CIVICUS discusses ongoing war in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah and its impact on civil society with Ziad Abdel Samad, Executive Director of the Arab NGO Network for Development (ANND), a regional network that promotes human rights, social justice and sustainable development across the Arab region.

Since October 2023, Lebanon has experienced active conflict alongside a deepening economic crisis, mass displacement and institutional breakdown. Civil society is at the forefront of the response, shifting from long-term development work to emergency humanitarian action while navigating severe financial and political constraints.

How has war affected civil society’s ability to operate?

Civil society organisations across Lebanon have been forced to shift much of their work from long-term development, advocacy and policy engagement towards emergency humanitarian response. The scale of humanitarian needs far exceeds the state’s response capacity. Civil society organisations have therefore played multiple roles, including by documenting human rights abuses and violations of international humanitarian law, providing humanitarian assistance and protection services and supporting the most vulnerable communities.

Civil society has also contributed significantly to preserving social cohesion. Large-scale displacement has placed enormous pressure on host communities already struggling with prolonged economic hardship. Organisations have worked to combat misinformation, facilitate dialogue, strengthen solidarity and support local mediation initiatives that help prevent social fragmentation.

At the same time, many organisations have faced increasing financial and political pressures that have limited their ability to carry out independent accountability, advocacy and monitoring work. There is a growing risk that civil society becomes confined to a purely humanitarian role. While humanitarian assistance is indispensable, civil society must not be reduced to a service provider filling gaps left by the state. Its equally important role is to advocate for accountability, defend human rights, monitor public policies and contribute to shaping sustainable development policies.

These restrictions have become even more pronounced during periods of escalation. Civil society is often expected to focus exclusively on humanitarian relief, while its ability to advocate, document and monitor is constrained. In some cases, emergency situations have also been used to introduce restrictive administrative measures or legislation with limited public scrutiny.

Globally, rising militarisation has diverted financial resources and political attention away from development cooperation. Many Lebanese organisations have experienced substantial funding cuts, while the funding that remains is increasingly earmarked for humanitarian action, leaving fewer resources for governance, rights-based advocacy and long-term development.

It is equally important to respect the internationally agreed principles of aid effectiveness. Development cooperation should be based on alignment with local priorities, genuine partnerships, mutual accountability and national ownership, not political or policy conditionality. Localisation should go beyond transferring operational responsibilities to local groups. It must also involve the transfer of decision-making power and resources. Despite these challenges, Lebanese civil society has continued to demonstrate remarkable commitment, resilience and professionalism.

How has the conflict affected media freedom?

At least 11 journalists have been killed in Lebanon, many of them clearly identified as members of the press. Risks have also extended to Lebanese Civil Defence and Red Cross personnel, many of whom have been killed or prevented from reaching affected areas during rescue operations. Many observers believe that some of these attacks were not accidental and therefore require independent investigation.

Digital infrastructure has also become part of the conflict. Throughout the fighting, there have been widespread reports of interference with communication networks, online disinformation campaigns, GPS spoofing and jamming affecting navigation systems. Digital security has therefore become essential for civil society organisations and journalists alike.

Beyond direct attacks, growing digital surveillance, freedom of expression restrictions and online intimidation have created an environment of increasing self-censorship among human rights defenders, journalists and researchers. Protecting civic space, including digital space, has therefore become an integral part of protecting democratic accountability and media freedom.

Journalists’ safety is a prerequisite for transparency and the public’s right to information. Repeated attacks against journalists and media crews have created a climate of fear that has hindered independent reporting on the destruction of civilian infrastructure and alleged violations of international humanitarian law.

Despite these risks, many journalists have shown extraordinary courage, documenting human suffering, reporting from frontline areas and preserving evidence that may ultimately contribute to accountability.

What will it take for Lebanon to achieve lasting peace?

Lasting peace requires far more than a temporary suspension of hostilities. Peace is not simply the absence of war. It requires justice, accountable institutions, inclusive governance and development that addresses the structural causes of instability. Without rebuilding of trust between citizens and public institutions, strengthening of the rule of law and reduction of economic and social inequalities, ceasefires risk becoming only temporary pauses before renewed violence.

