On the streets of southern Lebanon, wreaths fill the sidewalks as a steady warm breeze carries the scent of a long, sunlit summer. Yellow banners flutter, many bearing bold declarations tied to religious identity. One banner features a green inscription, while another depicts the letter a rising toward the sky beside a line. A rifle frame sits beside a verse from scripture. Portraits of regional leaders accompany images of young people lost to years of conflict, and pennants flutter in the crowd. Hezbollah and allied militias are celebrated as they reflect on four decades since their rise, marking their place as among the most heavily armed groups in the Middle East.
Born in 1982, the political party did not publicly announce its creation until three years after its founding documents were published. Lebanon endured a period of stalemate, and the intense civil strife of 1982 created a moment of upheaval. The movement grew amid these tensions, aiming to shape events on the ground as Israeli occupation persisted. Like its Iranian allies, it pursued a second objective alongside the initial aim of influence, a goal that persisted even after the early ambitions to establish an Islamic republic in Lebanon evolved. After forty years, Hezbollah remains a force of significance in regional resistance and security dynamics, particularly in relation to Israel, widely viewed as a primary threat by the Jewish state.
Throughout these four decades, the Lebanese militia has evolved from a smaller faction into a substantial actor with a clear impact on local and regional affairs. Hezbollah not only dominates elements of Lebanon’s political landscape but also projects influence outward, extending Iranian reach across parts of the Arab world. It is widely believed to field thousands of trained fighters and to maintain a substantial arsenal, including rockets and missiles directed at neighboring Israel. The Israeli state sees this capacity as a severe and immediate risk.
legitimacy doubtful
In the last decade, Hezbollah has become involved in regional conflicts, notably in Syria and Yemen. Aligning with Iran, it has offered support to allies such as the Syrian government led by Bashar al-Assad and to Houthi factions. This involvement has earned it designation as a terrorist organization by a segment of the international community, including multiple countries, the European Union, and many Arab League members. Yet, some observers argue that the group’s actions are shaped by broader regional power struggles rather than a pure resistance narrative against occupation elsewhere. Critics in the region dispute the group’s legitimacy, contending that it operates as a state within a state and questions persist about its long term role in Lebanon’s governance.
Hezbollah’s intervention in Syria and Yemen has influenced its designation as a terrorist organization by numerous governments and bodies.
Against the backdrop of Lebanon’s economic strain, questions about the militia’s legitimacy have deepened. Electoral results in recent years have shown waning support among some segments of the Shiite community, who now see the group less as a resistance movement and more as a political and economic actor with competing interests. Some observers suggest that the organization has derived significant revenue from illicit trafficking networks, a claim highlighted by analysts who caution against conflating economic activity with political legitimacy. [citation: Washington Institute analysis by Hanin Ghaddar]
1- The maritime accord between Israel and Lebanon has drawn debate for two main reasons. It is seen by some as a step toward de facto recognition of borders and a framework that could influence Hezbollah’s posture in the region. The accord has sparked discussions about sovereignty, security, and stability in a highly sensitive area. [citation: regional policy brief]
They also question Hezbollah’s role in shielding corrupt officials and resisting measures that could hold them accountable. Critics point to the Beirut port explosion and subsequent protests that reshaped public opinion, suggesting that the militia’s influence has diminished in the eyes of many citizens. A recent public poll in the region indicated that a notable portion of Lebanese people distrust Hezbollah’s capacity to deliver stability, while others still see it as a political ally in certain contexts. [citation: regional polling report]
Hanin Ghaddar emphasizes a reality in which Hezbollah remains deeply entrenched within Lebanon’s political and security spectrum. The organization exercises influence in the south and in parts of the Bekaa Valley, maintaining a prominent presence in Beirut’s southern suburbs. It is one of the few groups that did not fully disarm after Lebanon’s civil war, contributing to a strength that continues to shape the country’s internal balance, especially during periods of economic stress.
no war in sight
In recent years, Hezbollah has narrowed its public profile, moving away from overt confrontation with regional powers while continuing to coordinate with its Iranian partners. Its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, has maintained authority since the early 1990s, though his public appearances have grown rarer since the 2006 clash with Israel. The leader’s absence from public life has not halted militia activity, which is sometimes showcased through large-scale media broadcasts and public demonstrations. Despite its size, the group operates within a broader network of Iranian influence, maintaining resilience even if electoral success fluctuates. The organization has learned a lesson in avoiding direct, conventional warfare; it relies on missiles, drones, and long-term strategic pressure to shape outcomes, according to analysts who track the region. A sense of waning popular support would complicate any fresh flare of conflict, underscoring the fragility of political backing in turbulent times.
The overall balance remains nuanced. Even with growing isolation from certain international partners, Hezbollah has shown adaptability and staying power. The prospect of future conflict depends on many moving parts, including domestic sentiment, external pressure, and the evolving security architecture of the region. Analysts caution that a new confrontation would carry heavy costs and uncertainty for Lebanon and neighboring states, highlighting how internal divisions could influence outcomes far beyond Lebanon’s borders.
Related posts:
Lebanon, Hezbollah, and the regional balance amid conflict Lebanon-Israel indirect talks hinge on ceasefire, Hezbollah says Hezbollah Offers Iranian Fuel to Lebanon’s Power Plants Lebanon Clashes: IDF Strikes Hezbollah and Global Reactions Cross-Border Tensions: Hezbollah Attacks and Israeli Responses Israel’s Air Campaign Targets Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon IDF Strikes Hezbollah Infrastructure in Lebanon Amid Cross-Border Tensions DPR Militia and Russian Forces Claim Recent Firepower Gains Near Avdiivka Lebanon, Nasrallah on Iran-Saudi Ties, and the Path to Lebanon’s Presidential Process Spanish UN forces in Lebanon maintain patrols along Blue Line Israel and Lebanon: Updates on Missile Exchanges, Retaliation, and Border Operations IDF Attacks and Regional Escalation: A Consolidated Update