The debate over Lebanon's resistance has resurfaced as critics, including politicians, media figures, and activists, accuse it of pursuing foreign agendas contrary to national interests.
This rhetoric, amplified during times of conflict, contrasts sharply with the same critics' tolerance of western influence in Lebanon’s political affairs, particularly the selection of its new president.
Critics argue that the resistance undermines Lebanon’s sovereignty, yet many of them openly engage with American and Arab envoys who impose specific candidates or criteria for the presidency.
This obvious double standard has drawn scrutiny, as it suggests a willingness to accommodate western pressures while rejecting a homegrown defense strategy against Israeli aggression.
Historically, opposition to the resistance has been consistent, spanning from its early days before Hezbollah’s establishment in the 1980s through key milestones such as the liberation of southern Lebanon in 2000, the 2006 July War, and the 2024 Israeli aggression as well as the ongoing Zionist violations that followed it.
Critics have frequently targeted the resistance’s weapons, calling for their removal even as Israeli violations of the ceasefire agreement persist.
Dr Zakaria Hamoudan, director of the Lebanese National Institute for Studies and Statistics, highlighted this tension during an interview with Al-Manar, stating that “during Israeli attacks, some Lebanese factions have sought to undermine the resistance rather than support its efforts to defend the country”.
He emphasized that the resistance’s arsenal has consistently served as a deterrent, preventing deeper Israeli incursions and safeguarding Lebanon’s sovereignty.
He argued that dismantling the resistance would leave Lebanon vulnerable to similar outcomes.
Amid these challenges, Hamoudan underscored the importance of the “people, army, and resistance” equation, a strategy credited with shielding Lebanon from numerous threats.
He called for preserving this integrated approach, which has proven effective against Israeli aggression and remains a cornerstone of Lebanon's defense.
As Lebanon navigates this historic phase of regional tension, the debate over the resistance's role and its weapons continues to reflect deeper questions about true sovereignty, national security, and the country’s path forward.