Relations between Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Hezbollah have grown visibly strained, with contacts confined to what ministerial sources described as “the bare minimum.”
The chill has deepened following Aoun’s recent remarks on Hezbollah’s weapons, which widened the rift between the two sides and triggered pointed criticism from the group at the president.
In a televised interview last week marking the first anniversary of his election, Aoun said that “the role of weapons outside the state has ended with the presence of the army, and their continued existence has become a burden on their own environment and on Lebanon as a whole, with no remaining deterrent role.”
In response, former Hezbollah-aligned minister Mohammed Fneish said in a television interview that the party had “reservations on the president’s recent positions,” adding: “We disagree with him in form and substance in some passages. We are not another party. We are a resistance force that played a major role in liberating Lebanon.”
Cool communication
Ministerial sources familiar with Aoun’s position stressed that “the stances he expressed are not new, but the current circumstances may differ from previous ones.”
Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, the sources said the remarks stem from the president’s conviction that weapons outside the framework of the state no longer serve any purpose, that their role has ended, and that they have become a burden on everyone, including the Shiite community and Hezbollah’s own base.
“This is, ultimately, a description of an existing reality,” the sources said.
They added that reactions from Hezbollah’s supporters were expected, but would not prevent communication from continuing, since maintaining contact serves the interests of both sides, particularly Hezbollah.
Aoun and Salam
In recent years, Hezbollah had sought to maintain good relations with Aoun. Its lawmakers voted for him during the presidential election session after months of backing Suleiman Franjieh’s candidacy.
The group’s leadership even opened discreet talks with Aoun on what became known as the “national security strategy,” though these discussions yielded no results. Channels of communication remain open on the issue of weapons north of the Litani River, amid Hezbollah’s refusal to cooperate on this file.
Since the cabinet approved a decision last August restricting weapons to the state, Hezbollah’s leadership and supporters have focused their criticism on the government in which the group is represented.
Ties have worsened between Hezbollah and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, whom the group did not back during parliamentary consultations that named him as premier last year.
A natural reaction
Political writer Dr. Kassem Kassir, who closely follows Hezbollah’s position, said the reaction of the party’s supporters to Aoun’s remarks was “a natural response,” particularly because the president did not take into account what he described as the “role of the resistance in protecting Lebanon.”
He added that calls to end the role of weapons were made without offering guarantees for what would follow or proposing alternative options.
Kassir told Asharq Al-Awsat that the stance of Hezbollah’s supporters did not necessarily reflect the position of the leadership. Communication channels remain open, but contacts have failed to produce a unified vision.
He added that Hezbollah has formal reservations about the performance of the government and the state, especially regarding Israeli negotiations and what it views as concessions made without guarantees or tangible results.
Duality in rhetoric
University professor and lawyer Ali Murad said that segments of Hezbollah’s supporters on social media adopt an extreme accusatory tone toward anyone who disagrees with them, leaving no room for nuance.
However, he argued that the problem goes beyond the supporters themselves and lies in the political rhetoric and mobilization Hezbollah has relied on for decades, “which entrenched a culture that recognizes only black and white and promotes accusations of betrayal, either fully with us or fully against us.”
Murad told Asharq Al-Awsat that the “real issue lies in Hezbollah’s dual rhetoric.”
He said the party “is fully aware that the reality has become extremely difficult following major losses and a military defeat on one hand, and the broader retreat of the Axis of Resistance on the other. As a result, a clear contradiction has emerged between what Hezbollah says and what it actually believes.”
This contradiction, Murad said, is evident in the speeches of Hezbollah’s secretary general Sheikh Naim Qassem, which reflect two parallel narratives. “One acknowledges reality to a degree while maintaining rejection of handing over weapons. The other is a mobilizing discourse rooted in an earlier era, before the pager operation and the ‘support front’ war.”
“What Aoun said falls in this direction,” Murad said, arguing that Hezbollah in its former state has ended and has become a burden on Lebanon, the Shiite community, and the residents of the south.
“Persisting with the same rhetoric today amounts to rejecting reality and practicing denial, a form of political arrogance reflected by both supporters and the group’s media circles.”
No interest in breaking ties
Murad said what angered Hezbollah’s supporters most was “the truth they do not want to acknowledge,” namely that Hezbollah’s role has ended, that it has exited the deterrence equation, and that it can no longer achieve Lebanon’s objectives on its own.
“The president stated a truth that needed to be said,” he said.
Asked whether the relationship between Hezbollah and Aoun was nearing a breaking point, Murad said it was not in Hezbollah’s interest to sever political ties with the president, or even with the prime minister.
He noted that the group understands that the actions of both officials serve Lebanon’s interests and, in particular, the interests of the south.
In some respects, he added, this approach also spares Hezbollah and its base the risks of “fatal choices that could lead to a bleak outcome if denial or political self-destruction were to prevail.”
