The Perennial Demand for Disarmament
Here's what they buried between the lines: FIRST INSTANCE: The Taif Agreement's Unfulfilled Promise (1989) The Taif Agreement, brokered in 1989, officially ended the Lebanese Civil War. A core tenet was the disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias, with the explicit exception of Hezbollah, which was recognized as a 'resistance movement' against Israeli occupation (Council of
Ministers, 1991). The agreement mandated the Lebanese state to extend its authority over all Lebanese territory, yet a specific carve-out for Hezbollah's arms against Israel was maintained, a direct contradiction that set a precedent for future selective enforcement. REPETITIONS: UN Resolutions and Conditional Sovereignty (2004, 2006) The demand for Lebanese state control over all arms resurfaced
prominently with UN Security Council Resolution 1559 in 2004, which called for the 'disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias.' This resolution, heavily pushed by the United States and France, was issued shortly after the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafic Hariri and coincided with increased Western pressure for Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon. Two
years later, Resolution 1701 (2006), enacted after the Israel-Lebanon war, reiterated the call for no arms outside the control of the Lebanese state, particularly south of the Litani River. Both resolutions explicitly targeted non-state actors, primarily Hezbollah, while rarely addressing the extensive armaments of other sectarian groups or the external funding channels that sustained them.