
Hezbollah 'divided' over whether to scale back its arsenal amid US pressure to disarm
The Lebanese group, which is under mounting US pressure and daily Israeli strikes, is internally divided over whether to scale back its arsenal, an informed source close to the matter told The National. The "carrot and stick" US plan could bring reconstruction funds and an end to Israel 's attacks.
The increased US pressure on Hezbollah comes amid a major political shift in the Middle East, which has resulted in Iran 's proxies being significantly weakened since the Hamas-led attacks in Israel on October 7, 2023. Israel's devastating war on Gaza prompted many of these proxies to launch their own attacks against Israel.
On October 8, 2023, in support of its ally, Hamas, Hezbollah initiated tit-for-tat exchanges along the Lebanon-Israel border, which Israel later escalated into a full-scale war. The conflict ended in November, leaving Hezbollah, once Iran's most prized asset, significantly weakened, with much of its arsenal destroyed and parts of its leadership decimated. Hezbollah's disarmament, once considered a political taboo, is now on the table.
In June, Mr Barrack, the US special envoy to Syria and ambassador to Turkey, sent a roadmap to Lebanese authorities calling on Hezbollah to relinquish its weapons across the country within a few months, in exchange for financial support and a halt of continuing Israeli military operations.
"Lebanon's hope awakens!!! The opportunity is now. This is a historic moment to supersede the strained confessionalism of the past," M Barrack wrote on X ahead of his visit.
Hezbollah has been holding clandestine talks to decide on its future, Reuters reported on Friday. Still, observers have raised concerns about the US pressure tactics, stressing that Hezbollah's weapons remain a highly sensitive issue in a deeply fractured country, where the group continues to enjoy broad popular support.
'Carrot and stick'
Mr Barrack's roadmap calls for a rapid disarmament of the group in return for the release of much-needed reconstruction funds for the war-ravaged country. It also calls for Israel's withdrawal from five occupied border points it seized in October during its aerial campaign in Lebanon, and a halt to Israeli military operations, according to the source.
Mr Barrack described this approach to disarming Hezbollah as 'a carrot and a stick' in an interview with The New York Times.
Under the terms of the ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel, brokered by the US and France, all armed groups in Lebanon must give up their weapons, starting from the south of the Litani River, which lies 30km from the Lebanon-Israel border. In return, Israel must withdraw from the areas in south Lebanon it seized during the war and halt its violations of Lebanese airspace.
Lebanese authorities said they have dismantled almost all of Hezbollah's infrastructure near the border with Israel since the ceasefire. But despite this progress, Israel has continued to carry out air strikes, saying it is targeting Hezbollah and accusing the group of violating the truce, which Hezbollah denies.
Lebanese authorities say Israel has violated the truce more than 3,000 times. Israeli bombardments since the ceasefire have killed least 71 civilians, according to the UN.
The US-backed Lebanese President Joseph Aoun has pledged to establish a state monopoly on weapons, while emphasising that this should be achieved through dialogue with Hezbollah, not by force. Hezbollah retains strong support within parts of the Shiite community, many of whom rely heavily on its social services in the absence of a functioning state.
On Sunday, Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem said the group was ready for peace and dialogue on the one hand, but "confrontation" on the other should such circumstances arise. "We are a people who do not submit, we will not give up our rights and dignity," he stated.
Mr Qassem said the group remained steadfast, despite the threat from Israel and others. "This threat will not make us accept surrender," he said. 'How can we confront Israel when it attacks us if we didn't have them?" he asked, in reference to the pressure for the group to hand over its weapons.
"Who is preventing Israel from entering villages and landing and killing young people, women and children inside their homes unless there is a resistance with certain capabilities capable of minimal defense?'
Observers have cautioned that dismantling the group without considering local dynamics could further destabilise Lebanon. But 'for Washington, the internal complexities Lebanon faces in attempting to disarm Hezbollah are secondary; the focus is on safeguarding Israel', the source said.
Mr Barrack's stance aligns with that of Morgan Ortagus, the former official who oversaw the Trump administration's Lebanon portfolio and is known for her pro-Israel position. 'The US's primary concern is state monopoly on weapons and, above all, the security of Israel,' the source added.
