US Envoy Labels Lebanon A Failed State Amid Tensions

On November 1, 2025, the Manama Dialogue summit in Bahrain became the stage for a sharp escalation in the rhetoric surrounding Lebanon’s future. Thomas Barrack, the U.S. Special Envoy for Syria and Ambassador to Turkey, did not mince words: Lebanon, in his view, is a “failed state.” The comment, delivered during a panel on “U.S. Policy in the Levant,” echoed through diplomatic circles and newsrooms alike, reigniting debate about Washington’s approach to the Middle East and the roots of Lebanon’s chronic instability.

According to Associated Press, Barrack’s assessment was blunt: “The state is Hezbollah,” he said, referencing the Iran-backed group that has long wielded outsized influence in Lebanese politics and security. He continued, “America is not going to get deeper involved in the situation with a foreign terrorist organization and a failed state dictating the pace and asking for more resources and more money and more help.” For many observers, this was not just a policy statement but a public declaration of exasperation with Beirut’s “paralyzed government.”

The context for Barrack’s remarks is complex. Lebanon has struggled for years under the weight of economic collapse, political gridlock, and recurring violence, much of it tied to the ongoing power struggle between Hezbollah and the state. As Fox News Digital reported, Barrack quantified Hezbollah’s dominance: the group controls an estimated 40,000 fighters and boasts between 15,000 and 20,000 rockets and missiles. Its fighters are paid handsomely—$2,200 per month—while Lebanese Armed Forces soldiers scrape by on just $275, often with outdated or inferior equipment.

Despite these challenges, the Lebanese government accepted an American plan in August 2025 to disarm Hezbollah by the end of the year. Yet, as Sarit Zehavi of the Israel Alma Research and Education Center told Fox News Digital, “Israel is the only one disarming Hezbollah with its airstrikes. The Lebanese army is far from enough. We don’t see proof of disarmament of Hezbollah by the Lebanese army. The Lebanese army is not entering villages in south Lebanon to search for the weapons of Hezbollah inside of the houses.” Zehavi’s words underscore the immense difficulty of enforcing state authority in a landscape where non-state actors hold sway—and where the army itself has historically stayed on the sidelines of major conflicts with Israel.

For Washington, the stakes are high. The U.S. State Department described Hezbollah as “a threat to Lebanon and its neighbors,” and stressed, “Disarming Hezbollah and other non-state actors, as well as ending Iran’s proxy activities, is crucial to ensuring peace and stability in Lebanon and across the region.” Yet, in practice, American influence is constrained. Barrack made clear that the U.S. would not deepen involvement in Lebanon’s internal disputes but would support Israel “if Israel becomes more aggressive toward Lebanon.”

The fragile ceasefire brokered by the U.S. in November 2024 between Hezbollah and Israel has done little to quell violence. Since then, Israel has conducted near-daily strikes in southern Lebanon, targeting what it says are Hezbollah militants, weapons depots, and command centers. Lebanese officials, for their part, have accused Israel of striking civilian areas and destroying infrastructure unrelated to Hezbollah, calling for Israeli forces to withdraw and respect Lebanon’s sovereignty. The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) condemned a recent Israeli attack that killed a municipal worker in the border town of Blida as “a blatant violation of the Security Council Resolution 1701 and Lebanon’s sovereignty.”

Amid these tensions, the Lebanese president, Joseph Aoun, instructed the army to confront any Israeli incursion into southern Lebanon—a rare and risky escalation. Yet, as Fox News Digital noted, the Lebanese Armed Forces have not confronted Israeli forces directly in recent months, and Israeli warplanes even flew over the presidential palace in Beirut following Aoun’s order. The cycle of provocation, retaliation, and accusation seems unbroken.

But the story does not end with Lebanon and Israel. Barrack’s remarks came just as Syria, under its new president Ahmad al-Sharaa, prepares for a historic visit to Washington on November 10, 2025—the first by a Syrian leader since 1946. Barrack called Syria’s expected entry into the U.S.-led anti–Islamic State coalition “a big step” and “remarkable.” The coalition, now numbering about 80 countries, is seen as a bulwark against the resurgence of IS. Barrack argued that Syria, in contrast to Lebanon, is “showing the way” toward regional realignment, hinting that Damascus’s willingness to engage with the West could serve as a model for others.

Diplomatic efforts are also underway to revive the 1974 ceasefire agreement between Syria and Israel, with a fifth round of de-escalation talks on the horizon. According to Barrack, “The path is very clear — that it needs to be to Jerusalem or Tel Aviv for a conversation along with Syria.” These negotiations are fraught with mistrust, especially as Israel remains wary of Syria’s new government, led by former Islamist insurgents, and is determined to prevent hostile forces from establishing themselves along its frontier.

Inside Lebanon, the debate over how to handle Hezbollah is raging. U.S. envoy Morgan Ortagus, speaking in Beirut, insisted that the Lebanese military “must now fully implement its plan.” An Israeli security official told Fox News Digital, “We feel obligated to the American mechanism. We pass on Hezbollah’s violations to the American mechanism. We have seen the Lebanese army enforce the ceasefire, but the pace is insufficient.” The official added, “We were striking Hezbollah terrorist operatives on an almost daily basis since the ceasefire in accordance with it. A lot of these operatives are operating from civilian areas. The IDF is putting a lot of effort [into] not targeting civilian areas. We can’t tolerate Hezbollah’s attempts to rebuild its capabilities.”

UNIFIL’s spokesperson, Tilak Pokharel, offered a different perspective. He told Fox News Digital that UNIFIL operates from the Litani River to the Blue Line, covering 10% of Lebanon’s territory, and “we have not seen any build-up, and we have been working every day and supporting them, the Lebanese Armed Forces. Until earlier this week, we found 360 weapons and ammunition caches since Nov. 27, 2024.”

While some Lebanese politicians and social media influencers are now openly calling for diplomatic relations with Israel and an end to the war, others remain deeply skeptical of any rapprochement. Walid Phares, an American academic, noted, “Recently, there has been a noticeable rise in statements from Lebanese politicians and social media influencers calling for the establishment of diplomatic relations with Israel and an end to the ongoing war.” He added that despite Hezbollah’s military setbacks, the group “shows no intention of relinquishing its weapons” and “remains determined to maintain control over Lebanon and suppress other communities.”

For critics of U.S. policy, as highlighted in Tehran Times, America’s approach to Lebanon is seen as part of a long-standing pattern of interference—one that props up client regimes, imposes economic blockades, and finances sectarian politics in the name of democracy and stability. They argue that the U.S. narrative of Lebanon as a failed state ignores decades of American meddling and the resilience of Lebanese society. The article contends that Washington’s so-called mediation efforts, whether through Cairo or other channels, are designed to neutralize resistance and entrench Israeli security interests at Lebanon’s expense.

In the end, Lebanon’s fate hangs in the balance. The coming months will test whether the government can implement its pledge to disarm Hezbollah, whether the army can assert its authority, and whether diplomatic efforts can prevent another descent into war. As regional powers realign and great powers jockey for influence, Lebanon’s struggle for sovereignty and stability continues—caught, as ever, in the crossfire of history and geopolitics.