Analysis | Lebanon, Hezbollah, and Iran: A Call for a New Strategic Approach

An interview given this Monday by Lebanese President Michel Aoun to CNN did not receive much attention in Israel, which is unfortunate. He directly addressed the Israeli government and public, calling on them to come to the negotiating table and bring an end to the war. He was quoted as saying: “A military solution will never give you security. We are ready, we want this, we are committed. Are you ready? If so, let us sit and talk.”

His remarks also included reservations: the president said he would not meet Prime Minister Netanyahu before an agreement to end the war is reached, but that any agreement would include non-aggression and full peace. He also said Lebanon remains committed to the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, which calls for the establishment of a Palestinian state and Israel’s withdrawal from the territories it occupied. “You cannot jump directly from point A to B; steps must be taken gradually.”

Despite these reservations, it is difficult to recall such language coming from an Arab state leader since the days of Sadat and King Hussein: “We are ready, we want this, we are committed. Are you ready?” the Lebanese president asked the Israeli public and government. He received no response.

It is true that Aoun is not Sadat, and Lebanon is not Egypt. He leads a country effectively controlled by a terrorist organization, Hezbollah. But Lebanon exists and will not disappear, and Israel is there to its south and will not disappear either. Therefore, there is an obligation to pursue agreements with this neighbor.

Israel’s current official policy is first and foremost the elimination of Hezbollah. Over the past three years, the IDF has significantly weakened Hezbollah, but the organization is still alive, active, and continues to attack Israel even at this very moment, including during what is described as a ceasefire. Hezbollah has been weakened in Lebanon just as Hamas has been weakened in Gaza, yet both organizations remain intact and dangerous.

Experts on terrorism argue that it is impossible to fully destroy or neutralize a terrorist organization composed of tens of thousands of people driven by extremist religious ideology and supported by well-funded and powerful actors.

The Ayatollah Regime

The Iranian regime has also been severely weakened by the IDF with assistance from the United States, yet it still exists and continues to launch missiles at Israel. In its distress, it has formulated a false equation that Israel will not accept: if Israel continues to strike in Lebanon, Iran will attack Israel and mobilize the Houthis once again. In this way, Tehran is attempting to revive what remains of its regional proxies.

The same experts who believe that terrorist organizations cannot be eliminated by force also argue that regimes such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps cannot be toppled from the outside by external actors, especially while the Iranian population has not yet taken to the streets.

It appears that President Trump understands well the danger posed by a nuclear Iran, but Lebanon is, for him, a minor nuisance—“no casualties,” as stated in the White House. Trump has long since not spent a night in Metula, Shlomi, or Kiryat Shmona.

Israel must explain to Washington that Lebanon and its future are also key to the Iran issue. A future arrangement in Lebanon and further weakening of Hezbollah would leave Iran without its proxies and without influence in the Middle East. To fully neutralize Hezbollah, the IDF would need to occupy all of Lebanon, which is not a practical step.

A more realistic approach is to persuade the United States and France to work toward agreements between Israel and Lebanon, and to transform the Lebanese army into a real military force with modern equipment and capabilities. Today, Lebanon has almost no meaningful air force and a fleet of about 50 non-offensive vessels. It has roughly 80,000 soldiers organized into five regional commands, five mechanized brigades, six light infantry brigades, three commando battalions, as well as communications, artillery, and special units.

This is a military force that, with the support of powers such as the United States and France—and indirect Israeli support from a distance—could be equipped with modern land, air, and naval weaponry and prepared for action against a weakened Hezbollah, cut off from its weapons smuggling route from Iran through Syria into southern Lebanon. This could be achieved through a shift in thinking in Israel, the United States, and Western Europe, and by focusing on what is truly happening in Lebanon and the need to fully detach it from Iranian influence and control.

To be realistic, no reasonable or acceptable solution will be found overnight—not before the World Cup celebrations so loved by Trump, not before the U.S. midterm elections in November, and not before Israel’s elections later this year.

A fresh, original way of thinking requires statesmen who are not bound by outdated perceptions, but who think ahead with innovation, clarity, sanity, and a genuine chance to change reality for the benefit of northern residents.