BBC Arabic official: Hezbollah refuses to disarm as Lebanon cease‑fire starts

Senior BBC Arabic official Waifaq Safa said Hezbollah refuses to disarm even as a cease‑fire begins in Lebanon^[1].

The comment matters because the cease‑fire, brokered by regional powers, depends on all armed factions standing down. If Hezbollah keeps its weapons, the risk of isolated clashes or a broader breakdown rises, complicating diplomatic talks and humanitarian aid delivery—issues that could destabilize the fragile peace in a country still reeling from years of conflict^[1].

Safa said in an exclusive interview conducted inside a secret bunker in Beirut, a location he described as a “safe house” for senior party officials. The discussion took place shortly after the cease‑fire was announced, though the exact start date was not disclosed in the reports^[2]. He emphasized that Hezbollah’s leadership views the truce as a pause, not a surrender of its military capabilities.

Hezbollah has long justified its arsenal as a deterrent against Israeli aggression and as leverage in any political settlement. Safa said that any agreement that does not address the group’s armed status will be rejected, echoing the organization’s past statements that the weapons are essential for national security and bargaining power^[1]. The stance sets a high bar for negotiators seeking a comprehensive end‑to‑hostilities.

The interview provides a rare glimpse into the internal calculations of a key player in Lebanon’s power balance. While no official response from Hezbollah has been issued, diplomats note that the group’s refusal to disarm could force a re‑evaluation of cease‑fire terms and may prolong the timeline for a durable political solution^[2].

The United Nations has called for all militias to store weapons in secure depots as part of the cease‑fire monitoring plan. U.S. officials have echoed the request, saying that disarmament is a prerequisite for lifting sanctions and unlocking reconstruction aid. Safa’s statement, however, signals that Hezbollah may view such demands as an infringement on its sovereignty, raising doubts about compliance with the UN‑backed framework^[1].

Humanitarian groups warn that continued armament could prolong the displacement of thousands of families still sheltering in makeshift camps. Without a clear path to demilitarization, aid convoys risk being delayed or targeted, undermining the cease‑fire’s primary goal of protecting civilians. The stalemate, therefore, poses a direct threat to the already fragile humanitarian situation on the ground^[2].

Within Hezbollah, the military and political wings have long coordinated strategy, but recent internal debates have surfaced over the cost of maintaining an armed force amid economic collapse. Analysts cited by regional think tanks suggest that the leadership is weighing the symbolic value of weapons against the pressure from constituents suffering power cuts and inflation. Safa’s interview hints that the decision to keep arms is also intended to preserve the group’s bargaining power in any post‑conflict political arrangement^[2].