Lebanon's uncomfortable position amid smouldering US-Iran tensions

For months, friction between the United States and Iran has been building, with the prospect of a major military confrontation casting a shadow over the region. The most recent round of bilateral talks in Geneva concluded this week, with mediating Oman claiming that “significant progress” had been achieved, though few specifics were disclosed. All the while Washington continues carrying out its largest military buildup in the Middle East in two decades, positioning aircraft carriers such as the USS Gerald R. Ford and the USS Abraham Lincoln closer to Iran.

While governments across the region — ranging all the way from the South Caucasus down to the states of the Persian Gulf — broadly oppose the outbreak of war, Lebanon finds itself in a particularly delicate position due to its internal political balance.

Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has repeatedly emphasized that Beirut will stay out of external conflicts, urging Hezbollah earlier this month not to drag the country into “another adventure,” a statement that underscores the militant group’s influence over the country's trajectory.

In January, Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem declared that any US strike on Iran would amount to an attack on Hezbollah itself. Yet earlier this week, another Hezbollah official told AFP that the group would regard only a direct attack on Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, as a “red line”.

Despite this apparent shift in rhetoric, Burcu Ozcelik, senior research fellow for Middle East security at the Royal United Services Institute, told Deutsche Welle that Tehran would likely expect Hezbollah to play a role if a US–Iran conflict were to erupt, “most plausibly by pressuring Israel.” At the same time, she noted that Hezbollah is operating in an increasingly complex domestic environment.

"Integrationist pressure by Lebanon's President Joseph Aoun, and the organization's stake in Lebanon's political future as a national actor, raise the costs of a major, open-ended war," Ozcelik said.

Israel, Washington’s biggest regional ally, has meanwhile warned Beirut that it would respond forcefully — including by targeting civilian infrastructure — if Hezbollah intervenes in a US–Iran confrontation. Two Lebanese officials confirmed this warning earlier in the week, as the article recalls.

Hezbollah, whose armed wing is designated a terrorist organization by multiple countries, including the US and Germany, began launching attacks on Israel in support of Hamas a day after Hamas’ devastating October 7, 2023 attack on Israel.

In November 2024, a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah brought an end to 11 months of cross-border clashes and two months of full-scale fighting. During that period, Israel eliminated much of Hezbollah’s senior leadership and destroyed significant portions of its infrastructure and weapons stockpiles, with the DW noting that large swaths of southern Lebanon and parts of Beirut were devastated. Roughly 4,000 people were killed, and the World Bank estimates reconstruction costs at about $11 billion.

Although the ceasefire agreement called for Hezbollah’s disarmament, the group has so far relinquished weapons only south of the Litani River, which forms a minor part of the country. It continues to reject full disarmament, arguing that it must retain the capacity to defend Lebanon against ongoing Israeli strikes and what Hezbollah views as a military occupation of five positions along the border by Israeli forces.

Iran’s grip over Hezbollah

Israel, for its part, has maintained that it will continue targeting Hezbollah as long as the group presents a threat. As part of the Iran-led “Axis of Resistance” — which also includes Hamas in Gaza, the Houthis in Yemen, and various Iraqi paramilitary factions — Hezbollah regards both the United States and Israel as adversaries.

Ozcelik suggested that if tensions between Washington and Tehran intensify, Hezbollah could opt for a symbolic level of involvement. 

"This could be a limited, carefully calibrated set of attacks against Israeli targets designed to show solidarity and satisfy Tehran, while staying below a threshold that would trigger massive Israeli retaliation," she said, noting that shifting dynamics or direct Israeli actions could prompt a different response.

The US-based Institute for the Study of War warned in a report this week that delays in disarming Hezbollah may complicate the process, as the group continues efforts to rebuild its capabilities. 

Mohanad Hage Ali, deputy director for research at the Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut, countered that Hezbollah remains significantly weaker than before the war.

"The group is much weaker and more fragmented, which makes decision-making also more fragmented," he said, as cited by DW.

While Hezbollah’s military wing remains firmly opposed to disarmament, its political wing — which holds substantial representation in parliament and operates an extensive network of hospitals and social services — appears more willing to engage in discussions on the issue, he noted.

By Nazrin Sadigova