Many understood that the heavy gunfire—whether from light weapons or RPGs—in the southern suburbs of Beirut during the funeral of four Hezbollah fighters was fundamentally a message first to the Lebanese authorities and second to the United States.

This is the second time Hezbollah has used heavy gunfire to mark a significant event for them. The first time was when a ceasefire was announced by the U.S. State Department.

Previously, the party denied any connection to these actions, which resulted in casualties, injuries, and widespread fear. However, last Sunday, images of masked Hezbollah fighters clearly signaled full acknowledgment of this operation, which the Lebanese army later attempted to stop. Yet, when they began raids against known suspects, they found no one to arrest, as everyone had vanished.

Security incident or political event?

This security incident was treated as a political event. The Lebanese authorities, which are preparing in Washington for direct negotiations with Israel and whose President, Joseph Aoun, is expected to meet Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu under the auspices of U.S. President Donald Trump, appeared unable to implement even its most modest resolutions, such as banning celebratory gunfire and enforcing stricter legal measures against violators.

The political event is completed with Hezbollah sending a message to all concerned that an authority unable to control celebratory gunfire in the air will also fail to disarm the capital or implement all cabinet decisions criminalizing the party’s weapons. Therefore, there is no point in negotiating with them, as they resemble an authority building castles in the sand.

The state and Hezbollah's plan

Sources well-informed on the matter indicate that the Lebanese authorities face tough demands to eliminate significant consequences. For example, on March 2, it only called on the army to immediately move to disarm Hezbollah because it was pressured to do so. It was facing the withdrawal of all legitimacy from the party’s weapons, which reopened the Lebanese-Israeli front at Iran’s request to prevent Israel from targeting Lebanese infrastructure.

The Lebanese authorities, fully aware of the army’s lack of preparedness, preferred to appear incompetent rather than be seen as colluding with the party.

However, Hezbollah, true to its habits, did not appreciate the authorities’ maneuver or the army’s noncompliance; instead, it deepened the crisis. Last Sunday’s gunfire, despite the Lebanese army’s presence, implicated the military institution, portraying it as being in continuous coordination with a party whose weapons lack legitimacy and warrant the arrest of anyone possessing them anywhere in Lebanon.

It is evident from all the rapid developments since March 2 that Hezbollah seeks to impose its terms on Lebanon and is no longer concerned about any American escalation.

From its perspective, the objective is to portray the Lebanese authorities as incompetent by all standards, while presenting itself, in alignment with Iran, as the decision-maker, equipped with weapons and capable of enforcing its own standards.

Hezbollah believes it possesses three strengths: its ability to withstand losses, no matter how large; its readiness to engage in prolonged confrontations; and its awareness of the authorities’ unpreparedness for a field confrontation.

The greatest challenge to the Lebanese authorities

In the face of Hezbollah exploiting these strengths, what can the authorities offer?

In reality, it possesses nothing convincing. The U.S. administration urges it to take positions contrary to Hezbollah’s interests, fostering a culture of confrontation, including the Aoun–Netanyahu meeting in this context. Additionally, it urges the Lebanese army to demonstrate its intent to confront Hezbollah through engagement, even if minor.

If matters remain stuck in a situation that portrays the party as capable and the authorities as incapable, the looming question becomes the alternative Washington might resort to in addressing Lebanon’s complex dossier, particularly amid hints suggesting a potential removal of all the red lines previously drawn for Israel in Lebanon at the same time.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Annahar.