It was the climax of a conflict that began in October 2023 when the group opened fire at Israeli positions along Lebanon's southern frontier in support of its Palestinian ally Hamas at the start of the Gaza war. Aoun also said recent remarks by some Iranian officials had not been helpful, and reaffirmed that the Lebanese state and its armed forces were solely responsible for protecting all citizens.
Arab News
9 hours ago
- Arab News
How can we understand Hezbollah's intransigence over its weapons?
The fate of Hezbollah's arms is no longer a domestic dispute between advocates of sovereignty and supporters of the 'resistance.' Since the 2023-2024 war with Israel, this question has been distilling into an existential crisis facing the party. The slogan raised by the leader of Hezbollah's parliamentary bloc, Mohammed Raad — 'we will die before surrendering the weapons' — reflects his awareness that his camp has no other option but to cling to what remains of its arsenal. Abandoning its arms would break Hezbollah's political and ideological foundations. These actions are not mere reflections of political intransigence. Given its rigid ideology and uncompromising idealism, and because Iran's regional project is in its DNA, Hezbollah is not an agile actor with the capacity to fundamentally change in nature. Moreover, it has built its power around the notion that weapons are an identity, not merely a means to an end. In truth, the Lebanese have never associated Hezbollah with a domestic political or economic project. Its engagement in public affairs has always revolved around the 'resistance' and the imperatives of regional conflicts. Thus, surrendering its arms would entail redefining the party from scratch and sacrificing its raison d'etre. Operating within these restrictive parameters, Hezbollah has dragged its feet. Its bets verge on wishful thinking: that the Lebanese state will remain too weak to follow through on its commitment to disarm the party; that a new episode of regional chaos will destabilize Syria's emerging political authorities; and that the high-level assurances it has received from Tehran's top brass regarding its survival and armament will materialize. Hezbollah has built its power around the notion that weapons are an identity, not merely a means to an end. Nadim Koteich That is, Hezbollah is betting that it will get lucky — or even await miracles. The fate of these matters is totally beyond Hezbollah's control and external factors (that are consistently going against it) will determine how things play out. After years of collapse, Lebanon's state institutions are steadily, albeit slowly, consolidating and enhancing their credibility in the eyes of a broadening segment of the population. This trajectory undermines the slander and vilification of the state that Hezbollah has long used to challenge the state's legitimacy and justify its own existence. As for its wager on vacuums emerging in Syria that will grant it more room for maneuver, current developments point in the opposite direction. The political and military situation in Syria suggests that the weight of open-ended geopolitical conflicts and regional actors is declining, consolidating the new regime in Damascus. Even Iranian support, which constituted the cornerstone of Hezbollah's existence for decades, is increasingly constrained. Tehran is grappling with a severe economic crisis amid volatile shifts in the internal balance of power between the different wings of the regime. Iran is preparing for a new phase, all while trying to put the military and security apparatus (that was battered by deep Israeli strikes during the 12-day war in June) back together. These considerations have compelled Iran to prioritize its military and financial needs over coming to the aid of its allies, foremost among them Hezbollah. All this means the party is fighting for its very survival. However, while turning to politics has offered armed movements elsewhere in the world a lifeline, allowing them to maintain some influence, material conditions have left Hezbollah hostage to its weapons. The group has never pursued a genuine domestic cause that could underpin a shift toward politics. Nadim Koteich The Irish Republican Army, despite being deeply rooted in the conflict with Britain, pursued a clear, localized national cause: unifying Ireland and defending the rights of nationalist Catholics. That is why it managed to survive the shift from armed struggle to a political course that culminated in the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, which left Sinn Fein in a strong position politically. Colombia's Revolutionary Armed Forces, known as FARC, despite becoming involved in the drug trade and losing some of its legitimacy as result, was nonetheless pursuing a domestic agenda to a social and economic struggle in Colombia. FARC thereby managed to conclude a peace agreement that, despite only being partially implemented, granted it a political foothold. Hezbollah, in contrast, has never pursued a genuine domestic cause that could underpin a shift toward politics. Even its claims of defending Lebanon's sovereignty and confronting occupation were never presented as ultimate, final objectives. These goals were presented as a means to further its regional ambitions. Its ideological link to its axis, as well as its intrinsic role in the regional power struggle, make any fundamental change to its nature nearly impossible. To give up its arms would not be to adjust its strategy; it would be to abandon the reason for its existence. Thus, the party appears bound to keep behaving this way. It will continue to vie to maintain its weapons and transnational function. Even after being put out of action, it will continue to wait for gradual decline. Its intransigence could, in turn, perpetuate the decay of Lebanon's state institutions. If it does so, the country would go from being a political battleground to being home to a failed state, with the Lebanese people paying the price many times over. • Nadim Koteich is the general manager of Sky News Arabia. X: @NadimKoteich
