The November 2024 ceasefire between Hizbollah and Israel ended 14 months of conflict but left Lebanon in a tense political state. Calls for Hizbollah’s disarmament complicate the recovery process as social tensions persist. Effective governance and international support are crucial for stability as Lebanon seeks to navigate its post-war challenges.
In November 2024, a ceasefire concluded fourteen months of conflict between Hizbollah and Israel, which began on October 8, the day following Hamas’s attacks on Israel. Although the ceasefire has led to the return of approximately one million displaced Lebanese, the political climate remains tense. Hizbollah’s adversaries are advocating for its disarmament, an essential stipulation within the ceasefire agreement. To ensure stability, Lebanon’s political leaders must pursue negotiations over confrontation regarding Hizbollah’s armed status.
Despite the ceasefire, residual tensions linger, especially as disputes over the military status of Hizbollah arise among Lebanese leaders. With debilitating economic conditions, public support for a negotiated disarmament may wane as many Lebanese view Hizbollah as a crucial protective force against external threats. Furthermore, the current cabinet, under President Joseph Aoun, faces immense pressure to comply with the ceasefire terms while delivering reforms ultimately needed to steer Lebanon forward.
The post-conflict scenario has ignited debates about Hizbollah’s military capabilities, with one narrative portraying Hizbollah as victorious despite its losses, while opponents underscore the party’s recklessness in engaging in a destructive conflict. They advocate for a state monopoly on arms and urge Hizbollah to comply with the ceasefire. As Lebanon navigates this divided political landscape, the need for constructive dialogue regarding Hizbollah’s future becomes paramount.
Moreover, the ceasefire’s precarious nature presents challenges, linked to potential spikes in inter-communal violence fueled by underlying resentment towards displaced populations. Observers note that while Hizbollah may appear weakened, its substantial military resources afford it ongoing influence in Lebanese politics, further complicating recovery efforts and civilian stability as new reforms unfold. International engagement must focus on fostering dialogue rather than overwhelming pressure to disarm Hizbollah, as this could inadvertently enhance its domestic support.
As Lebanon’s political leadership seeks a way forward, the key will be to formulate a strategy that includes Hizbollah in the broader vision of the state’s security. Continued U.S. support for the Lebanese Armed Forces is critical, especially amidst financial constraints, ensuring durability in the truce and progress in negotiations. With strategic patience and building respect for state institutions, Lebanon can navigate the complexities introduced by the recent war and ultimately foster long-term peace.
In summary, Lebanon is navigating a precarious post-conflict landscape defined by the recent ceasefire between Hizbollah and Israel. Despite a fragile truce, political and social tensions remain, with calls for Hizbollah’s disarmament complicating the recovery process. Effective governance necessitates strategic negotiations involving Hizbollah while securing international support for the Lebanese Armed Forces, emphasizing the importance of maintaining stability and promoting state institutions to mitigate future conflicts.
Original Source: reliefweb.int
