Hezbollah escalated its response to Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam over plans to press ahead with restricting weapons to the state and extending the move to areas north of the Litani River, raising the specter of civil war as tensions over the issue intensify.
Mahmoud Qamati, vice president of Hezbollah’s political council, said in a televised interview that statements by the president and prime minister on confining weapons north of the Litani meant the government was heading toward chaos and instability, and toward an internal situation that no one would accept, possibly even a civil war.
The government last week tasked the Lebanese army commander, during a cabinet session, with preparing a plan to restrict weapons north of the Litani, after announcing that the objectives of the first phase of the plan to confine arms to the state south of the river had been achieved.
Qamati’s Position
Hezbollah says that before any discussion begins on the fate of its weapons outside the area south of the river, Israel must stop violating Lebanese sovereignty, withdraw from points it occupies, and release prisoners.
Qamati said on Tuesday that some parties were insisting on implementing foreign dictates and offering concessions to Israel for free and without any return.
He added that the army’s role was not to protect Israel from any military action from Lebanon, but to confront Israel, which he said occupies Lebanese territory.
Accusing some members of the government of collusion to implement a US-Israeli plan for personal calculations, Qamati called for a return to reason, wisdom, and “Lebanese-Lebanese dialogue”.
War Against Whom?
Lebanese Industry Minister Joe Issa El-Khoury expressed surprise at Hezbollah’s threat of a civil war, asking between whom such a war would take place, between an illegitimate armed group and the legitimate army.
Civil wars, he said, usually erupt between illegitimate armed groups, warning that if Hezbollah did not hand over its weapons, other unarmed groups might rearm on the grounds that the army was unable to protect them.
Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, El-Khoury said it was unacceptable for one group alone to be armed to fight Israel, adding that Lebanon either builds a state together or looks for other projects. While the region was moving forward with strong momentum, he said, Lebanon was moving backward.
El-Khoury said the army’s forthcoming plan to restrict weapons north of the Litani should not include multiple phases, but rather a single phase running until the end of March.
He stressed that linking implementation to the army’s capabilities and resources was misplaced.
He recalled that the strongest militia after the civil war was the Lebanese Forces, which later committed to building the state and handed over its weapons to the army, thereby eliminating the need for army deployment in areas where the group had been present.
That, he said, was what should happen today with Hezbollah.
Party Warning
Sources familiar with Hezbollah’s internal thinking told Asharq Al-Awsat that the group did not want a clash with the army, and that the army did not intend to seize weapons by force.
The warning issued by Qamati, they said, was directed at political forces pushing for disarmament by force. The sources added that the current moves were an attempt to create the right conditions to reach a consensus solution to the issue.
Remarks by Rajji
Hezbollah’s veiled threats of civil war coincided with a fierce campaign by lawmakers from the Shiite duo, Amal and Hezbollah, against Lebanese Foreign Minister Youssef Rajji.
In a televised interview, Rajji said that the ceasefire declaration approved by the government provided for Hezbollah’s weapons to be confined in return for a halt to Israeli attacks, and that as long as the weapons were not fully confined, Israel, unfortunately, had the right to continue its attacks.
Hezbollah lawmaker Ali Ammar described the remarks as dangerous, saying they required a clear and firm stance from the president and prime minister, as well as a halt to such statements, which he said inflamed internal divisions and served only to benefit the enemy.
Qassem Hashem, a member of the Development and Liberation bloc, said Rajji’s comments went beyond impropriety to justifying Israeli aggression against Lebanon, calling it a violation of sovereignty and a blow to national dignity.
He said the remarks should not pass without accountability in cabinet, and that in a fully sovereign state, the minister would be dismissed.
Another lawmaker from the bloc, Mohammed Khawaja, asked the president and prime minister whether Rajji was truly Lebanon’s foreign minister, accusing him of focusing on finding justifications for Israel.
In response, El-Khoury told Asharq Al-Awsat that Rajji’s remarks reflected the government’s position, not a personal view.
He said the agreement approved by Hezbollah listed the parties authorized to carry weapons and did not include Hezbollah, meaning that the group’s insistence on keeping its arms constituted a breach of the agreement and provided Israel with a pretext to refuse to implement its provisions.
