Lebanon's Prime Minister Nawaf Salam called Hezbollah's attack on Israel "irresponsible and suspicious" and convened an emergency cabinet session with the army chief. The language broke with decades of calculated ambiguity. Previous Lebanese prime ministers — Saad Hariri, Najib Mikati, Hassan Diab — declined to condemn Hezbollah's military operations while they were under way, treating the group's armed wing as a fact of Lebanese political life rather than a policy choice.
The word "suspicious" does specific work. It implies Salam believes Hezbollah may have acted to provoke an Israeli ground intervention — intervention that would devastate Lebanese territory and civilian life rather than Hezbollah's alone. Salam, a former International Court of Justice judge appointed in January 2025 after years of political paralysis, owes nothing to the confessional establishment that accommodated Hezbollah's parallel military force.
Convening the army chief signals preparation beyond rhetoric. The Lebanese Armed Forces have historically avoided confrontation with Hezbollah, whose military capability dwarfs the national army's. UN Security Council Resolution 1701, passed after the 2006 war, required the disarmament of all armed groups south of the Litani. The 1989 Taif Agreement mandated dissolution of all militias. Neither was enforced against Hezbollah.
Israel has characterised the Haifa strike as an "official declaration of war" and expanded targeting to political figures and civilian supporters. In 2006, Israeli strikes destroyed Lebanese national infrastructure — bridges, power stations, Beirut's airport — with no distinction between state and militia. Salam's condemnation draws a line between Lebanon's government and Hezbollah. Whether Israeli military planners honour it is the question Lebanese civilians now face.
