The issue took only a few hours to move from a newspaper headline to the forefront of Lebanon’s political scene.
A short statement published in a local newspaper close to Hezbollah, attributed to a group calling itself the “National Officers,” was enough to spark controversy in a country highly sensitive to any discussion involving the military institution.
The statement, which did not exceed a few lines, warned against assigning the army the task of “pursuing those confronting an external attack on the country,” arguing that such decisions “could weaken the unifying role of the army and expose its internal unity to dangerous tremors with unpredictable consequences.”
Observers viewed the statement as an attempt to pressure the political authorities should they proceed with steps to implement a plan to place all weapons under the control of the state.
The Lebanese Army was quick to respond to the alleged statement. Army Command confirmed that “there is absolutely no truth to what the report claimed regarding army officers,” stressing that the statement “has no connection whatsoever to the army,” and that “members of the military institution are committed to loyalty only to the institution and to the nation.”
For his part, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam described the statement as “suspicious and devoid of patriotism, belonging only in the realm of fabrication and blackmail.” Salam pointed to doubts about the authenticity of the statement, explaining that the matter falls under the Penal Code, particularly regarding harm to the unity of the army, the unity of the country, and civil peace. Meanwhile, the defense minister confirmed that the statement is “suspicious and is being investigated.”
The statement also raises legal questions about the legitimacy of publishing it and about its content. In this context, political analyst and lawyer Amin Bashir said that “a local newspaper publishing a statement that speaks of a division within the Lebanese Army and threatens rebellion within its ranks constitutes unethical conduct and a violation of the law.”
Bashir explained in remarks to Alhurra that the Lebanese Penal Code includes articles criminalizing the incitement of strife or the stirring of conflict among Lebanese.
He also pointed out that Article 62 of the Publications Law allows legal action against a media outlet if it publishes material that could endanger the safety, unity, sovereignty, or borders of the state, or that could provoke sectarian or racial tensions.
The controversy was not limited to the legal aspect. The statement quickly became the subject of sharp political debate. Member of Parliament Waddah Al-Sadeq wrote on the platform X that the statement may be part of a process “through which the Revolutionary Guard, via its media arms in Lebanon, seeks to undermine the image of the Lebanese Army and destabilize its internal unity, in preparation for dismantling it and drawing it into the axis game.”
Political analyst Dr. Khaled Al-Hajj told Alhurra that a party stands behind the statement, which “carries a message of threat and warning of internal strife and civil war directed by the party at the political authorities, official institutions, and Lebanese society, should the state decide to reclaim its sovereignty regarding the weapons file.”
Strategic expert retired Brigadier General George Nader told Alhurra that “there is no such thing as ‘National Officers,’” and considered talk of “a split among Shiite officers within the army to be completely false.”
The controversy comes at a time when the army leadership has been facing political criticism. In recent days, particularly after Army Commander Rodolphe Haikal issued a statement affirming that resolving the issue of Hezbollah’s weapons “cannot be purely military but must also be political,” wide debate emerged over the stance of the military institution, amid reports of external pressure to remove Haikal.
Amid this debate, official efforts have emerged to contain any repercussions affecting the army’s image. During a visit to the Ministry of Defense and the Army Command in Yarze, President Joseph Aoun stressed that the military institution is “above parties and sects.” He said, “Anyone who dreams of changing the army commander is targeting the military institution, not the commander personally, and this is unacceptable.”
Aoun affirmed that the campaigns targeting the army will not affect its performance, warning that shaking the military institution means that “the entire nation would be put at risk.”
Bashir said the criticism directed at the army “reflects disappointment among a segment of Lebanese, after the state had previously announced the completion of the first phase of removing weapons south of the Litani River, while developments on the ground showed that the party continues to possess missile capabilities and the freedom to launch rockets.”
The sensitivity of this issue is linked to Lebanon’s historical memory of military divisions during the civil war. At that time, the Lebanese Army witnessed several splits, most notably when First Lieutenant Ahmad Al-Khatib announced in 1976 the formation of the “Lebanese Arab Army,” in addition to a coup attempt led by Brigadier Aziz Al-Ahdab the same year. The “South Lebanon Army,” known as Lahd’s Army, was also formed with Israeli support and included defectors from the army.
Many believe that the conditions that allowed divisions within the army during the civil war no longer exist today. Bashir considers the talk of a potential army split to fall within the framework of “political intimidation.”
On the other hand, some have expressed concern about the repercussions of the political escalation. Lawyer Nizar Saghieh wrote on X: “The sharper the hostility between the axes becomes, the greater the danger to Lebanese unity.”
As the controversy escalates, calls are increasing to quickly uncover the circumstances of the case and identify the party behind the “National Officers” statement, amid warnings that leaving the matter unresolved could open the door to further rumors and tensions.
The article is a translation of the original Arabic.
