IRIA News

5 minute read

A top U.S. envoy voiced strong satisfaction with Lebanon’s response to a proposal to disarm Hezbollah in return for an Israeli pullback, after meeting with Lebanese leaders amid renewed Israeli strikes and rising border tensions.

U.S. ambassador to Turkey and special envoy for Syria, Thomas Barrack, delivered the proposal to Lebanese officials during a previous visit last month. The plan envisions Hezbollah disarming entirely within four months. In return, Israel would halt its aerial campaign and pull back troops from five outposts in southern Lebanon, positions it has held since last year’s war with Hezbollah.

Speaking to reporters on Monday following a meeting with Lebanon’s President, Barrack announced he had received a detailed, seven-page response from Beirut. “What the government gave us was something spectacular in a very short period,” Barrack said, adding that “I’m unbelievably satisfied with the response.”

While Barrack did not disclose the contents of Lebanon’s reply, the optimism in his tone marked a rare moment of diplomatic progress in a region engulfed by conflict. His remarks came on the heels of a fresh Israeli offensive targeting Hezbollah positions in southern and eastern Lebanon, as well as a ground operation in a border village, moves seen by many observers as an effort to pressure Hezbollah into capitulation.

The disarmament deal

The proposal represents a high-stakes strategic move by Washington to neutralize one of Iran’s most formidable regional allies without direct military confrontation. Hezbollah, designated a terrorist organization by the United States and several Western countries, has been a dominant political and military force in Lebanon for decades. Its disarmament would be a seismic shift in the regional power balance.

Under the terms of the proposal, Hezbollah would relinquish all arms, including rockets and other strategic assets, within a four-month window. In exchange, Israel would cease its airstrikes and dismantle forward military positions in southern Lebanon. An Israeli official made clear that withdrawal would only happen once Hezbollah’s disarmament was verified.

“Israel would only withdraw once Hezbollah completely disarmed,” the official said, adding that Israel would continue to fortify its positions “as long as it saw Hezbollah trying to rebuild its forces in south Lebanon.”

Hezbollah’s calculations

Hezbollah has not issued an official statement on the disarmament proposal. However, in a televised address on Sunday, its Secretary-General hinted at the group’s strategic considerations, stating that some level of armament was necessary to defend Lebanon from Israel.

Sources close to Hezbollah have indicated that while the group may be willing to scale back its arsenal, full disarmament remains a red line. The party views its military wing as essential to both deterrence and domestic legitimacy.

Nonetheless, there are signs of quiet pragmatism. Since last year’s ceasefire, Hezbollah has already pulled back from certain southern positions and handed over some weapons to the Lebanese Armed Forces. The Lebanese government’s response to the U.S. plan, which took only two weeks to formulate, suggests that significant back-channel dialogue may already be underway.

Barrack, who also serves as a longtime adviser to U.S. President Donald Trump, emphasized that peace was a shared goal. “The Israelis do not want war with Lebanon,” he said. “Both countries are trying to give the same thing, the notion of a stand-down agreement, of the cessation of hostilities, and a road to peace.”

Lebanon’s delicate balancing act

Barrack met with several senior Lebanese officials during his visit, including Prime Minister Najib Mikati and Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, a close ally of Hezbollah. Berri’s office issued a statement describing the meeting as “good and constructive, taking into account Lebanon’s interests and sovereignty, the concerns of all Lebanese, and the demands of Hezbollah.”

The Lebanese leadership faces an important task of balancing Hezbollah’s role as both a resistance movement and a mainstream political force, while navigating intense regional and international pressure.

Western diplomats have long viewed a weakened Hezbollah as a prerequisite for strengthening Lebanon’s state institutions, which have historically been overshadowed by sectarian power centers.

Future for Hezbollah in Lebanese politics?

Barrack suggested that Hezbollah’s political future in Lebanon could remain intact, even if the group gave up its arms. “Hezbollah needed reassurance that it would still have a future in Lebanon as a major political party,” he said, hinting at a possible model where the group transforms from an armed faction to a purely political actor.

This transformation would mirror the trajectory of other militant movements-turned-political parties across the region and could provide a face-saving exit for Hezbollah as it confronts growing domestic and external challenges.

Barrack also pointed to broader regional developments that could catalyze change in Lebanon. Most notably, he referenced the shift in Syria, where a new government has taken power following the fall of President Bashar al-Assad, a close Iranian ally. According to Barrack, the new Syrian leadership is already engaging in dialogue with Israel—something that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago.

“The dialogue has started between Syria and Israel, just as the dialogue needs to be reinvented by Lebanon,” he said. “If you do not want change, it’s no problem. The rest of the region is moving at Mach speed, and you will be left behind.”

Barrack’s warning was clear: Lebanon risks isolation if it does not adapt to new regional realities. The Trump administration is maintaining pressure policies against Iran, and aiming to promote stabilization through bold diplomatic efforts, especially in areas where traditional state structures remain fragile.

While the latest developments have brought up potential breakthroughs, the path ahead remains fraught with challenges. Hezbollah’s response, whether implicit through action or explicit through statements, will be closely watched. Israel, for its part, shows no sign of backing down until it sees concrete steps toward disarmament.