A Pragmatic Path for Lebanon: Halting Rearmament Instead of Chasing Disarmament

The United States has reportedly placed an ultimatum on the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF): disarm all paramilitary groups in Lebanon before year’s end. On paper, this demand may sound like a decisive step toward stability. In practice, however, it is an impossible task. Lebanon’s army has spent the better part of a year attempting to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 south of the Litani River—a region that represents less than a fifth of the country’s territory. Even there, progress has been partial and painstaking. To expect the LAF to replicate this effort across the entire nation in a matter of weeks is to ignore both the realities of Lebanon’s political landscape and the limits of its military capacity.

Disarmament is not a technical exercise; it is a political project. It requires consensus among Lebanon’s fractious political class, sustained resources, and time. None of these are currently available. The Lebanese state is grappling with economic collapse, institutional paralysis, and a citizenry exhausted by years of crisis. To impose a sweeping disarmament deadline under such conditions risks setting the army up for failure, undermining its credibility at home and abroad.

Yet doing nothing is equally untenable. The international community, and particularly Washington, would interpret inaction as shirking responsibility. The Lebanese army, already dependent on foreign assistance, cannot afford to appear passive in the face of mounting pressure. Lebanon needs a third way—an approach that acknowledges the limits of the possible while demonstrating seriousness of intent. That alternative lies not in disarmament, but in halting rearmament.

The Case for Halting Rearmament

Paramilitary groups in Lebanon are not static entities; they are dynamic organizations that replenish their arsenals through smuggling networks and external support. Attempting to strip them of existing weapons is a Sisyphean task, particularly in light of an ongoing occupation and incessant Israeli violations. But preventing the inflow of new arms is a more attainable goal—one that the LAF, with international backing, could credibly pursue.

Halting rearmament would not resolve the problem of armed non-state actors overnight. It would, however, freeze the balance of power and prevent further escalation. By cutting off supply lines, Lebanon could begin to contain the proliferation of weapons and demonstrate to its partners that it is taking concrete steps toward stability. This approach reframes the challenge from an impossible demand to a manageable objective, on which to start building trust for the more challenging next steps.

The Role of the Lebanese Army

The LAF is uniquely positioned to lead such an initiative. Unlike Lebanon’s political institutions, the army retains a measure of public trust across sectarian lines. It has shown resilience in the face of crisis and has proven capable of coordinating with international forces in southern Lebanon. With proper support, the army could extend this role to border security, focusing on the eastern frontier with Syria and the northern frontier with smuggling routes into the Bekaa Valley.

This is not a call for the army to wage war against paramilitary groups. Rather, it is a call for the army to act as a gatekeeper, preventing the inflow of arms that regrow these groups. By shifting the emphasis from confrontation to containment, Lebanon can avoid internal conflict while signaling to the world that it is serious about curbing militarization.

The Role of the International Community

Halting rearmament is not a task Lebanon can achieve alone. Smuggling networks are sophisticated, and the country’s borders are porous. The international community, particularly the United States and European partners, can play a decisive role by providing the LAF with advanced surveillance equipment, drones, sensors, and training in border interdiction. Just as importantly, they can help build the logistical infrastructure needed to sustain such operations over time.

This assistance would not only strengthen Lebanon’s capacity to enforce its sovereignty but also reinforce the credibility of the LAF as a national institution. It would demonstrate that international support is not limited to rhetoric but extends to tangible investment in Lebanon’s stability.

Political Significance

A proposal to halt rearmament would also carry political weight. It would allow the Lebanese government to present a proactive counter-plan to Washington—one that acknowledges U.S. concerns while rejecting unrealistic demands. It would show that Lebanon is not shirking responsibility but is instead offering a pragmatic alternative. Such a move could buy the country time, reduce external pressure, and create space for internal dialogue on the broader question of disarmament.

Moreover, this approach could serve as a confidence-building measure. By demonstrating that the LAF can effectively monitor and secure borders, Lebanon could lay the groundwork for future steps toward disarmament. It would be a gradual trust-building process (internal and external), but one rooted in achievable milestones rather than unattainable ultimatums.

From Inevitable Failure to Pragmatic Success

Lebanon stands at a crossroads. To accept the U.S. ultimatum as stated is to embrace failure. To do nothing is to invite isolation and possibly war. The only viable path forward is to propose a third option: halting rearmament. This strategy is realistic, attainable, and politically defensible. It leverages the strengths of the Lebanese army, invites constructive international support, and reframes the debate from impossible demands to achievable goals.

