Disarming the Resistance
By Mounir Shehadeh
Lebanon – Calls to “disarm the resistance” or “hand over its weapons” have recently surged across media outlets and social platforms, echoed by officials and commentators alike. These calls coincided with blatant transgressions against sacred symbols and religious figures—violations that crossed all red lines, stirred public unrest, and affected the morale of the resistance’s supporters.
His Excellency the President is fully aware of the sensitivity and complexity of this matter. He stressed that the issue of the resistance’s arms must be approached with deliberation and dialogue, warning that any alternative could threaten civil peace. He reaffirmed that the decision to consolidate arms and authority over war and peace under the state has already been made. What remains is determining the mechanism for implementation—something that will be addressed as part of a national security strategy, to be enacted at the appropriate time.
A particular political faction in Lebanon is actively contributing to instability by making provocative statements, exploiting the “Israeli” threat as a symbolic stick—just as it did during the civil war. This faction still appears to wager on that same threat, having learned nothing from the destruction and fragmentation that such reliance brought upon Lebanon in the past.
The same faction, which claims to uphold sovereignty while living under tutelage—and at times, clear complicity with the Zionist enemy—shows little concern if “Israel” were to march into the heart of Beirut, so long as it fulfills their vendetta against the resistance and its arms. This prompted the Secretary General of Hezbollah to deliver a firm and decisive statement, rejecting any notion of disarmament. He outlined fundamental conditions: complete “Israeli” withdrawal from Lebanese territory, an end to violations and hostilities, the release of prisoners, and a serious commitment to reconstruction. Only then, he said, could the resistance consider discussing a national defense strategy.
His statement came after similar remarks by senior Hezbollah official Wafiq Safa, which reinvigorated morale among the resistance’s base following a period of disillusionment.
The Secretary General’s address sparked intense debate across media and online platforms, with supporters and critics engaging in a heated rhetorical battle.
Civil peace is a foundational pillar of the nation. Those who take its disruption lightly are playing with fire—risking chaos and destruction reminiscent of the 1975 civil war, a dark chapter in Lebanon’s history. Yet there are some who perversely view it as a badge of honor instead of a moment of shame and regret.
Let us suppose, hypothetically, that tomorrow morning the resistance decides to hand over its weapons to the state, and the Lebanese Army receives this arsenal. It would inevitably be forced to destroy these weapons within a month, since our army is prohibited from possessing deterrent arms capable of altering the balance of power. And let us suppose the resistance dissolves itself entirely.
To the advocates of disarmament, a simple question:
- Is there any guarantee of “Israeli” withdrawal or an end to its aggression?
Your answer is predictable:
- “Let the resistance disarm, and we’ll deal with the rest later.”
Or perhaps buried deep in your subconscious:
- “Who cares—just disarm them and rid us of their presence.”
This rhetoric simply hands “Israel” more justification to continue its violations, linking its aggression directly to the existence of resistance weapons.
What rational person would accept standing defenseless before a Zionist enemy that has time and again shown disregard for international law, treaties, or commitments—an enemy unchecked even by major world powers?
Of course, everyone aspires to live in a sovereign, dignified nation with a strong national army solely responsible for defense. But how can that be achieved when the Lebanese Army is denied access to effective deterrent weaponry? How can this be expected when we are confronted by a brutal, expansionist enemy, backed by global tyrants and protected in international forums, committing massacres with total impunity under the false banner of “self-defense”?
We now live in a world governed by the law of the jungle—a world consumed by moral decay. A world led by unhinged rulers with no restraints, and populated by submissive opportunists who hide behind slogans of pacifism and civility while serving ruthless masters.
Dignity and honor are earned through blood and sacrifice—concepts incomprehensible to those who never possessed them.
