'Friends of Lebanon' Sound the 'Reminder Bell': Priority to Restrict Weapons and State's Sole Authority over War and Peace

The statement issued by the “Friends of Lebanon,” with its contents revealed by the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, served as a wake-up call for Beirut, which has been drowning in excessive analysis of the repercussions of the U.S. midterm elections, as well as the shockwaves from the Israeli Knesset elections on the Lebanese reality and in assessing their impact on diplomatic and military pressures related to the Hezbollah weapons file and the possibility of its renewed involvement in a war of support for Iran if “the language of artillery” returns to its front.

Although Lebanon is exposed to risks stemming from U.S., Iranian, and Israeli calculations, due to the “cauldron” reality imposed on it by Hezbollah, which has placed it in the “same boat” as Tehran, this entanglement does not exempt it from the necessity of avoiding excessive engagement in a waiting game for the interactions of the political crises in Washington and Tel Aviv, in order to activate a process of containing Hezbollah’s weapons as obligations on the Lebanese government, in accordance with its decisions (August 2025 and March 2026) and under the “Framework Agreement” signed with the United States and Israel on June 26.

Political circles viewed the “Friends of Lebanon” stance on Thursday as sending a message to this effect, noting that the fundamentals of the United States, Britain, Australia, Canada, and Japan have not changed regarding what is required of Beirut, yesterday, today, and tomorrow, concerning the weapons file and the state’s monopoly on the decision of war and peace, regardless of the profound transformations reflected in:

- The U.S. midterm elections, where the Republicans’ defeat in both chambers of Congress represents a variable being monitored to see if it will reshape Washington’s regional options, particularly regarding the management of the war with Iran, given the severely narrowed maneuvering margins for President Donald Trump, who now faces an urgent need to close this front in one way or another, but in a manner that saves his image and legacy and prevents him from becoming a “lame-duck president” for his successor, whoever may be, in the decision he will make regarding the “Islamic Republic.”

- And the half-loss of Benjamin Netanyahu, which is also accompanied by automatic repercussions on the Lebanon front, potentially leading to a “escalation through escape forward” scenario, as well as maintaining the current controlled tension while awaiting Trump’s absorption of the “first shock” of the greater setback, whose rolling repercussions are already affecting his “internal house” and his prestige within his party, with signs of “Republican frustration” already detectable, as noted by Vice President J.D. Vance, who is pursuing what was reported as a “coalition of the disaffected” on the path to running for the “Red Elephant” (Republican Party) in the presidential elections.

The “Friends of Lebanon” statement was drafted “without gloves,” and the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs reposted it on the U.S. Embassy’s page on the “X” platform, stating: “We are the embassies of the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, Canada, and Japan, and as friends of Lebanon, we reaffirm our strong support for the Lebanese government in ensuring that the state holds a monopoly on weapons, and that the state alone is the sole decision-maker in matters of war and peace.

We take note of the steps taken by the Lebanese authorities in the Dahr al-Baidar case (Hezbollah explosives), and we encourage a swift and independent judicial process, free from any political interference, to ensure full accountability.

It is also essential for Lebanon, under the current circumstances, to obtain a clear and public commitment from all members of the Parliament and all political parties, affirming their support for the statements of the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister that the Lebanese state alone has the right to decide on war and peace.”

“We also reiterate our firm desire that the Lebanese state fully regain its actual sovereign authority over all its territory.”

This stance appeared to reflect the magnitude of risks Lebanon would face if Trump chose “the last remedy, cauterization” against Iran and Hezbollah decided to drag the “Cedar Country” into the maelstrom of war. In this context, President Joseph Aoun reiterated that “Lebanon is an independent and sovereign state, and we will not accept anyone sharing in our sovereignty,” a remark implicitly directed at Tehran.

Meanwhile, the military judiciary continued pursuing the case of Hezbollah’s explosive shipment. First Military Investigating Judge Ghada Abu Alwan began her investigation, questioning yesterday the two Hezbollah detainees, Ali Al-Kurdi and Haitham Amhaz. At the end of the session, she issued two arrest warrants for them in absentia.

A week earlier, charges had been brought against 13 individuals from Hezbollah in connection with the shipment, which was seized at the Dahr al-Bider checkpoint while en route from Baalbek to the Southern Suburb inside a truck (driven by Al-Kurdi and Amhaz) loaded with between 500 and 800 kilograms of C-4 and similar explosives, along with iron balls and nails.

Hezbollah has publicly acknowledged that the seized materials belong to it and that their intended use is “resisting Israel.” This admission has not prevented judicial action, given that the government had previously declared the party’s military wing illegal and also approved a phased plan to confiscate its weapons, involving containment and prohibiting their transport and use between each phase.