While its fighters are clashing with the Israeli army in the far south of Lebanon, Hezbollah has opened a new front internally through an unprecedented political attack on Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, accompanied by mobilization of its supporters over several days toward the Grand Serail (government headquarters).
During the large demonstrations organized in recent days, party and Iranian flags were raised, sectarian slogans were chanted, and accusations of treason were directed at the prime minister. There were also reported incidents of gunfire in the air, acts of rioting, and scattered clashes across Beirut’s streets, which sparked a state of panic among residents.
The Lebanese army quickly intervened, carrying out a wide deployment and dispatching patrols to contain the situation and prevent its escalation.
These movements came after the prime minister rejected Iran negotiating on behalf of Lebanon, in parallel with Israel agreeing to hold direct negotiations with Beirut, in addition to a previous government decision to restrict illegal weapons to the hands of the state.
In contrast, Hezbollah rejected these directions, while its official Mahmoud Qomati predicted a “popular tsunami that will sweep away the government.”
Warnings of Sedition
Scenes of tension in Beirut have raised growing fears that the situation could slide into internal confrontations, especially amid the ongoing war and the pressures caused by displacement of the capital and its residents.
These developments prompted Salam to postpone his trip to the United States to follow the situation, as he confirmed. Political and popular circles also warned that what is happening in the streets goes beyond freedom of expression and could devolve into dangerous friction between citizens, especially given a memory still burdened by the repercussions of the events of May 7, 2008, when Hezbollah and its allies attacked Beirut and areas of Mount Lebanon following a government decision targeting its communications network.
In this context, an official Lebanese source told Alhurra that the current movements “part of an attempt to whip up pressure for the overthrow of the government in the street, similar to what the country witnessed after the July 2006 war during the government of Fouad Siniora,” noting that “the protests in front of the Serail are likely to escalate, especially after the end of the war between Hezbollah and Israel, and the party does not hide this direction.”
The source added: “While Hezbollah escalates in the street to bring down the government, its ministers continue attending cabinet sessions without even hinting at withdrawal.”
It is worth noting that, with the party believing it is covered by the truce between Iran and the United States, calls from its allies and supporters to topple the government have intensified. Among them was what Marada Movement leader Suleiman Frangieh said: “If our line wins in the field, the government should fall after the war; and if their line wins, it will continue.”
Following the demonstrations, motorcycle convoys, and the instigation of clashes in Beirut, the Lebanese army warned in a statement that it “will intervene firmly to prevent any breach of internal stability.”
“A Grave Mistake”
The campaign reached an unprecedented level when an adviser to Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Akbar Velayati, sent a warning message to Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, writing on the platform X that “the Lebanese prime minister must understand that ignoring the role of the resistance and Hezbollah will expose Lebanon to security risks,” adding that the country’s stability “depends on the combined efforts of the government and the resistance.”
At the same time, Salam was subjected to personal threats against his life, but he stated in a media interview that he does not fear for his safety, based on his confidence that the majority of Lebanese support international positions and back government decisions, which gives him a sense of reassurance and peace of mind.
Amid the escalation by the party and its supporters, MP Elias Hankash said: “They are not accustomed to a national prime minister like Nawaf Salam, who works first for Lebanon’s interest. This is unfamiliar to them, as they are used to prioritizing Iran’s interests and the doctrine of Wilayat al-Faqih over the Lebanese state.”
Hankash added in remarks to Alhurra that this behavior “is not strange for Hezbollah whenever Lebanon comes close to restoring its natural position,” stressing that “there is a Lebanese state, institutions, and security agencies concerned with imposing the authority and prestige of the state over the entire territory, starting with restricting weapons and extending to maintaining security in Beirut and other regions.”
For his part, political analyst Georges Aakouri considered that any attempt to overthrow the government in the street constitutes a “grave mistake,” emphasizing to Alhurra that current conditions differ fundamentally from those preceding the events of May 7, 2008. He pointed out that “Lebanon today faces a different internal, regional, and international reality, especially under direct Israeli pressure, which makes any similar scenario unlikely to be repeated.”
