Why It Matters

The House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa convenes on February 3 to examine why U.S. efforts to dismantle Hezbollah’s grip on Lebanon have stalled.

At stake: American credibility in the Middle East, Lebanese state stability, and the safety of U.S. citizens. The core challenge is whether current policy can achieve complete Hezbollah disarmament and removal from state institutions—or whether the obstacles are insurmountable.

While Lebanon completed Phase One disarmament south of the Litani River, Hezbollah refuses Phase Two operations, threatening civil war if the Lebanese Army pushes north. Meanwhile, Israel has violated the November 2024 ceasefire over 11,000 times, creating a one-sided enforcement dynamic that undercuts Lebanese government authority.

Who’s affected: Rep. Joe Wilson has demanded rapid disarmament and accountability for human rights abuses—specifically citing American citizen Amer Fakhoury, tortured under Hezbollah’s orders. Lebanese President Joseph Aoun is caught between American pressure and domestic rejection of weapons surrender under Israeli occupation. The Lebanese Armed Forces lack sufficient personnel and resources to forcibly disarm Hezbollah without triggering civil conflict.

Broader Context

Congress is escalating focus on Hezbollah as the November 2024 Israel-Lebanon ceasefire deteriorates. Israel has violated the truce over 11,000 times through near-daily bombardments while occupying Lebanese territory, according to recent reporting.

Key obstacles:

  • Ceasefire breakdown: The U.S.-led International Monitoring Mechanism has stalled amid disagreements over enforcement priorities.
  • Hezbollah’s conditional stance: The group refuses full disarmament unless Israel complies with the ceasefire and ends occupation.
  • Lebanese Armed Forces capacity: The military lacks resources to forcibly disarm Hezbollah without triggering internal conflict.
  • Constitutional entanglement: Disarmament may require renegotiating Lebanon’s 1989 Taif Accord and broader sectarian power-sharing reforms.

Wilson has directly engaged Lebanese leadership, warning that Lebanon’s future depends on disarmament commitments. He met with President Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam in August 2025, demanding accountability for cases like Fakhoury’s torture and detention.

The Agenda

The House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa will hear testimony from three experts at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy: David Schenker, Hanin Ghaddar, and Dana Stroul.

All three witnesses bring extensive backgrounds in Middle East policy and Iran’s regional influence. Schenker and Stroul are recognized analysts of Iranian proxy networks and U.S. counterterrorism strategy. Ghaddar specializes in Hezbollah’s political and military operations within Lebanon.

Between The Lines

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), subcommittee chair, has consistently backed U.N. resolutions requiring Hezbollah’s full disarmament and co-sponsored sanctions legislation. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), ranking member, shares opposition to Hezbollah, focusing on terrorism financing and sanctions enforcement.

Wilson has emerged as the most vocal advocate for immediate disarmament. In November 2025, he publicly demanded Lebanon "disarm Hezbollah before the end of the year." His demands extend beyond weapons removal, insisting "Hezbollah and its allies must be completely uprooted from Lebanon’s security services and military."

This hearing follows two related 2025 sessions examining counterterrorism strategy effectiveness and budget allocation, suggesting focused pressure on Hezbollah specifically.

Competitive Landscape

The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) maintained quarterly lobbying expenditures of $50,000 throughout 2025, focusing specifically on requiring "Lebanon and Hezbollah to live up to the terms of the ceasefire agreement with Israel."

The U.S.-Lebanon Policy Council Inc. takes a broader approach on "US-Lebanon bilateral relationship policy matters," with variable spending: $20,000 in the second quarter of 2025 and $10,000 in the last quarter of 2025.

The divergence is notable: ZOA emphasizes security enforcement and ceasefire compliance, while the Council’s approach potentially balances Hezbollah containment with Lebanese state stability.

The Bottom Line

The hearing reflects intensified congressional pressure for Hezbollah’s disarmament amid a collapsing ceasefire. With competing advocacy priorities—security-focused enforcement versus broader state stability—and Wilson leading demands for rapid action, testimony from Washington Institute experts will critically assess current U.S. strategy and inform future legislative direction on a policy crisis threatening American credibility in the Middle East.

Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article