Browse
Log in / Register
Share
BEIRUT, Oct 16 - Hezbollah has publicly acknowledged that hundreds of kilograms of explosives seized by Lebanese security forces last week were its own, and says the material was being moved for attacks on Israeli troops. The unusual admission, relayed on Thursday by lawmaker Hassan Fadlallah, comes as Beirut tries to show it can disarm the group while Israeli forces remain in southern Lebanon.
Lebanese forces stopped a vehicle at a checkpoint in the eastern Bekaa region and arrested two people inside. Authorities did not initially identify the owner of the vehicle or the purpose of the cargo. That silence fed public anxiety inside Lebanon, where many feared the haul was intended for car bomb assassinations or other destabilizing attacks within the country.
Fadlallah ended the ambiguity at parliament on Thursday. He said Hezbollah owned the vehicle and the explosives, and that the cargo had been designated for use against Israeli soldiers deployed on Lebanese territory. He added that Hezbollah had already contacted state security agencies, asking for the materials to be returned and for the two detainees to be released.
Hezbollah has long refused to discuss its weapons logistics with the Lebanese public, and the admission marks a notable break from that practice. It also calls attention to the limits of the state’s disarmament push, which has been complicated by the sustained presence of Israeli troops in the south.
In parallel reporting, a Hezbollah official and a Lebanese security source told Reuters that the explosives seized in the car had been intended for use in explosive drones targeting Israeli forces. Those drones are one of Hezbollah’s most effective counters to Israeli surveillance and ground mobility, and the group has relied on them heavily since the conflict escalated.
Fadlallah’s statement makes that plan official. He did not say where the drones were to be assembled or launched. But his decision to openly confirm the delivery attempt suggests that Hezbollah is prepared to challenge the government’s authority rather than quietly absorb the loss.
The acknowledgment comes at a delicate moment. Under a US-brokered arrangement reached with Israel this year, Beirut committed to disarming Hezbollah as part of a process that would ultimately lead to an Israeli military withdrawal from Lebanese soil. For months in 2025, Lebanese troops carried out seizures and destroyed weapons depots in southern Lebanon, signaling that the state was finally enforcing its authority.
That plan was suspended when a new round of large-scale fighting began. Since then, Israel has kept up airstrikes and artillery fire across south Lebanon, while Hezbollah has refused to disarm as long as Israeli forces remain on Lebanese land. Thursday’s declaration is effectively Hezbollah’s way of saying that this condition has not changed.
Analysts describe the statement as a double-edged political move. It reassures Hezbollah’s base that the group is still able to move arms despite state scrutiny, but it also hands the Lebanese government a clear case to prosecute if it chooses to assert its monopoly on weapons. The two men arrested in the vehicle have not been charged publicly, and there has been no judiciary response to Hezbollah’s request for their release.
Hezbollah’s logistics have shifted dramatically since the fall of Bashar al-Assad in late 2024. For years, the group moved weapons overland from Iran through Syria into Lebanon. That route depended on a cooperative Assad government and a soft border, neither of which exists now. Syria’s new authorities have repeatedly announced seizures of weapons along the Lebanese frontier, often saying the shipments were bound for Hezbollah.
The Bekaa interception suggests Hezbollah still has an internal transport network, but also that Lebanese security forces are capable of detecting it. The immediate question is whether Beirut is willing to hold the line or will hand the explosives back to avoid a confrontation with Hezbollah. Either choice carries political costs.
Fadlallah’s admission may also be a message to the United States and France, which have pushed for a verifiable disarmament timeline. By saying outright that the explosives were intended for Israeli troops, Hezbollah is drawing a clear line between resistance operations and domestic violence. The group wants the Lebanese public to see the shipment as a legitimate act against an occupying army rather than as unlawful smuggling.
Israel has continued to act against Hezbollah positions throughout southern Lebanon, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has repeatedly said it will not withdraw until Hezbollah’s military capacities are destroyed. The result is a tactical standoff: Beirut is desperate to avoid a new round of destruction, while Hezbollah is determined to maintain a credible deterrent.
The fate of the seized explosives remains unresolved. Hezbollah’s demand for their return puts Lebanese security agencies in an awkward position, because returning the materials would contradict the government’s explicit ban on Hezbollah military activities. Destroying the explosives, on the other hand, risks a serious escalation with the group, even though both sides are trying to manage their relationship.
Fadlallah’s public claim is also a test of leadership. If Lebanese courts treat this as a matter of national security and keep the case open, there is little chance Hezbollah will accept it quietly. But if the case is defused, the government may be able to present the episode as proof that Hezbollah is operating only under strict political constraints.
The next few weeks will reveal whether Beirut can use this incident to reassert its authority without triggering another round of violence. The international attention on the case makes it harder to sweep under the rug. For Lebanon, this may be one of the most direct challenges yet to its promise to disarm Hezbollah.
This assessment is based on public statements and reporting from Beirut as of Oct. 16, 2025.