Arab News
9 hours ago
- Arab News
Disarming Hezbollah the only way forward for Lebanon
Many people have long argued that the disarming of the Lebanese militia Hezbollah might backfire on the fragile country. But the course of Lebanon's short yet troubled history shows that even those actors who influenced the country and imposed their ideological and military dominance over the state eventually became a part of that history themselves. The current efforts by Lebanon's government to disarm Hezbollah should be supported by all Lebanese, as only the central state can guarantee safety, equity and stability for all. In two crucial meetings last week, the Lebanese government moved toward ordering the army to draw up plans to disarm Hezbollah and any other armed factions in the country. No one is under any illusions that this step could not have been conceivable before 2025, but some of the recent seismic shifts in the Middle East have impacted Lebanon. One was the end of the Assad regime in Syria, which fell last December. The second was a result of the war in support of Gaza that Hezbollah fought and lost against Israel. This resulted in the decapitation of the militia's leadership and the death of many top and middle-ranking commanders and foot soldiers. It led the militia to agree a ceasefire with Israel that was not negotiated through the caretaker government of the time and included an agreement to pull out of positions the armed militia held south of the Litani river, as well as to facilitate the implementation of all UN resolutions related to keeping the peace in the border areas with Israel. Beirut's disarmament push is only natural for a new government that is aiming to rebuild Lebanon and end the suffering. Mohamed Chebaro Another factor was the election of a new president and government free of foreign influence. Lebanon had long been plagued by direct and indirect external interference in its internal and international affairs. Beirut's disarmament push is only natural for a new government that is aiming to rebuild Lebanon and end the suffering that resulted from policies that were conceived to undermine the state and keep the country as a vassal or puppet at the service of the so-called resistance axis. The resistance of the Shiite community in Lebanon and their ministers in government is also natural, as Hezbollah and Amal (the two Shiite political parties that were dominant in the state until January this year) are set to lose the clout they built up over three decades. When they were the only ones allowed to bear and store arms in the name of resisting Israel, this had considerable returns for their constituents up and down the country. Any removal of their weapons would take with it the related privileges and gains on the social, economic and political fronts. The rebuke that followed a statement made on X by Ali Akbar Velayati, the international affairs adviser to Iran's supreme leader, indicated that Tehran's clout over Lebanon may finally be dissipating. It was formerly inconceivable for a Lebanese message to speak of 'flagrant and unacceptable interference' from Tehran, which was followed by the advice that Iran ought to focus on its own people's needs. Most Lebanese seem hungry for their state to ensure its sovereignty and monopoly over the use of force. Mohamed Chebaro Lebanon's independent stance is no doubt rooted in the transformation that has beset the Middle East since Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel, whose ramifications are still being felt across the region. For Lebanon, it resulted in a war that weakened Hezbollah due to two month of attacks that saw Israel establish several observation posts inside Lebanese territory at the end of 2024. Most Lebanese seem hungry for their state to ensure its sovereignty and monopoly over the use of force. But that route will not be without challenges and dangers. It could cause rifts in society if Lebanon's Shiite community feels alienated as a result of Hezbollah being disarmed. Reassuring that community is essential, but only within the framework that disarming all armed groups is the only way for Lebanon to redress its ailing state, society and political system. Those against disarming Hezbollah should be reminded that Lebanese of many denominations have tried and failed to align themselves against the interests of their country at various times in its history. Some did so for ideological reasons in the 1950s, when Nasserism was sweeping the Middle East and the country narrowly evaded a mini civil war. Others believed in sacrificing their nation state to help the Palestinians liberate their country, permitting them to bear arms. There were also those who welcomed the Syrian regime's grip on the country in the name of preventing communal strife after the 1975 to 1990 civil war. Others like Hezbollah bought into religious ideology and sanctioned resistance to Israel as promoted by Iran at the expense of the country's stability. Amid a complex geostrategic landscape and with Israel emboldened, the disarming of Hezbollah — even if it is emerging as a result of a US-designed plan — should be welcomed by all Lebanese. It offers a chance to disentangle Lebanon from the many misadventures of its various communities over the years. The call of the new president and prime minister should be heeded. Maybe then this small nation can benefit from a homegrown stability that shields it from adversity and affords its tired communities some respite and certainty after decades of discord and chaos. • Mohamed Chebaro is a British-Lebanese journalist with more than 25 years' experience covering war, terrorism, defense, current affairs and diplomacy.
