Salam’s “containment” of Hezbollah’s arms sparks controversy

Lebanon is at a critical juncture in its struggle to assert state authority over armed groups within its territory.

Prime Minister Nawaf Salame recently delivered a clear and direct message regarding Hezbollah’s weapons, emphasizing the government’s commitment to enforcing sovereignty while criticizing the longstanding narrative that these arms provide protection or deterrence.

Simultaneously, many viewed that Salam’s wording was somewhat vague, resurfacing past appeasement methods which previous governments resorted to.

Challenging the weapons narrative

In a bold address to the Press Club’s administrative board, Salam made it clear that Lebanon has fulfilled its governmental duties to contain armed groups, and that any delay in disarmament lies with the parties refusing to comply with international resolutions.

He questioned Hezbollah’s claim that its arsenal deters enemy attacks, asking pointedly whether these weapons could respond to ongoing Israeli threats. “This arsenal has neither protected party leaders nor safeguarded Lebanese citizens and their property,” Salam said, citing the devastation of numerous villages during past conflicts.

The Prime Minister also addressed perceived delays in disarmament measures, distinguishing between deliberate stalling and operational limitations of the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF). He emphasized that slow progress often reflects capacity constraints rather than negligence, stressing the importance of supporting the military rather than assigning blame unfairly.

A phased plan for disarmament and sovereignty

Salam outlined a clear roadmap for disarmament, stating that the first phase, focused on southern Lebanon south of the Litani River, should conclude by the end of the year. This stage targets the removal of weapons and military infrastructure, while the northern Litani region currently follows a “containment” strategy, preventing the transfer or use of arms until broader measures can be implemented.

The word “containment” differs from disarmament. As explained, it entails that Hezbollah would its arms in north of the Litani River (for the meantime, as disarmament would follow later) instead of achieving complete and immediate monopoly of arms in the hands of the legitimate authorities. Such statement recalls what previous Lebanese governments (the so-called “national unity” cabinets) relied on to either justify Hezbollah’s military presence or to merely avoid addressing this pressing issue.

Moreover, Salam stressed that Lebanon is facing a one-sided war of attrition, and that regional and international mediators should not need to sound warnings for the country. While acknowledging Hezbollah’s past role in southern Lebanon, he asserted that the modern imperative is enforcing national sovereignty and complying with international law.