BEIRUT — On the eve of Tuesday’s ministerial referendum on the resistance’s weapons, Lebanon appears to be revisiting the events of May 5, 2008—when Fouad Siniora’s government moved to dismantle the resistance’s communications network, a key factor in its victory during the July 2006 war.

The provocative decision forced the resistance to use its force against the Saudi and U.S. embassies’ mercenaries and their seditious projects, which primarily aimed to provoke a direct confrontation between the resistance and the Lebanese army.

It was claimed that the telephone communications network established by Hezbollah was “illegal and constitutes an assault on the state’s sovereignty and public funds.”
 Siniora’s government then decided to launch “criminal prosecutions against all individuals, bodies, companies, parties, and entities proven responsible for extending this network,” pointing to an alleged “Iranian role in this regard.”

In 2020, Druze leader Walid Jumblatt admitted his responsibility for igniting this strife through the media, politics, and military channels.

A source close to President Joseph Aoun confirmed that he continues to emphasize civil peace and the necessity of dialogue, and that he believes Lebanon has the right to seek guarantees in exchange for disarming the resistance.

Meanwhile, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich stated that “the Israeli army will not withdraw from the five points in southern Lebanon,” saying that “the residents of the north will no longer see Hezbollah on the fence.”

During the so-called “Strengthening the North” Israeli conference, held in the northern occupied Palestinian territories, Smotrich claimed that the ceasefire agreement with Lebanon “granted Israel full legitimacy to weaken Hezbollah and practically prevent it from rehabilitating itself on the border.”

He threatened that “the agreement includes all of Lebanon even in the heart of Beirut’s southern suburb. If necessary, we will demolish buildings in broad daylight. There is no safe zone.”

Regarding the massive destruction resulting from the Israeli aggression on the south, the Israeli minister said, “The Shiite villages destroyed by the Israeli army in southern Lebanon will not be rebuilt.”

While President Aoun is keen to maintain internal stability, political sources revealed that a meeting that brought together Jumblatt, Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea, and other parties in power, decided to proceed with the government’s decision to disarm the resistance according to a specific timetable to win the favor of Washington and Riyadh.

During his recent visit to Beirut, U.S. envoy Thomas Barrack urged these parties to do “whatever is necessary internally to pressure Hezbollah” with the same goal of pitting the Lebanese army against the resistance.

At the same time, anti-Resistance media continues to leak information about the threat of an Israeli escalation unless the government makes a decisive decision to disarm Hezbollah in conjunction with internal political incitement.

An informed source told Tehran Times that the Amal-Hezbollah alliance may withdraw from the government if it takes actions that alienate their popular base. Such a move, the source warned, would significantly erode the government's legitimacy, as it would be seen as a betrayal of a major sectarian constituency—namely, the Shiite community. This community harbors deep concerns about the potential for sectarian violence similar to the massacres witnessed in Syria.

While Lebanon and the region are experiencing a delicate situation that cannot be tolerated, Tuesday’s cabinet session is not the only threat, for there are others that reveal Washington and Riyadh’s relentless efforts to sabotage Lebanon's internal security.