_edited.png){kind=small}
Who Decides War and Peace? Lebanon After the New Regional Agreement
- Wissam Nasrallah
- 5 hours ago
- 2 min read
Today, the new 60-day agreement between the United States and Iran goes into effect, with the hope that it will lead to a broader de-escalation across the region, including Lebanon. We are grateful for any step that may spare lives, reduce bombardment, and allow families to breathe again after months of fear and displacement.
At the same time, we want to be sober about what this means. For ordinary people, any pause in violence is good news. It may allow some displaced families to begin returning home, children to regain a measure of normal life, and churches to serve with less immediate fear. Yet for Lebanon as a country, the situation remains deeply fragile. The deeper questions remain unresolved: Who decides war and peace? Can the state protect its people and exercise authority and sovereignty over its territory, or are decisions made abroad on its behalf? What happens to the south while parts of it remain occupied? And can any ceasefire last if it does not address both the external pressures on Lebanon and the internal divisions that weaken it?
In that sense, this agreement may bring relief without resolution. It may reduce the immediate human cost of war, and for that we are thankful, but it may also leave Lebanon trapped in a pattern where temporary calm is negotiated by outside powers while the underlying causes of instability remain untouched.
Recent comments by President Trump suggesting that Syria could “finish the job” or take on Hezbollah add another layer of concern. For many Lebanese, any suggestion of renewed Syrian involvement in Lebanon’s security affairs awakens painful memories. It is also worrying because Syria itself remains unstable. Many minority communities, including Christians, Druze, Alawites, and others, continue to live with deep insecurity and uncertainty. A fragile Syria cannot easily become a stabilizing force for Lebanon.
Here at ABTS, we continue to host displaced families. Many will likely begin making their way back home as the situation allows. Others may need to stay longer, especially those from southern villages where homes have been destroyed or where Israeli occupation and insecurity continue. We are walking with them as best we can, offering shelter, spiritual care, and a place of dignity in the midst of uncertainty.
For the Church, this remains a moment of costly witness. We are called to serve people, not political agendas, to care for the vulnerable, not merely analyze the crisis, and to bear witness to Christ in a land where people are exhausted by fear, displacement, and broken promises.
Comments