Israel and Hezbollah reached a ceasefire, but Lebanon and its people lost

In a devastating two-month war, Israel decisively defeated Hezbollah, killing its leader Hassan Nasrallah and dismantling the group’s entire organizational structure and leadership. This war, which began on Oct. 8, 2023 when Hezbollah announced attacks on Israel to support Gaza, has left thousands dead, tens of thousands injured and over 100,000 homes and businesses destroyed.

The conflict ended with a ceasefire between Israel and Iran brokered by the U.S. and Nabih Berri, the Speaker of the Lebanese Parliament, rubber-stamped by Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati and backed by American guarantees to Israel.

Yet this agreement is no cause for celebration. As I argued in my previous opinion pieces, the war exposed Hezbollah’s vulnerabilities and destroyed its hold on Lebanon. But what will follow, and what should the next administration and Congress do to guard U.S. interests and help the Lebanese?

The ceasefire deal’s winners are clear, and the Lebanese people are not among them.

Winners

1. Israel: Israel emerges as the clear military victor, having dismantled the leadership of Hezbollah and forced its complete withdrawal from all of southern Lebanon — not just south of the Litani River. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has won security for northern Israel and operational control over southern Lebanon for the next 60 days. Then the deal allows Israel to act preemptively in the south of Lebanon if future threats emerge. For Israelis, the war means stability and a return home after months of displacement.

2. The Biden administration: For President Joe Biden, the ceasefire offers a foreign policy victory as his term nears its end. By brokering U.S. guarantees to Israel and facilitating a truce, Biden can claim credit for de-escalating tensions in a volatile region. This achievement bolsters his diplomatic legacy, even as Lebanon bears the brunt of the consequences, since the deal did not lift Iran’s political meddling in Lebanon.

3. Iran: Hezbollah’s backer has sacrificed the group to secure its broader strategic goals. Allowing Hezbollah’s collapse in southern Lebanon positions Tehran for potential nuclear negotiations with the Trump administration. While this may appear as a setback for Iran’s regional influence, it demonstrates Tehran’s willingness to trade tactical losses for long-term gains. And, as mentioned above, Iran maintains its meddling in Lebanon, but not on the Israeli border.

4. Nabih Berri: With Hezbollah’s military and political power decimated, Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri has emerged as the de facto Shia leader in Lebanon. Berri has taken control of what is left of Hezbollah, consolidating his grip on Lebanon’s political machinery. This deal cements his role as a kingmaker, ensuring his continued dominance over the next presidential election and government formation processes.

Losers

1. The Lebanese people: The true victims of this conflict are the Lebanese people. Thousands are dead, tens of thousands injured and hundreds of thousands displaced. Southern Lebanon, the southern suburbs of Beirut and the villages of the Bekaa Valley are devastated, with homes, businesses and infrastructure destroyed. For a population already crushed by years of economic collapse, the war has deepened their suffering and left them with little hope for recovery.

2. Lebanon as a nation: The agreement entrenches Lebanon’s political dysfunction, leaving the country’s sovereignty further eroded. Berri and his allies — the ruling clique, including Prime Minister Mikati — have emerged stronger, while Lebanon itself remains trapped in a cycle of corruption and stagnation. With Berri controlling the selection of the next president and government, the prospects for reform and progress are dim.

As I have always argued, the Lebanese people must act if they hope to inspire international support. The U.S. and the Arab world will not intervene meaningfully unless the Lebanese themselves demonstrate the political will to break free from entrenched corruption and sectarianism.

Sovereign members of parliament and their supporters must take to the streets and the parliament once more, demanding immediate presidential elections. They must work to sever Berri and his regime from controlling the political process.

For the next American administration and Congress, the path forward requires concrete action.

First, support the Lebanese Armed Forces, which is the last credible institution in Lebanon. It must be strengthened to maintain order and counterbalance both Hezbollah’s remnants and Berri’s growing influence.

Second, sanction Speaker Berri and his network. Berri’s corruption is notorious. The U.S. has already sanctioned his right-hand man, former Finance Minister Ali Hassan Khalil, and now it must extend those sanctions to Berri himself, his family and his allies, including the prime minister. Allowing them to maintain unchecked control would be a death sentence for Lebanese democracy and American interests.

Third, reject the “army-people-resistance” formula. The narrative that Hezbollah’s military is integral to Lebanon’s defense must be demolished. Any attempt to revive this framework under Berri’s control would perpetuate Lebanon’s instability.

The Israel-Hezbollah deal is not a triumph of diplomacy but a devastating chapter for Lebanon. Israel and Iran emerge with strategic gains, while Lebanon lies shattered, its people left to suffer under the weight of destruction and entrenched corruption. If the Lebanese people do not rise to reclaim their sovereignty and demand accountability, the cycle of despair will only deepen.

The time for action is now — on the streets, in parliament and in the face of those who would destroy what remains of Lebanon’s future. And action is needed in Washington, with funding and equipment for the Lebanese Army along with sanctioning the corrupt Lebanese ruling class.

David Ramadan, Ed.D. is a Lebanese-American who was elected and served in the Virginia House of Delegates. He is a professor of practice at the Schar School at George Mason University and a scholar at the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.