The fear of escalation – and the internal conflict in the land of cedars: who determines the future of the country?

The news in brief:

• A fierce internal conflict is going on in Lebanon over the question of who determines the future of the country.
• Senior Hizbullah Kamati clarified that it is the organization that decides everything related to the defense of Lebanon.
• Kamati added that “no one is able to bypass the military arm of the terrorist organization.”
• On the other hand, President Joseph Aoun is working to prevent the spread of attacks.
• A Lebanese military delegation will go to Washington in order to stabilize the ceasefire.
• Why it matters: The confrontation highlights the deep rift between Hezbollah’s supporters and its opponents in the country.

While in Lebanon there is increasing concern about the possibility of further escalation with Israel, in the Land of Cedars a sharp internal conflict is intensifying over the question of who determines the future of the country: the official institutions or Hezbollah. The signs placed in Beirut with the reading “Peace for Lebanon’s future” join a growing discourse on the networks, in which Lebanese are sharply critical of the terrorist organization, mocking its promises of “victory” – and loudly asking what the “resistance” has achieved besides destruction, fear and a continuous threat to the stability of the country.

The IDF issued an unusual and dramatic evacuation alert for all residents of the city of Tzur and its surrounding areas, with an order to evacuate north of the Zahrani river – a move that affects tens of thousands of people, according to estimates about 60 thousand Lebanese. Meanwhile, in Tzur many residents are already seen leaving the area for fear of attacks.

The evacuation warning for Tzur comes less than a day after the IDF’s call to evacuate its bases, and sharpens the expansion of the scope of the fighting and the pressure that Israel is trying to exert on Lebanon.

As security tensions increase, so does the rift within Lebanon itself. The public discourse on the networks and in the political arena reveals an increasingly escalating conflict between those who see Hezbollah as a “protective force”, and the Lebanese who claim that the organization has made the country hostage to the regional conflicts.

Hezbollah no longer tries to obscure the power struggle against the state. Mahmoud Kamati, a member of the political council of the terrorist organization, clarified that if Secretary General Naim Kassem had called on the public to take to the streets to overthrow the government, “we would have seen hundreds of thousands protesting and demanding the overthrow of the government peacefully and democratically”, while defining it as a “democratic right”.

At the same time, Kamati pointed out who, as far as the organization is concerned, has the last word in matters of war and peace: “Hezbollah is the one who makes the decision in everything related to the defense of Lebanon,” he claimed. “No one is able to bypass the military arm of the organization.” These statements only sharpen the depth of the conflict in Lebanon.

On the other hand, the Lebanese president’s office tries to convey the opposite image: a country that works to stop deterioration and keep Lebanon out of a broad conflict. According to a senior political source who spoke to the Lebanese newspaper Nidaa al-Watan, President Joseph Aoun has been conducting frantic internal and international negotiations over the past day, in an attempt to “stop the Israeli attacks and prevent their spread”, while in Beirut they seek to ensure that Dahiya is not dragged into the campaign.

Lebanon is also trying to advance the political route – the military delegation that is going to Washington is expected to emphasize in meetings at the Pentagon on Friday the need to stabilize the ceasefire and prevent its collapse. This, alongside a demand to strengthen the Lebanese army militarily, logistically and economically.

In social networks in Lebanon, Hezbollah’s statements are already receiving a harsh response. More and more voices are being heard accusing the organization of destroying the country, of undermining its sovereignty – and of trying to continue dictating reality through military force.

“Hezbollah must understand that the period in which they imposed political will with weapons is over. The one who threatens to overthrow the government is the one who abandoned the country and placed himself against the will of the majority of Lebanese,” stressed Fouad. “This government represents Lebanese citizens who want sovereignty and stability, not imaginary wars and victories while the south is under siege and occupied. What did these weapons achieve for Lebanon other than destruction?”

Other voices in the Lebanese discourse also express not only anger, but a deep sense of disconnection between the leadership of the “resistance” and the reality in Lebanon today. Malek stated that “we live with a group of people, none of whom are really with us in 2026. And they probably won’t really move to 2026 either until they return to the south in a few months and see the indescribable.”

Others attack not only the very line of Hezbollah, but also the messages coming out of its leadership, which they say are full of contradictions and disconnected from the reality on the ground. “Usually a liar is exposed quickly, because a lie has short legs, but no one surpasses Naim Kasem.”