Lebanon’s Army Pursues Gradual Disarmament Plan Amidst Political and Security Challenges
The Lebanese Army’s phased approach to confining weapons to the state has re-ignited debate over security and political control, moving beyond a simple technical adjustment to a long-term strategy shaped by regional dynamics and internal pressures. This multi-stage plan, revealed in recent discussions, prioritizes a calculated geographical progression – starting with peripheral areas and moving towards the center – rather than immediate, thorough disarmament.
The first phase, completed south of the Litani River, demonstrated the potential for restoring state security authority through collaboration with UNIFIL and leveraging Resolution 1701, which addresses the cessation of hostilities. According to sources, this initial success hinged on both international support and domestic political consensus. “This stage formed the practical basis for the plan,” a senior official stated, “and demonstrated that the state’s restoration of its security role is possible when international reference and internal political cover are available.”
However, the current focus on the second phase – extending from the Litani River to Al-Awali north of Sidon – is proving more contentious.this area, considered the northern gateway to the south, lacks the direct international backing that facilitated the first phase.as a result, the army’s actions are more closely tied to political decisions and assessments of internal stability.
Realistically, the army’s approach in this second stage centers on enhancing its presence, controlling visible weaponry, and preventing overt armed displays, rather than attempting a full-scale disarmament or confrontation with established groups. “The second stage, as it appears in the army’s approach, is the stage of consolidating the state’s authority and preventing chaos, not breaking the balance by force,” one analyst noted.
The plan’s subsequent phases are considerably more complex. The third phase encompasses Beirut, its suburbs, and the Bekaa region, where arms control is inextricably linked to combating smuggling, securing the Lebanese-Syrian border, and reasserting state authority in areas where weapons intersect with illicit economies and political influence. The fourth and fifth phases envision complete border control and ultimately confining weapons to Palestinian camps, culminating in a state monopoly on the use of force. However, these final stages remain largely theoretical, contingent on evolving political and security conditions.
Several key conditions underpin the entire plan. critically, the cessation of Israeli attacks and a complete withdrawal are considered foundational. This means the implementation of any further stage is directly dependent on the regional situation and the durability of the current ceasefire.Moreover, the army’s practice of submitting monthly reports to the government underscores its commitment to operating within a defined political framework and avoiding overreach.
The second phase,therefore,is not necessarily a precursor to comprehensive disarmament north of the litani,but rather a transitional step aimed at strengthening state security control and preventing the emergence of ungoverned spaces. While perspectives vary – some view it as a natural continuation of the south Litani model, others as an internal matter of balancing power – the army is demonstrably proceeding with caution.
the plan to confine weapons to the state reflects a long-term, patient approach, prioritizing military awareness that restoring security authority is a gradual process, b
why: The Lebanese Army is pursuing a phased disarmament plan to restore state security authority and prevent ungoverned spaces. The plan is driven by regional dynamics, internal pressures, and a desire to avoid immediate confrontation.
who: The Lebanese Army is the primary actor, working with UNIFIL and navigating the political landscape involving various Lebanese factions and regional influences (particularly Israel and Syria).
What: The plan involves a multi-stage geographical progression of disarmament, starting with areas south of the Litani River and aiming for a state monopoly on the use of force.
