Head of the Lebanese Forces Samir Geagea: Disarming Hezbollah is a purely popular demand

MAARAB, Beirut — Against the backdrop of rapidly unfolding events in Lebanon, and following the recent visit of US Ambassador to Turkey and Special Envoy to Syria Tom Barrack and US Deputy Special Presidential Envoy to the Middle East Morgan Ortagus to Beirut, the Lebanese government received congratulations on its firm decision to disarm the Iranian-backed Hezbollah militia. During their visit, the diplomats also discussed the next steps for implementing this decision. 

In an exclusive interview with Al Arabiya, Dr. Samir Geagea, head of the Lebanese Forces, described the government’s move as “a historic and significant step.” He explained, “The recent decision to disarm Hezbollah acknowledges a reality long ignored: for forty years, the authority of the Lebanese state has been effectively hijacked and weakened. First, the Assad regime exerted dominance over Lebanon, and later Hezbollah imposed its control over the state.” 

Geagea stressed that while “the road ahead for restoring full state authority may be long, the ultimate outcome is clear: the state will fully reclaim its sovereignty.” Responding to concerns among some Lebanese about enforcing the disarmament decision, he warned, “There is an ongoing attempt to instill fear in a community that is a fundamental pillar of Lebanon’s political, social, and democratic life—the Shiite community. This is a major misconception and a false narrative promoted by Hezbollah.” 

Geagea’s remarks align with comments made by Barrack during a press conference after meeting with the Lebanese Maronite Syriac President, Joseph Aoun, in which Barrack said, “Disarming Hezbollah is in the interest of the Shiites, not against them.” 

Related: US Envoy Thomas Barrack: Disarming Hezbollah serves the Shia community, as well as all Lebanese 

“The Shiite community was essentially held hostage by Hezbollah, which serves as an instrument of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps,” he stressed, explaining that this situation reflects how deeply external forces have influenced Lebanon’s political landscape. 

On the US position, Geagea clarified that their paper outlines a series of “requests,” not binding “orders.” “The Americans aim to reshape the Middle East and ease ongoing conflicts and tensions. From the very beginning, they made it clear: if Lebanon chooses not to act, that is entirely its prerogative. But what is the core demand? It is not merely the immediate disarmament of Hezbollah; it is the restoration of strategic military and security authority to the Lebanese state, an objective that is fundamentally Lebanese,” Geagea explained, adding that this demand is primarily rooted in Lebanon’s own national interests. 

In light of Hezbollah’s resistance to the government’s decision, Geagea noted that the group “faces new realities it has not encountered since its founding in the 1980s. The geography that once served as its strategic extension—Syria—is no longer accessible as before. Its military capacity remains despite Israeli strikes, but its previous allies have dispersed.” He pointed out that “the decision ultimately is not Hezbollah’s to make, but Iran’s. Iran is now trying to regroup its influence—from Yemen to Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces, and to Lebanon—but Syria is no longer under its full control. Hezbollah is entirely dependent on Iran: if Iran says ‘surrender,’ it surrenders; if Iran says ‘no,’ it does not act.” 

Geagea called for an independent public opinion poll, free from Iranian influence, to gauge the Lebanese people’s stance on Hezbollah’s arms, asserting that “70% of the Lebanese support disarmament, making this a 100% Lebanese demand.” He added that halting state-provided services to Hezbollah would significantly reduce its influence.