The position is motivated by a desire to avoid a repeat of the 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel, which ended with UN Security Council Resolution 1701, calling for the disarmament of the group. However, Hezbollah began rebuilding its arsenal soon after. 'It still haunts Israelis,' the source said.
Today, the situation is drastically different. Hezbollah is grappling with acute financial strain, a decimated chain of command, and severed supply routes following the ousting of its ally Bashar Al Assad in Syria, all amid broader regional shifts in the balance of power.
Western diplomats have previously told The National that the intense pressure placed on the new Lebanese government, embraced by international powers, and marked by a significant decline in Hezbollah's political influence could jeopardise its stability.
The US pressure tactics could also backfire, the source warned. 'There's a risk Hezbollah could feel cornered and respond defensively,' the source said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian says Israel tried to assassinate him
Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian told US conservative broadcaster Tucker Carlson in an interview released on Monday that Israel attempted to assassinate him. While most of the interview was fairly straightforward, with Pezeshkian giving unsurprising responses to the former Fox News commentator's questions, Pezeshkian did say that he was not "afraid of sacrificing" his soul for Iran. "They did try, yes. They acted accordingly, but they failed," he told Carlson in response to a question on whether he believed Israel had tried to kill him. Pezeshkian did not specify when the assassination attempt took place, saying only that it was during "a meeting". 'I was in a meeting... they tried to bombard the area in which we were holding that meeting," he continued. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters 'I am not afraid of sacrificing my soul in defence of my country... None of the government officials are afraid of losing their lives in the line of defence. But will… more bloodshed and killing bring peace and tranquillity and stability to the region?' he added. Multiple times throughout the interview, conducted in both English and Farsi, Pezeshkian said that Iran wants peace, not war, and that the Islamic Republic was still willing to engage in talks with the United States. 'We have never been after' a nuclear bomb Pezeshkian said Iran had never sought to build a nuclear bomb. 'The truth is that we have never been after developing a nuclear bomb - not in the past, not presently, or in the future - because this is wrong and is in contrast to the religious decree issued by the supreme leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran,' he said. 'It is religiously forbidden for us to go after a nuclear bomb, and this was always corroborated, thanks to our cooperation with IAEA because they were always there to verify this'. When asked by Carlson about how much uranium Iran was enriching, Pezeshkian did not directly answer but said Iran was 'ready to hold talks over it' and have supervision. He reminded Carlson that Iran had been 'sitting at the negotiating table' with the US when Israel 'destroyed' diplomatic negotiations by launching unprovoked attacks on 13 June. No trust Pezeshkian said Iran had "no problem" restarting nuclear talks with the US, but said they had lost trust in the country, given what had happened over the last few weeks. "We see no problem in re-entering the negotiations," he told Carlson. "There is a condition... for restarting the talks. How are we going to trust the United States again? How can we know for sure that in the middle of the talks, the Israeli regime will not be given the permission again to attack us? 'My proposal is that the US administration should refrain from getting involved in a war that is not America's war. It is Netanyahu's war. He has its own agenda…and that is having forever wars, wars that go on and on and on'. Pezeshkian said that his end goal was peace, and he believed that Iran could 'easily resolve our differences and conflicts with the US through dialogue and talks'. 'We have always been after peace. It is been my heartfelt opinion that we need to live in peace and harmony during this short and limited time granted to us by god almighty to live in peace and tranquility with everybody'. He said that Iran had not waged war on anybody in the last 200 years, but only had wars imposed on it, referring to the recent conflict with Israel and the war with Iraq in the 1980s. Trump could 'guide' Mena Regarding Trump, he said he believed the US president could 'guide' the region and the world to peace and was powerful enough to put Israel in its place, adding that if he did not, another war would only spread more instability in the Middle East, which was not in the interests of the US government. When asked by Carlson if he believed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was passing information to Israel, Pezeshkian said there was a "lack of trust". 'There is lack of trust as a result of the last report by IAEA and the type of the reports. The way they prepared the reports somehow gave an excuse to the Israeli regime to prepare the ground for [the] unlawful and unauthorised attack against our nuclear facilities. Even after that, the IAEA failed to condemn these attacks or try to [in] any way to stop them'. 'There is real fear': How Israel's attack on Iran enabled an assault on press freedoms Read More » Pezeshkian told Carlson that Iran would not draw on military support from allies Russia and China, saying, 'In God we trust. We are capable of defending ourselves and standing on our own two feet'. Carlson acknowledged he would be criticised for interviewing the Iranian president. In a video over the weekend, he defended the move, saying, "American citizens have the constitutional right, and the God-given right, to all the information they can gather about matters that affect them,' including 'hearing from the people they're fighting'. The interview follows the US's military attacks on Iran's nuclear sites at the end of June. President Donald Trump's decision to support Israel's war on Iran sparked widespread criticism, including from his own "Make America Great Again" base, who are opposed to another "forever war" in the Middle East. In recent weeks, Carlson has been an outspoken critic of the Trump administration's decision to strike Iran's nuclear facilities. In an interview of Senator Ted Cruz that went viral prior to the US first attacking Iran on 13 June, Carlson accused Cruz of not knowing "anything" about the country.