Lebanese authorities have expressed openness to negotiated solutions involving international mediation, including implementation of international resolutions, border security arrangements, the withdrawal of armed forces and security guarantees for communities on both sides of the border.

However, Lebanon’s conflict cannot be understood in isolation from wider regional dynamics. Hezbollah and its allies have linked developments in Lebanon to broader negotiations involving Iran, the USA and other regional and international actors. Ceasefire efforts have therefore become intertwined with wider geopolitical calculations, explaining the repeated difficulties in reaching sustainable agreements.

The conflict also reflects broader geopolitical competition over energy resources, regional influence and trade routes. These structural dynamics increasingly shape the conflict and the prospects for peace, making it even more important to pursue political solutions grounded in international law rather than power politics.

Sustainable peace requires a complete cessation of attacks against civilians, full respect for Lebanese sovereignty, effective monitoring mechanisms, humanitarian access, accountability for violations and an inclusive political process that addresses the legitimate security concerns of all parties. Above all, it requires regional de-escalation, because Lebanon’s stability has repeatedly been undermined by wider regional tensions.

Who should be held accountable for violations and how?

Nothing can justify attacks against civilians, civilian infrastructure or the destruction of towns and villages. International humanitarian law is unequivocal that civilians and civilian objects must be protected.

At the same time, the conflict cannot be understood without recognising the security concerns that have shaped it. Israel has justified its military actions as targeting threats posed by non-state armed groups, while Hezbollah has argued its military activities are linked to ending Israeli military operations and securing Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanese territory.

This has placed Lebanon in an extremely difficult position. The Lebanese state and its armed forces should bear primary responsibility for national defence, but the longstanding debate over the state’s monopoly on the legitimate use of force remains unresolved. Lebanese authorities have consistently expressed support for diplomatic and political solutions in order to avoid further destruction and loss of life.

Accountability must never depend on political considerations. International humanitarian law cannot be applied selectively. Allegations of violations committed by any party, including attacks against civilians, humanitarian workers, journalists and civilian infrastructure, must be independently investigated. Selective justice weakens confidence in international institutions and undermines the credibility of the rules-based international order.

Military action alone cannot deliver sustainable security. Accountability and justice are indispensable components of any durable peace.

What international support does Lebanon need?

Any international response must begin with the protection of civilians and full respect for international humanitarian law. Diplomacy, negotiation and political dialogue remain the most effective means of resolving conflicts. The United Nations Human Rights Council, the Security Council and the International Court of Justice all have essential responsibilities in promoting accountability, protecting international law and supporting peaceful solutions.

At the same time, any sustainable solution must begin inside Lebanon. It is essential that state institutions, including the armed forces, independent judiciary and public administration, are strengthened, while ensuring they remain fully accountable under the rule of law. Rebuilding the social contract between citizens and the state should be a central objective of recovery.

The conflict has also caused profound developmental, economic, environmental and social damage that cannot be addressed through political or security arrangements alone. Agricultural land, ecosystems, infrastructure and natural resources have all suffered extensive destruction. Hundreds of thousands of displaced people have lost their homes, livelihoods and sources of income. Reconstruction should therefore go beyond rebuilding physical infrastructure. It must restore livelihoods, create decent employment opportunities, strengthen social protection systems and guarantee the rights of displaced communities to return safely, receive fair compensation and rebuild their lives with dignity.

More broadly, Lebanon’s experience reflects a wider crisis of multilateralism. International institutions remain indispensable for addressing conflicts, climate change, financial instability, humanitarian crises and sustainable development. However, their legitimacy depends on the consistent application of international law, meaningful accountability and greater representation of global south countries and civil society in decision-making.

International support should therefore reinforce rather than substitute for national ownership. The challenge today is not to abandon multilateralism, but to rebuild it on foundations of equity, justice, genuine partnership and respect for the sovereignty and development choices of peoples.

CIVICUS interviews a wide range of civil society activists, experts and leaders to gather diverse perspectives on civil society action and current issues for publication on its CIVICUS Lens platform. The views expressed in interviews are the interviewees’ and do not necessarily reflect those of CIVICUS. Publication does not imply endorsement of interviewees or the organisations they represent.