Over the past year, Lebanon’s adversaries — including Israel and its Western and Arab backers — have sought to force the country into compromise and the disarmament of the resistance through political, economic, and military pressure. The request by the United States, France, and Saudi Arabia to delay the parliamentary elections is a clear example of this pressure, one that was met with opposition from Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri and resistance-aligned factions. A close reading of developments shows that while these pressures have been outwardly justified by arguments such as Lebanon’s internal instability and wartime conditions, their main objective has been to prevent resistance-aligned groups from winning the elections and to reshape the country’s political balance. In reality, such efforts have failed due to Hezbollah’s popularity, broad public support for the resistance, and the inability to implement disarmament plans — all of which signal a strategic defeat for Lebanon’s adversaries.

Resistance and National Strength

Hezbollah and Lebanon’s resistance factions, despite severe economic pressure, obstruction of reconstruction in damaged areas, and the continuation of Israeli military attacks and incursions, have maintained their social base and relied on the weapons of resistance to defend Lebanon’s territorial integrity. Statistics and field observations indicate that large public gatherings and events reflect public confidence in the resistance current and reinforce the defensive doctrine of “army, people, and resistance.” In addition, the resistance’s opposition to any compromise with Israel has intensified, and Hezbollah’s positions regarding neutrality in the face of military action against Iran clearly demonstrate the movement’s dynamism and consolidation. This strength sends a clear message not only domestically but also regionally: any plan to weaken Lebanon or force its political submission will fail.

Elections as a Barrier to Pressure

Holding parliamentary elections on schedule symbolizes Lebanon’s political independence in the face of foreign pressure, and any change in the election timetable in favor of U.S. demands and those of its allies would amount to political surrender and a display of weakness. Nabih Berri and other resistance leaders stress that postponing the elections would not only undermine the legitimacy of Lebanon’s political institutions but also create conditions for intensified Israeli military aggression and increased economic and political pressure. A public vote for national and resistance-aligned factions, beyond underscoring the failure of the past year’s plots, would strengthen Lebanon’s deterrent capacity against regional schemes by its adversaries and demonstrate that choosing the path of resistance remains the dominant preference among the country’s people and political forces.

Regional and Strategic Implications

The results of the upcoming elections could alter the balance in Lebanon and the wider region. Continued strength for Hezbollah and resistance factions would reinforce the “army, people, and resistance” strategy and ensure the effective return of resistance arms as the core defensive pillar. Regionally, such a shift would pose a serious challenge to plans such as the “from the Nile to the Euphrates” concept raised by some American and Israeli officials, demonstrating that by preserving its decision-making independence and defensive capability, Lebanon can not only deter military aggression but also play a restraining role in the region’s political and security dynamics. This would clearly confirm the failure of Lebanon’s adversaries’ political, economic, and military strategies over the past year and shape the country’s future in favor of the resistance current.