Lebanon must refuse Hezbollah’s demand to return seized explosives - editorial
The Lebanese government should reject the demand. Returning the explosives would undermine security forces’ concrete step toward enforcing state authority and confirm Hezbollah can overrule them.
Lebanon must reject Hezbollah's plea to return seized explosives, asserts an editorial. Security forces recently intercepted a vehicle loaded with kilograms of explosives at a Beirut-Bekaa Valley highway checkpoint. Hezbollah claimed the shipment as its own, demanding the material's return and the release of those detained. Iran-backed Hezbollah asserts the explosives are earmarked for strikes against Israeli forces within Lebanon's borders.
The Lebanese government ought to refuse this demand. Their recent actions to seize the explosives demonstrate a commitment to state authority. Relinquishing the explosives would weaken their efforts and validate Hezbollah's assertion that it can dictate to the state. Lebanon has consistently maintained that only the state should hold weapons.
In March, the government explicitly banned Hezbollah's military activities. President Joseph Aoun has reiterated the state's dedication to confiscating illegal weapons and curbing smuggling.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio advised Aoun to retain the explosives, stating their return should be "out of the question." The US State Department echoed Rubio's stance, emphasizing the need for accountability among those who ordered, funded, and orchestrated the shipment. No government should acquiesce to an armed group transporting hundreds of kilograms of explosives without state authorization.
A Lebanese military delegation to the US-hosted trilateral talks in Tampa, Florida, is anticipated on Tuesday. Beirut intends to advocate for an end to Israeli aggression in Lebanon. Under the US-brokered framework, Hezbollah's disarmament is contingent on a gradual Israeli withdrawal. However, Hezbollah persists in refusing to disarm while Israeli forces remain entrenched in Lebanese territory.
Lebanon's stance merits serious consideration. Israel should pursue a security arrangement that permits its troops to withdraw. An enduring military presence incurs costs, whereas persistent strikes cannot offer a permanent solution. Any withdrawal must also forestall a return to the pre-war conditions. Over the years, agreements meant to keep Hezbollah's forces away from Israel's border have been disregarded.
Hezbollah amassed missiles, erected military infrastructure, and sustained an armed organization more formidable than the Lebanese state itself.
Full disarmament demands time. Lebanon can commence with the weapons already under its control: retain the explosives, preserve evidence for the investigation, and arrange for their secure disposal. Authorities should investigate the shipment, prosecute those found guilty of breaching Lebanese law, and apply consistent policies to future seizures regardless of the claimant.
Such actions would bolster Lebanon's position during negotiations. If Beirut desires Israel to cease its strikes and withdraw forces, it must demonstrate that Lebanese territory will remain secure against renewed preparations for attacks on Israel.
Israel also bears responsibility for advancing Lebanon's cause. Jerusalem asserts its desire for the Lebanese government and Armed Forces to supplant Hezbollah as the de facto authority in the south. Progressive, independently verified progress toward disarmament, preventing smuggling, and extending state control should be matched by phased Israeli measures under the agreed framework, in line with the security of northern communities.
A single seizure cannot validate these conditions, but it can illustrate whether Lebanese authorities intend to enforce their decisions uniformly. Verification should encompass access to suspected weapons sites, transparent reporting on confiscations, and proof that dismantled outposts remain closed. Lebanon's allies should aid its army in executing these duties and insist that political pressure never influences which shipments transit a checkpoint.
The European Union's recently sanctioned mission to train and advise Lebanon's military and internal security forces offers additional support. Its deployment remains pending. Foreign assistance will have minimal impact unless Beirut is prepared to uphold its authority against Hezbollah's demands. The question remains: who determines which armed forces operate on Lebanese soil? If the answer is the Lebanese state, then Beirut knows precisely what to do with Hezbollah's explosives.
Written by urgent.news from Jerusalem Post's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