Middle East Eye
2 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Iran's Pezeshkian tells Tucker Carlson Israel tried to assassinate him, ready for nuclear talks with US
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian told US conservative broadcaster Tucker Carlson in an interview released on Monday that Israel had attempted to assassinate him. While most of the interview was fairly straightforward, with Pezeshkian giving unsurprising responses to the former Fox News commentator's questions, Pezeshkian did say that he was not "afraid of sacrificing" his soul for Iran. "They did try, yes. They acted accordingly, but they failed," he told Carlson in response to a question on whether he believed Israel had tried to kill him. Peseshkian did not specify when the assassination attempt took place, saying only that it was during "a meeting". 'I was in a meeting... they tried to bombard the area in which we were holding that meeting," he continued. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters 'I am not afraid of sacrificing my soul in defence of my country... None of the government officials are afraid of losing their lives in the line of defence. But will… more bloodshed and killing bring peace and tranquillity and stability to the region?' he added. Multiple times throughout the interview, conducted in both English and Farsi, Pezeshkian said that Iran wants peace, not war, and that the Islamic Republic was still willing to engage in talks with the United States. 'We have never been after' a nuclear bomb Pezeshkian said Iran had never sought to build a nuclear bomb. 'The truth is that we have never been after developing a nuclear bomb - not in the past, not presently, or in the future - because this is wrong and is in contrast to the religious decree issued by the supreme leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran,' he said. 'It is religiously forbidden for us to go after a nuclear bomb, and this was always corroborated, thanks to our cooperation with IAEA because they were always there to verify this'. When asked by Carlson about how much uranium Iran was enriching, Pezeshkian did not directly answer but said Iran was 'ready to hold talks over it' and have supervision. He reminded Carlson that Iran had been 'sitting at the negotiating table' with the US when Israel 'destroyed' diplomatic negotiations by launching unprovoked attacks on 13 June. No trust Pezeshkian said Iran had "no problem" restarting nuclear talks with the US, but said they had lost trust in the country, given what had happened over the last few weeks. "We see no problem in re-entering the negotiations," he told Carlson. "There is a condition... for restarting the talks. How are we going to trust the United States again? How can we know for sure that in the middle of the talks, the Israeli regime will not be given the permission again to attack us? 'My proposal is that the US administration should refrain from getting involved in a war that is not America's war. It is Netanyahu's war. He has its own agenda…and that is having forever wars, wars that go on and on and on'. Pezeshkian said that his end goal was peace, and he believed that Iran could 'easily resolve our differences and conflicts with the US through dialogue and talks'. 'We have always been after peace. It is been my heartfelt opinion that we need to live in peace and harmony during this short and limited time granted to us by god almighty to live in peace and tranquility with everybody'. He said that Iran had not waged war on anybody in the last 200 years, but only had wars imposed on it, referring to the recent conflict with Israel and the war with Iraq in the 1980s. Trump could 'guide' Mena Regarding Trump, he said he believed the US president could 'guide' the region and the world to peace and was powerful enough to put Israel in its place, adding that if he did not, another war would only spread more instability in the Middle East, which was not in the interests of the US government. When asked by Carlson if he believed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was passing information to Israel, Pezeshkian said there was a "lack of trust". 'There is lack of trust as a result of the last report by IAEA and the type of the reports. The way they prepared the reports somehow gave an excuse to the Israeli regime to prepare the ground for [the] unlawful and unauthorised attack against our nuclear facilities. Even after that, the IAEA failed to condemn these attacks or try to [in] any way to stop them'. 