PM SLAMS Israel, SHIELDS Terrorists!
Lebanon’s prime minister condemned Israeli airstrikes ahead of Hezbollah-dominated elections, while ignoring the militant group’s violations of a failing ceasefire.
At a Glance
Lebanese PM Nawaf Salam condemned Israeli strikes but not Hezbollah’s ceasefire violations.
Israel targeted Hezbollah positions ahead of municipal elections expected to strengthen the group.
The November truce required Hezbollah to retreat north of the Litani River—a condition still unmet.
Israel maintains “strategic” positions in Lebanon amid ongoing rocket threats.
Salam insists elections will proceed, despite Hezbollah’s armed control in the south.
Ceasefire on Paper Only
The ceasefire brokered last November called for Hezbollah to vacate territory south of the Litani River and dismantle its military infrastructure. Yet Israeli intelligence claims rocket launchers and weapons are still operational in Hezbollah-controlled zones. In response, Israeli forces have launched strikes on targets in Toul, Soujod, and the Bekaa Valley, reportedly killing one Hezbollah fighter and destroying a weapons cache.
Despite these violations, Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam condemned only the Israeli response, calling on the international community to intervene. His silence on Hezbollah’s activities signals a reluctance to confront the group’s de facto governance over southern Lebanon—an area the national army is nominally supposed to control under a UN resolution.
Watch a report: Southern Lebanon rocked by new Israeli strikes.
Elections in the Shadow of Rockets
Amid this volatility, Lebanon is moving forward with municipal elections, particularly in regions where Hezbollah enjoys overwhelming influence. These elections, Salam insists, are vital for “protecting Lebanon and the Lebanese,” a claim met with skepticism given Hezbollah’s armed presence. The prime minister’s statement makes no mention of the irregular conditions under which voters in the south will cast ballots—namely, under the watchful eye of an armed faction.
Hezbollah’s expected electoral gains raise broader concerns about Lebanon’s sovereignty and the integrity of its democratic institutions. Critics argue that allowing a heavily armed party to dominate political contests undermines the legitimacy of any resulting governance.
Strategic Stalemate
Israel, for its part, has not withdrawn fully from Lebanese territory, citing the need to maintain “strategic” positions in the face of Hezbollah’s ongoing military activities. This creates a legal and military impasse: the ceasefire was contingent upon both sides adhering to strict terms, but with Hezbollah entrenched and Israel still operating within Lebanon, neither party appears fully committed to peace.
The situation illustrates a larger geopolitical reality: Lebanon’s state apparatus remains too weak to challenge Hezbollah’s parallel power structure, and international actors seem unwilling to enforce the terms of the ceasefire impartially.
Until Lebanon’s leadership confronts the armed faction within its borders, condemnations of foreign aggression will ring hollow—especially as Hezbollah continues to dictate both the security and the political future of the nation.