The Lebanese Army, which welcomes recruits from all religious backgrounds in Lebanon, has been tasked with the duty to serve as a guarantor of civil peace since the 1975-1990 war.
Following the 2006 Hezbollah-Israel war, UN Security Council Resolution 1701 mandated that only the Lebanese Army be armed in southern Lebanon as a means to put an end to the war and push Hezbollah to withdraw north of the Litani river. However, in the years since, Hezbollah has remained in the south and amassed an arsenal, without hindrance from either UNIFIL peacekeepers or the Lebanese Army.
Now, amid the escalating war between Israel and Hezbollah on Lebanese territory, Lebanon’s military is sitting out the conflict. As discussions of a 60-day ceasefire to enforce Resolution 1701 emerge, the absence of Lebanon’s army raises pressing questions about the state’s ability to effectively respond to major conflict.
Some observers note that the army is neither in a position to confront Israel nor politically empowered to challenge Hezbollah. Others say the army lacks the preparedness of Hezbollah fighters, both in combat and knowledge about confronting Israel.
As the Lebanese Army has declined an interview with Beirut Today, the outlet explores this issue by comparing statements from various experts who have spoken to the media during the past months of conflict.
Government paralysis and its impact on the army
Without a president since 2022, Lebanon functions under a caretaker government as parliament remains deadlocked along sectarian lines, unable to form a new government for over two years.
Simon Mabon, a professor of international relations at Lancaster University, described the Lebanese government as “paralyzed” in an interview with the German media agency DW News.
He noted that the Lebanese government operates under a form of “zombie power sharing,” capturing the complex and frozen political dynamics in Lebanon.
This paralysis extends to other institutions as well, including the army, which is a limited force and certainly not the most powerful military in Lebanon. That distinction belongs to Hezbollah, according to Professor Mabon.
The Lebanese Army, comprising approximately 80,000 soldiers, operates with outdated equipment, lacks air defenses, and relies heavily on aid from the United States and Qatar, which recently approved a three-month fuel grant.
Weakened by five years of economic crisis, many soldiers, including senior officers, have taken on second jobs to meet basic expenses, sources tell Beirut Today.
The Lebanese Army’s approach to Israeli attacks
Since the escalation of the conflict, Israel has launched several direct attacks on Lebanese forces. On October 24, the Lebanese army reported that three soldiers, including an officer, were killed by Israeli fire near the village of Yater in southern Lebanon’s Bint Jbeil region while conducting an evacuation of the wounded.
An Israeli airstrike had also killed two soldiers on October 11, and an attack with tank fire hit a Lebanese army position on October 3, with the army reportedly returning fire in both cases.
These incidents occurred near Bint Jbeil, about five miles from the border, where Lebanese troops have positioned themselves since pulling back from the boundary on September 30 in anticipation of an Israeli ground offensive, according to France 24.
On October 23, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin expressed “deep concern” to Defense Minister Yoav Gallant about reported strikes on the Lebanese Armed Forces, stressing the need to ensure the safety of both Lebanese and UNIFIL forces, according to the U.S. Department of Defense.
Since September 23, at least 11 Lebanese soldiers have been killed by Israeli fire, according to an AFP tally of army reports.
Israel claims to target Hezbollah infrastructure, including tunnels, weapons caches, and key leadership sites. However, strikes have also hit various residential areas and Lebanese military and UN peacekeeping bases. Even Israel’s “targeted” strikes against Hezbollah officials has often caused strikes on residential buildings and public roads.
Israel asserts that the Lebanese armed forces and UN peacekeepers hit by its fire were positioned near Hezbollah infrastructure. UNIFIL and the Lebanese Army have repeatedly denied this claim.
David Wood, Senior Analyst for Lebanon at the International Crisis Group, speaking to France24, noted that these strikes demonstrate Israeli military dominance and undermine the credibility of the Lebanese army, particularly given the humanitarian concerns of attacking soldiers not engaged in direct combat.
Professor Clive Jones, director of the Institute for Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies at the University of Durham, UK, suspects Israel aims to oust UN and Lebanese forces to establish “some form of Israeli control” in southern Lebanon, where approximately 15,000 Israeli soldiers are currently operating.
Beirut Today requested an interview with the Lebanese Army, which initially suggested emailing our questions but later stated that answers were unavailable and directed us to their website for press releases.
BT wanted to ask about the Army’s role in the ongoing war between Israel and Hezbollah and why it has not responded to Israel’s attacks on residential areas and UN peacekeepers.