'There is real fear': How Israel's attack on Iran enabled an assault on press freedoms Read More » Pezeshkian told Carlson that Iran would not draw on military support from allies Russia and China, saying, 'In God we trust. We are capable of defending ourselves and standing on our own two feet'. Carlson acknowledged he would be criticised for interviewing the Iranian president. In a video over the weekend, he defended the move, saying, "American citizens have the constitutional right, and the God-given right, to all the information they can gather about matters that affect them,' including 'hearing from the people they're fighting'. The interview follows the US's military attacks on Iran's nuclear sites at the end of June. President Donald Trump's decision to support Israel's war on Iran sparked widespread criticism, including from his own "Make America Great Again" base, who are opposed to another "forever war" in the Middle East. In recent weeks, Carlson has been an outspoken critic of the Trump administration's decision to strike Iran's nuclear facilities. In an interview of Senator Ted Cruz that went viral prior to the US first attacking Iran on 13 June, Carlson accused Cruz of not knowing "anything" about the country.


Middle East Eye
2 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Britain once jailed suffragettes. Now it jails Palestine activists
On a quiet Saturday in London, beneath the statue of Gandhi in Parliament Square, police arrested 83-year-old Reverend Sue Parfitt. Her crime? Holding a placard that read: 'I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.' She smiled as they took her away - dignified, calm, unafraid. She was one of more than two dozen people arrested that day - many of them women and elderly, most carrying nothing but banners and conscience. Their 'offence' was to stand in solidarity with Palestine Action, the group newly branded a terrorist organisation by the British government, despite never having harmed a single person. Its methods? Spray paint, red dye, road blockades - all part of a non-violent campaign to end Britain's role in arming Israel's destruction of Gaza. The irony is almost unbearable: this proscription was ordered by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and backed overwhelmingly in parliament on the very anniversary of women in Britain winning the right to vote. Most female MPs voted to criminalise Palestine Action - and many of them later smiled for photos celebrating the suffragette legacy of militant resistance. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters That legacy wasn't meek. The Women's Social and Political Union, led by Emmeline Pankhurst, planted bombs. They disrupted postal services, set fire to public buildings and politicians' homes, smashed windows, handcuffed themselves to railings, attacked Church of England buildings, and vandalised golf courses and male-only clubs. They disrupted political meetings, broke the law, and starved themselves in protest. Silencing dissent Palestine Action has never come close to such tactics. And yet today, it is labelled a terrorist threat. As Baron Peter Hain put it: 'Palestine Action members spraying paint on military aircraft at Brize Norton seems positively moderate by comparison [to the suffragettes' actions].' But while most female MPs today celebrate the suffragettes in words, they vote to criminalise their spirit in action. One of the few exceptions is Baroness Jenny Jones, a Green peer who has been outspoken in her defence of Palestine Action and searing in her condemnation of Britain's complicity. She is everything the suffragette legacy demands: principled, defiant, willing to speak uncomfortable truths in a chamber soaked in political cowardice. She stands with those resisting oppression - not those funding it. UK arrests 83-year-old priest for backing Palestine Action and opposing Gaza genocide Read More » She is the type of female legislator who was in Pankhurst's mind when she spoke at one of her trials: 'We are here, not because we are law-breakers; we are here in our efforts to become law-makers.' And it is no surprise that while the likes of Cooper target campaigners - including women such as Parfitt and the cofounder of Palestine Action, Huda Ammori - Jones calls out the state's duplicity: the criminalisation of protest, the arming of apartheid, the silencing of dissent. As she put it in parliament: 'If you want Palestine Action to disappear, then stop sending arms to Israel and giving military support to a foreign government engaged in ethnic cleansing.' This isn't just hypocrisy. It's a violent moral inversion. At the same protest on Saturday stood a Welsh nurse who only weeks ago was at the Rafah border pleading with Egyptian security forces to let him through into Gaza to facilitate aid delivery. Now back in the UK, he continues to protest - heartbroken, undeterred. This is the face of the movement: ordinary people moved by the