Lebanon’s Presidents and Hezbollah: Three Decades of Shifting Positions

For more than three decades, Lebanon’s presidents have adjusted their approach to Hezbollah and its weapons as the country’s internal balance of power and regional circumstances changed. The decisive break came when Hezbollah’s arsenal escaped the disarmament applied to other militias from Lebanon’s civil war, justified by its role in resisting Israel’s occupation of southern Lebanon.

That exemption represented the first clear breach of the Taif Agreement, which called for all wartime militias to dissolve and disarm. Under the presidency of Elias Hrawi, Lebanon could not treat Hezbollah on the same footing as the groups that were dismantled. Syrian tutelage, working with Iran to direct Lebanon’s political decisions, had recast Hezbollah from a militia into a resistance force.

“

The Israeli occupation of part of southern Lebanon and Syria’s control over the internal political game imposed a distinction between Hezbollah and the other Lebanese militias that existed during the civil war.

The arrangement survived Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon on May 25, 2000. Hezbollah then remained both a political and military actor, with capabilities that exceeded those of Lebanon’s state institutions. When army commander Emile Lahoud became president in October 1998 with Syrian backing, Hezbollah’s influence inside the state grew, particularly after the Israeli withdrawal. The formula of “army, people and resistance” became embedded in the ministerial statements of successive governments, especially after Israel’s 2006 war with Lebanon.

“

led to Hezbollah being elevated from the status of a militia to that of a resistance force, while the other militias were dissolved and disarmed.

Fares Saeed, a former lawmaker and head of the Saydet al-Jabal Gathering, says the distinction arose from two forces: Israel’s occupation of part of southern Lebanon and Syria’s control of the country’s internal political process. Those circumstances, he argues, elevated Hezbollah while the other militias were dissolved and disarmed.

Saeed also points to a shift after Israel’s withdrawal, which coincided with the death of Syrian President Hafez al-Assad in June 2000. The Maronite Council of Bishops, led by the late Patriarch Nasrallah Boutros Sfeir, then called more forcefully for Syrian troops to leave Lebanon. Saeed describes the position as historic and courageous, arguing that Israel’s withdrawal raised a direct question: why should Syrian forces remain?

“

This historic and courageous position was based on a clear logic. Since Israel had withdrawn from southern Lebanon, why should