In a country where paralysis has become the norm, halting rearmament offers a way to move forward. It is not a panacea, but it is a step toward stability—a step that Lebanon can take now, with the help of its partners, to preserve its sovereignty and credibility. The choice is not between disarmament and inaction. The choice is between inevitable failure and pragmatic success. Lebanon should choose pragmatism.

Lebanon the Message: A Muslim Welcome to Pope Leo

As Lebanon awaits Pope Leo’s historic visit, our nation endures profound suffering. Israeli bombardment ravages parts of our land, while economic collapse grips the rest. These hardships do not discriminate—they strike at the heart of Lebanese life. Muslim and Christian families alike have lost loved ones, homes, livelihoods, and sacred spaces. The pain is shared.

When recently asked by an Arab queen if he felt safe visiting Lebanon, the Pope replied without hesitation: “Well, we’re going.” As a Lebanese citizen of Muslim faith, I welcome Pope Leo with deep respect and hopeful anticipation. His presence is not merely a gesture of solidarity with Lebanese Christians—it is a national moment that transcends sectarian lines and speaks to the collective aspirations of all Lebanese. In a region often fractured by intolerance and foreign interference, Lebanon remains a rare mosaic of coexistence. Pope Leo’s visit affirms this exceptionalism and offers a chance to reclaim our sovereignty, renew our unity, and reimagine our future—not as sects in competition, but as citizens with a common purpose.

The Pope’s visit will cast a global spotlight on Lebanon—not as a religious battleground, but as a multi-faith homeland. His moral authority can amplify the voices of the bereaved, displaced, and wounded, calling for accountability and a renewed commitment to peace. His message will carry the weight of humanity—and in Lebanon, in stark contrast to other neighbors in the region, humanity always needs to come first.

At a time when foreign powers, particularly the United States, exert growing pressure on our institutions, Pope Leo—himself the first American pontiff—can help shield Lebanon from undue influence. These pressures, often cloaked in diplomacy, threaten our fragile confessional balance and democratic foundations. Defending the state is not about defending a sect; it is about defending the republic. Institutions like the presidency and the army must remain symbols of national unity, not sectarian privilege. The Pope’s presence will send a clear message: Lebanon’s leadership must answer to its people, not to external agendas. Sovereignty is sacred. Lebanon’s future must be shaped by the Lebanese.

Familiar with America’s model of religious diversity and freedom, Pope Leo will recognize Lebanon’s pluralism not as a sectarian compromise, but as a national achievement—enshrined in a century-old Constitution. While neighboring states have marginalized or expelled religious minorities, Lebanon insists on a different path: one of mutual respect and constitutional protection. In our mosques and churches, our neighborhoods and schools, we live a daily miracle of coexistence. The Pope’s visit will honor this legacy and remind the world that Lebanon is not a failed state—it is a pluralistic republic that needs help as it reforms, and is worth defending. He will emphasize that religious diversity is not Lebanon's weakness; but its strength.

By following in the footsteps of Pope Francis’ 2021 visit to Ayatollah Sistani in Najaf, Pope Leo would be endorsing a framework of equal rights—not minority privilege. His presence would affirm that religious leadership can champion civic equality. By preaching faith as a bridge to justice, not a barrier, he can help Lebanon move from confessional protectionism to a republic grounded in a Bill of Rights—where every citizen, Christian, Muslim, Jew, or other, is equal under the law. This would not only be a political shift—it would be a moral one.

Ultimately, Pope Leo’s visit is a call to all Lebanese—regardless of faith—to recommit to unity, sovereignty, and human dignity. It is a moment to rise above sectarian divides and embrace a shared future rooted in justice, pluralism, and peace. But it is also a reminder to the world that Lebanon is not a broken state, but a beacon of moral courage, that should not be tampered with or allowed to falter. Therefore, to Lebanese Muslims, the Pope should never appear as a foreign religious figure, but as a fellow human being committed to justice and peace.

I invite all Lebanese—Christians, Muslims, and minorities—to welcome Pope Leo not because we share his faith, but because we share his values. Let his visit place Lebanon’s ideals at center stage once more. Let it be the moment the world remembers Lebanon the Message: a nation that embraces all faiths and excludes none. Above all, let this be the moment when the Pope prays for Lebanon to become not a land of divided minorities, but a united, multi-faith republic of equal citizens.