extraordinary obscenity of genocide, and by the complicity of their own governments in enabling it. Growing movement Just a week earlier, punk duo Bob Vylan sent shockwaves through Glastonbury by chanting 'Death to the IDF' on stage, referencing the Israeli army. The words were echoed by thousands and broadcast live on the BBC. Palestine was everywhere at the festival - in lyrics, on flags, spoken from the stage. The crowds cheered. The establishment panicked. Prime Minister Keir Starmer rushed to condemn the chant, and even the White House weighed in. What the same western political establishment has failed to condemn, of course, are the crimes giving rise to those chants: the bombs dropped on hospitals, mass starvation, and body parts in rubble. Follow Middle East Eye's live coverage of the Israel-Palestine war Two days later, London's high court ruled it lawful for the UK to supply parts for F-35 fighter jets - the very aircraft used to flatten Gaza. The message was unmistakable: chanting against genocide perpetrators is a scandal. Arming a genocidal army is lawful. Yet despite every effort to suffocate the pro-Palestine movement - police vans, proscription orders, media blackouts - it is only growing. A long-suppressed BBC documentary on Palestinian medics, which the broadcaster delayed and ultimately dropped, was finally aired by Channel 4. It showed in harrowing detail the systematic targeting of doctors and hospitals by Israeli forces. As commentator Gary Lineker said: 'The BBC should hang its head in shame.' The people are already ahead of their leaders. And sooner or later, the leaders will follow - whether they want to or not Meanwhile, Haaretz, Israel's own paper of record, published testimonies from Israeli soldiers describing how they were ordered to shoot starving Palestinians gathered for food. Not militants - children, parents, civilians. The body count in Gaza now exceeds 56,000. And Britain is arresting the people trying to stop it. But the tide is turning. Public opinion is not just shifting; it is collapsing around the western establishment. In the UK, net favourability towards Israel is now at -46. Nearly half of Britons believe Israel is committing genocide, while a majority support the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Across Europe, it's the same, with net favourability towards Israel at -44 in Germany, -48 in France, -54 in Denmark, -52 in Italy and -55 in Spain. In the US, the shift is also stark. A Pew poll conducted in March found that 53 percent of Americans now view Israel unfavourably, a rise of more than 10 percentage points from three years ago. A Reuters/Ipsos poll found that four in 10 Americans now believe Israel's problems are 'none of our business.' Unstoppable shift The battle to liberate Palestine is no longer being fought solely in Gaza or the occupied West Bank. It is being waged just as critically in the heart of the western world: between an increasingly awakened public and an establishment determined to suppress it. The Israeli project is not a self-contained national affair. It is, at its core, a western colonial enterprise. And the last two years have exposed how deeply its survival depends on the political and military sponsorship of western governments - above all, the United States. This is why the frontline now runs through London, Paris, Berlin and Washington - through parliaments, universities, media outlets and courtrooms. It is a battle for moral authority, a contest between power and truth. And its outcome will shape the fate of Palestine. But history teaches us something else too: that the most transformative struggles - from the abolition of slavery and women's suffrage, to the civil rights movement - were won not because the powerful saw the light, but because the public made them feel the heat. And that public pressure, relentless and sustained, forced open doors long held shut. So it will be with Palestine. The people are already ahead of their leaders. And sooner or later, the leaders will follow - whether they want to or not. Public opinion will, in time, impose its will on those in power. It may take years. It may come slowly. But this shift is already underway, and it is unstoppable. History is watching. And when Palestine is finally free - as it will be - the names remembered won't be those who armed Israel with bombs. It will be the ones they tried to silence. The ones they arrested. The ones who marched. The ones who healed. The ones like Reverend Sue Parfitt, who smiled as they took her away. The ones like Baroness Jenny Jones, who refused to betray what justice means. We will remember who stood on the side of freedom - and who stood in its way. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.