The American Recipe for Lebanon’s Destruction
By Ihab Shawqi
Lebanon – When the Resistance described the American role in the existential struggle with the Zionists as a leadership role rather than a mediatory one—and emphasized that the aggression is fundamentally American—it did so with full awareness of the nature of the American role: one that is indifferent to Lebanon’s destruction or to dragging it once again into civil war for the sake of achieving American geopolitical interests. This role operates through an “Israeli” façade, wherein the entity functions as a spearhead for American colonialism and hegemony.
American practices in the region took on a new form with Trump’s rise to power in Washington, although they essentially remained a continuation of traditional policy in terms of substance and essence. This path has been marked by a shameless and overt unveiling of plans and conspiracies that contradict international law and norms.
In Lebanon, American audacity became most evident in the meetings of Trump administration envoy Morgan Ortagus with Lebanese officials, where she provocatively wore a necklace bearing the Zionist “Star of David.” Ortagus frequently made public statements about disarming the Resistance, despite being fully aware of the sensitivity and seriousness of this issue—an issue strictly off-limits to external interference, and one that must remain within the domain of internal dialogue, based on specific conditions and considerations relating to the national defense strategy. This is particularly important in light of Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sheikh Naim Qassem’s clear assertion that the Resistance’s weapons are a red line.
In fact, Ortagus’s remarks serve as a public front for recommendations made by American Zionist groups, foremost among them the “Vandenberg Coalition,” whose policy proposals to the Trump administration appear to have been faithfully implemented.
David Schenker, one of the most prominent American Zionists—who has shaped his political career as both a diplomat and a writer specializing in strategic affairs—has likewise used his platform to incite against the Resistance, particularly Hezbollah.
At this point, it is essential to shed light on the “Vandenberg Coalition” and its recommendations, which form the blueprint for Lebanon’s destruction. These align closely with Schenker’s vision and are supported by developments on the ground, most notably the ongoing “Israeli” aggression against Lebanon, particularly the recent escalation targeting the southern suburbs.
The “Vandenberg Coalition”
This coalition, founded and headed by Elliott Abrams shortly after the Biden administration took office, consists of 75 former officials and experts—Republicans or politically unaffiliated, but notably devoid of Democratic Party figures. Abrams himself is a prominent neoconservative, and the coalition includes figures close to the “Israeli” Likud Party, such as members of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, along with others funded by arms manufacturers.
The coalition released a 16-page document titled “Deals of the Century: Solving the Middle East,” outlining comprehensive policy recommendations to the Trump administration. The document urged Washington to utilize all tools of American power to prevent Iran—described as “the greatest threat to American interests in the Middle East and the source of most security problems in the region”—from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
The report describes “Israel” as America’s key ally in the region and calls on Washington to supply it with all necessary weaponry to win wars and prevent broader escalation. It also recommends maintaining a US military presence in Iraq and Syria and suspending all aid to the Lebanese Army “until it proves its readiness to stand up to Hezbollah”.
With regard to Lebanon, the document contains a particularly dangerous passage—one that appears to be in active implementation, especially by Ortagus, who seems to be enforcing its provisions. The Vandenberg report provocatively states:
“Iran-backed Hezbollah is entrenched in crucial aspects of Lebanese society and government, using this power in its efforts to destabilize ‘Israel’ and impose Iranian influence across the Middle East and beyond. The US policy should treat Lebanon as a state captive to Iran unless Hezbollah’s grip weakens.”
It continues:
“The election of a new president, blocked by Hezbollah for two years, indicates hope that the Lebanese state can assert itself and regain its sovereignty from Hezbollah and Iran. However, this hope will only become a reality if the US maintains a firm and strict policy against the influence of Hezbollah and Iran.”
The report further recommends:
“America should reassess the requirements for funding the Lebanese Armed Forces and impose stricter conditions to ensure complete independence from Hezbollah. Until then, the US should suspend all funding to the Lebanese Armed Forces, hoping that ‘Israel’s’ weakening of Hezbollah will encourage the army to assert its independence very soon.”
All of this must be viewed within the broader framework of US-“Israeli” coordination, evident in their ongoing violations of the ceasefire and the third assault on the southern suburbs. These are all part of a strategy to pressure Hezbollah into a precarious position: either respond and risk clashing with the state and army, or remain silent, thereby appearing weak and giving momentum to calls for disarmament and sowing division.
David Schenker’s Recipe for Destruction
David Schenker served as the US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs in 2019, under the first Trump administration. During his tenure, he made provocative visits to Lebanon targeting the Resistance’s weapons—mirroring the role now played by Ortagus.
Schenker also served as Senior Advisor to the Deputy Assistant War Secretary for affairs related to Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, “Israel” and Palestine. Notably, as far back as 2010, Schenker had proposed suspending US military aid to Lebanon because of Hezbollah.
Most recently, Schenker published an article at the Washington Institute titled “There Is No Better Time to Disarm Hezbollah,” in which he urges action against the Resistance, claiming that Hezbollah and Iran are “in their weakest state.”
In the article, he argues for seizing the moment, regardless of the consequences:
“There is no doubt that Hezbollah will try to delay and procrastinate on disarming, hoping to preserve its remaining capabilities. If the government insists on its stance and expands its efforts against Hezbollah, violent clashes could erupt. However, despite the risks, the current moment may be the most suitable opportunity to disarm Hezbollah—whether with or without its consent.”
This highlights the immense American and Zionist pressure being exerted, both overtly and behind the scenes, and underscores the deliberate push toward civil discord.
The state now bears the responsibility to confront the US—even if that means persuading it that the Resistance is serious about its red lines, and that strategic patience must not be mistaken for weakness. There is only one path to stability: the withdrawal of “Israel” and allowing the Lebanese people and their political forces to independently chart their own future and agree on a national defense strategy—far from the American recipe for destruction and the Zionist agenda that reinforces it.