Additionally, BT sought clarification on the Army’s decision to pull back to near Bint Jbeil amid signs of an Israeli ground offensive and how it would respond if Israeli forces advanced further into Lebanon.
How Hezbollah outmatches the Lebanese Army
Armed and trained by the United States, the Lebanese army wields limited influence in southern Lebanon, facing both political and practical barriers to significant action. Hezbollah, on the other hand, holds significant influence as many of its fighters hail from southern Lebanese villages.
In 2006, various Lebanese villages, such as Bint Jbeil, were able to withstand Israeli attacks and prevent Israeli occupation as local fighters, hailing from the villages they defended, withstood the attacks.
Deploying soldiers or conducting military operations requires approval from the political elite. This elite has typically included allies of Hezbollah over the past 30 years.
The Lebanese army is outmatched by Hezbollah, which has an Iranian-supplied arsenal and reportedly had about 100,000 fighters at the beginning of the war. After a month of intense fighting and significant loss of life, the official count of remaining Hezbollah soldiers remains unclear.
According to an analyst on The War Nerd’s podcast from October 23, the Lebanese army is “too weak” on their own.
Professor Clive Jones, director of the Institute for Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies at the University of Durham, UK, stated in an interview with France24 that Lebanon’s military is “stuck between a rock and a hard place.”
He emphasized that there is also very little the Lebanese army can do in response to the Israeli incursion.
“The role of most armies – in trying to defend the territorial integrity of the country – is one that the Lebanese army has never been able to perform, and is certainly not able to perform right now.”
Beirut Today has sought to inquire whether the Lebanese Army is prepared to confront Israel militarily, if necessary, and how it approaches this situation.
BT also sought to understand whether the Army can politically challenge Hezbollah and how it navigates that relationship. The Army has declined to participate in an interview.
The army’s symbolic importance in national unity
The role and place of the Lebanese Army in the conflict are far more complex than one might expect.
Khalil Helou, a general on leave from the Lebanese army and a professor of geopolitics at St. Joseph University in Beirut, explained to Euronews that the army’s responsibilities extend beyond merely defending the country’s borders.
“It’s not a classic army like Western armies,” he noted. “The Lebanese army is subject to the instructions of the Lebanese government.”
Helou emphasized that, for a long time, there have been extreme divisions within Lebanon, leaving the army to operate independently.
Although the Lebanese army is not in a position to defend the country, it holds significant symbolic importance in the national psyche.
According to Fadi Nicholas Nassar, a US-Lebanon fellow at the Middle East Institute, talking to France24, Lebanon’s military is “one of the few institutions that command the trust of both the vast majority of Lebanese citizens and international stakeholders.”
Professor Clive Jones, director of the Institute for Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies at the University of Durham, UK, stated:
“If you look at opinion polling, the one institution that most Lebanese actually have some trust in is not the government, but the army. It reflects an ideal of a multi-sectarian body, demonstrating that various communities can work together.”
The army’s popularity is such that current commander General Joseph Aoun is widely regarded as one of the front-runners to step in when the deadlocked parliament eventually fills the two-year presidential vacuum.
In a country fractured both socially and politically, the army also plays a crucial role in maintaining stability through operations, including collaboration with UN peacekeeping forces in the south.
The army’s role in Lebanon’s recovery
Some Western leaders also view Lebanon’s military as a channel for aid. However, the conditions attached to this assistance are significant.
David Wood, Senior Analyst for Lebanon at the International Crisis Group, speaking to France24, noted, “The question becomes what does the international community want from the army in return for providing those funds?”
Pressuring the army to intervene against Hezbollah could lead to fractures along community lines.
Wood explained, “It’s not hard to imagine a scenario where Lebanese Shia, who constitute many rank-and-file members of the army, would either refuse to act or desert entirely.”
Moreover, any action taken by the Lebanese military against Israel would officially broaden the conflict, turning it into a war against two states rather than the one Israel claims is solely between itself and Hezbollah – despite Israel’s strikes targeting Lebanese civilian infrastructure in various cases.
However, Wood noted that once the conflict in Lebanon subsides, “the army will almost certainly play a huge role in the post-war security arrangement for southern Lebanon and for Lebanon in general.”
However, many in Lebanon remain conflicted on whether the army will be able to fully defend Lebanon, given the fact that it receives aid from the United States – Israel’s strongest and largest ally.
Beirut Today reached out to the Lebanese Army to inquire about its envisioned role in Lebanon’s security and stability once hostilities cease. The Army chose not to participate in the interview.