Hezbollah unlikely to join renewed war unless Iran faces existential threat, Lebanese official says

Hezbollah is unlikely to join a renewed war between the US and Iran unless Tehran's leadership faces an existential threat, a senior Lebanese official has told The National.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters, explained that Hezbollah's intervention would depend on whether Iran and its ruling system face survival rather than simply coming under renewed American attack.

“We knew earlier this year, when the war in the region first broke out, that Hezbollah would join the fighting if [late Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei were killed,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “We even informed the Americans about it.”

The Middle East conflict, now in its eighth month, began in February after Israel and the US launched air strikes against Iran. Two days later, on March 2, Hezbollah fired rockets at northern Israel in retaliation for the killing of Mr Khamenei, triggering a relentless Israeli bombing campaign across several parts of the country, alongside the occupation of towns in southern Lebanon.

Israeli troops remain in the south and have continued to carry out strikes despite a US-brokered framework agreement with the Lebanese state signed in June. Hezbollah, which was not a party to the agreement, has rejected it but refrained from fighting Israeli troops.

While direct US-Iran military confrontation has eased at times, fears are growing that hostilities could resume, potentially after the US midterm elections on November 3. In recent weeks, Washington and Tehran have exchanged proposals aimed at ending the war and reopening the Strait of Hormuz, but significant differences remain over the terms of a deal, with diplomatic efforts yet to produce a breakthrough.

Qatari mediators presented Tehran with a draft proposal, but an Iranian official subsequently described the proposal as unacceptable.

The Lebanese official said that if Iran faced a serious threat to its survival, Hezbollah would be likely to intervene regardless of its weakened military capabilities. The group suffered significant losses after more than three years of war with Israel. However, it is still believed to retain weapons stockpiles.

Tampa talks

The official described last week's US-facilitated security and military discussions between Israeli and Lebanese delegations, held at the US Central Command headquarters in Tampa, Florida, as “very good”, dismissing reports in Lebanese media describing the talks as unsuccessful.

“These actually were the most constructive round of military talks held so far,” said the official, who has direct knowledge of the meetings.

The Lebanese delegation has been seeking an end to Israeli attacks and a withdrawal of Israeli forces, while the framework includes the disarmament of Hezbollah and an expanded role for the Lebanese army.

01:06

Italy plans new Lebanon mission to replace Unifil

The question of Hezbollah's weapons remains one of the most contentious issues in Lebanon's domestic politics, as well as in negotiations with Israel and diplomatic discussions with international partners.

Efforts to disarm the militant group, both domestic and international, have repeatedly stalled, hampered by Hezbollah’s military strength, its backing from Iran and the Lebanese army’s limited capabilities.

Hezbollah has rejected calls to disarm while Israeli forces remain on Lebanese territory. Beirut has committed to disarming the group.

The official said the Lebanese state remained determined to establish its sovereignty, but stressed that the process would be pursued in a manner that prioritised Lebanon's own interests and not that of others.

There have long been concerns that a direct confrontation between the Lebanese army and Hezbollah could trigger internal conflict. While some voices in Lebanon argue that a solution ultimately lies with patron Iran, others advocate a more forceful approach, even if it comes at a cost, and accuse the state of failing to act decisively.