Enforcing 1701: Lebanon’s lasting hope for stability in the South

In the wake of renewed Israeli military action in southern Lebanon, Lebanon’s Prime Minister Najib Mikati and Parliament Speaker Nabih Berry, a close Hezbollah ally, are now calling for the rapid implementation of UN Resolution 1701 to end hostilities between Hezbollah, the Iran-backed Shia militia, and Israel. 

Yet it has taken this escalation for Lebanon to readdress this resolution, passed in 2006 but largely disregarded since its adoption.

Resolution 1701 is explicit in its objectives, demanding the withdrawal of Hezbollah forces and weaponry beyond the Litani River — 30 kilometers from the Israeli border — and stipulating the need for disarmament of the group’s militia. 

Mikati and Berry insist they do not wish to alter a single line of the resolution, despite its shortcomings in responding to current realities on the ground. However, if this resolution were to be enacted effectively, it would mark a crucial step towards stabilizing Lebanon and securing its sovereignty.

Lebanon’s instability has been perpetuated by the enduring presence of Hezbollah’s arms. The nation’s other militias — Christian, Druze, and Sunni — were disarmed in 1990 as part of the Taif Agreement that formally ended the Lebanese Civil War. 

Hezbollah was the sole exception, allowed to maintain arms under the premise of resisting Israeli occupation. However, the justification for this exception has withered over time, with only two small disputed areas remaining: the Shebaa Farms and half of the village of Ghajar, both territories historically linked to Syria, not Lebanon.

To imagine a sustainable peace for Lebanon, Hezbollah’s disarmament is essential. Lebanon’s state sovereignty has long been compromised by the unchecked autonomy of this well-armed faction. Enforcing Resolution 1701 would begin to dissolve Hezbollah’s stronghold in southern Lebanon, creating an opportunity for Lebanon’s national army to reclaim control, and would pave the way for the establishment of a buffer zone along the border. 

Such a zone would significantly reduce the risk of future escalations, restoring security and stability for Lebanese citizens who have endured decades of conflict.

A massive deployment of Lebanese soldiers to the south would reinforce this shift and serve as a powerful demonstration of state authority in a region that has suffered deeply under Hezbollah’s domination. 

For the Lebanese state to regain its integrity, it is imperative that it exerts control over all its territories, ensuring that militias, particularly one with such powerful external ties as Hezbollah, are disarmed and integrated into the political framework peacefully.

While some may argue that the few contested territories of Shebaa Farms and Ghajar warrant the militia’s existence, these areas are modest in size and could be subject to future negotiations if peace prevails. 

The true challenge lies not in the boundary disputes themselves but in Lebanon’s willingness to step forward decisively and resolve the deeper issues of armed factions within its borders.

The path to peace is clear, though daunting. The Lebanese government holds the responsibility to enforce Resolution 1701, redeploy its army in southern Lebanon, and finally address the disarmament of Hezbollah. 

The international community should support Lebanon in achieving these goals, for without them, the cycle of conflict will only persist, undermining both Lebanese stability and regional security. Lebanon is at a critical crossroads; it must now seize this moment to secure a peaceful and sovereign future.