Aakouri believes that what is happening in the street “falls under intimidation and comes within the context of the party’s effort to rally its base and maintain the presence of a political opponent.” He added that “the accusations directed at Salam of being an Israeli agent by a party affiliated with Iran are disgraceful.”
On the other hand, a ministerial source believes that what is happening “reflects the existence of two different viewpoints within the country,” considering that the current developments “fall within this political division and do not carry any unusual indicators so far.”
In a speech on the eve of the anniversary of the Lebanese civil war, Salam addressed the Lebanese people, saying: “I understand your anger and your need for your voice to be heard, even at the doors of the Serail,” stressing that “we will continue our efforts to stop the war, foremost among them the initiative presented by His Excellency the President to negotiate a ceasefire and enable the legitimate state institutions to fully perform their role in protecting Lebanon and all Lebanese.”
Background of the Security Plan
Last Thursday, the Council of Ministers decided to task the Lebanese army and security forces with implementing a plan to strengthen state authority in Beirut and restrict weapons to legitimate entities. While some circles linked this decision to information about Hezbollah preparing to topple the government in the street, an official source denied that the measure is connected to a direct security threat or indications of coup-like movements.
The source explained to Alhurra that “discussion of this step began weeks ago as part of a broader plan to protect the capital, especially in light of the population density resulting from displacement,” noting that “security deployment had already begun through intensified patrols and the establishment of checkpoints to control the security situation.”
The source emphasized that these measures “also fall within the Lebanese state’s effort to demonstrate seriousness to the international community in enforcing internal security and strengthening its authority over its territory.”
A Negotiation Track
Lebanon previously underwent a “short-lived peace experience” with Israel in 1983 through the “May 17 Agreement,” signed during the presidency of Amin Gemayel after the invasion of Beirut. Although the agreement was approved by a large majority in the Lebanese parliament, it was canceled in 1984 under Syrian pressure.
Hankash believes that what Salam is doing, in cooperation with President Joseph Aoun, through the option of direct negotiations with Israel, aims to “put an end to the adventure into which the party has dragged Lebanon,” considering that this path “constitutes a step in the right direction.”
Aakouri also stressed that direct negotiations with Israel are an urgent step for Lebanon given what the party has drawn it into.
In a notable development, the Lebanese presidency announced in a statement that international and Arab contacts led by Aoun resulted in assigning the U.S. State Department the role of mediator between Lebanon and Israel.
According to the statement, the first phone contact took place between the two sides. Lebanon was represented by its ambassador in Washington, Nada Hamadeh Mouawad, while Israel was represented by its ambassador in Washington, Yechiel Leiter, with the participation of the U.S. ambassador in Beirut, Michael Issa. The first meeting is scheduled for tomorrow, Tuesday, at the U.S. State Department headquarters to discuss a ceasefire and the negotiation track.
In contrast, the Israeli ambassador in Washington confirmed that his country will begin peace negotiations with Lebanon, noting, according to Axios, that Israel has not yet agreed to a ceasefire with Hezbollah.
Broad Solidarity
Contrary to what the movements intended, the events triggered a wave of internal solidarity with Salam.
The “Assembly of Arab Tribes in Lebanon” warned against being drawn into actions that threaten civil peace, stressing that the era of imposing faits accomplis by force has ended, and that the state—through the Lebanese army and security agencies, and with the will of the Lebanese people—is capable of imposing its sovereignty and protecting stability. It also emphasized adherence to the logic of the state and legitimate arms.
MP Waddah Sadek called for banning demonstrations and motorcycle convoys in Beirut to avoid the situation sliding into a “street versus street” scenario, while MP Walid Baarrini urged Hezbollah to stop what he described as a provocative and stubborn approach and to return to the fold of the state.
For his part, MP Faisal Karami—previously considered aligned with Iran’s so-called “resistance axis”—described what is happening in Beirut as “political chaos out of place and timing,” considering the demonstrations “misleading,” especially since the negotiation option came with the agreement of the three presidents.
Amid these developments, Lebanon stands between a negotiation track emerging on the horizon and a street that could ignite at any moment, making the state’s task of containing tensions more complex than ever.
The article is a translation of the original Arabic.
