The Senate’s version of the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act proposes sweeping new conditions on U.S. support for the Lebanese Armed Forces. The proposed restrictions come after top Senate lawmakers publicly expressed frustration in recent months with the LAF’s failure to take concrete steps to fully disarm Hezbollah, and argued that the U.S. should not provide unconditional funding for the LAF.

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), the chair of the Armed Services Committee, which produces the NDAA, said in late April that “Congress should not support the LAF unless it acts to disarm Hezbollah completely — and immediately.”

Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), who chairs the Foreign Relations Committee, echoed Wicker, adding that it was “well past time for the LAF to take tangible action to fully disarm Hezbollah and for the Lebanese government to follow through on long-promised economic reform. The era of complacency and unconditional bailouts must come to an end.”

Support for the LAF, which would be limited to no more than $36 million, is conditioned on the LAF’s work to disarm Hezbollah. No more than 5% of that funding can be provided until the administration certifies to Congress that Lebanon has outlawed Hezbollah’s activities and that the LAF is actively working to disarm Hezbollah, prevent the Iranian-backed group’s rearmament and prevent attacks on Lebanon’s neighbors — including Israel.

The administration would then be required to re-certify every 90 days to Congress that the LAF is continuing to act against Hezbollah to the full extent of its capabilities, with a mandatory suspension of aid if it cannot meet that certification.

The quarterly reports would also include specific data on the number of weapons seized from Hezbollah and other metrics regarding the LAF’s efforts to degrade Hezbollah, as well as the makeup and capacities of the LAF forces.

President Donald Trump on Tuesday publicly condemned Israel’s operations against Hezbollah, suggesting — in a move that baffled both lawmakers and experts — that Syria’s military could instead be called upon to deal with the Hezbollah threat.

The NDAA would block U.S. counterterrorism assistance to Syria until the administration can certify the Syrian government is taking action to demobilize, disarm and monitor foreign fighters and jihadists in the country, implement a system to “fairly integrate” the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces into the Syrian military and prevent attacks on minorities including Kurds and Druze.

The provision comes amid continued scrutiny on Capitol Hill of the Syrian government’s efforts to protect minorities after the U.S. withdrew sanctions on the Syrian government.

As previously reported, the NDAA, which was finalized last week but not released in full until Tuesday, includes a version of the FUTURES Act, which has become a hot-button issue in the context of the House version of the NDAA, seeking to centralize and expand existing defense collaboration efforts between the two partners.

But it also includes a second provision on joint development, requesting the administration provide Congress with a plan to establish a partnership between the U.S. and Israel on defense industrial priorities, with the goal of supporting the defense industrial bases in both countries, providing opportunities for industries in both countries to cooperate and collaborate and supporting defense development and startups in both countries.

The legislation additionally proposes boosting funding for cooperation on subterranean operations — previously billed as counter-tunnelling efforts — from $80 million to $100 million, and counter-drone programs from $70 million to $100 million. The bill also authorizes $1 million for cybersecurity cooperation with Israel.

That funding would still have to be approved separately in the appropriations process later this year.

The NDAA also includes two different provisions to enhance defense cooperation with both Israel and other Middle East allies.

One, the Abraham Accords Defense Cooperation Initiative, would establish a program to expand defense cooperation between the U.S. and the Abraham countries, to address various threats in the region. It encourages each country in the region to provide matching funds for the program.

The other, which pulls language from the OASIS in the Middle East Act, aims to develop a coordinated air- and missile-defense acquisition strategy alongside Israel, Abraham Accords members and other Middle East allies to ensure adequate resources to protect the U.S. and its allies in the event of future conflicts.

The provision further requires the administration to explain its work to replenish interceptor stockpiles that have reportedly been severely degraded in the war, assess the possibility for co-production with various Middle East allies of interceptor systems, consider an creating an air-defense stockpile in the Middle East and improve joint development and acquisition of low-cost interceptor options.

The NDAA, which provides formal congressional authorization for the Civil Military Cooperation Center overseeing the implementation of the ceasefire plan in Gaza, requires the administration to provide Congress with information on plans for and actual deployment of the International Security Force in Gaza and its involvement in disarming Hamas, as well as on granular, specific details on the amount and types of aid moving into Gaza.

Plans for the ISF have largely failed to materialize, and the force has not yet deployed inside Gaza, where efforts to disarm Hamas have stalled in light of the terrorist group’s intransigence.

Israel and Lebanon agreed on Wednesday to extend their ceasefire — which in practice has been tenuous — on the condition that Hezbollah disarms and withdraws from Israel’s northern border, and to jointly establish “pilot zones” where the Lebanese Armed Forces “will take exclusive control of the territory.”

The parties, together with the U.S., announced the developments in a joint statement at the conclusion of the second and final day of the fourth round of peace talks between Israeli and Lebanese officials at the State Department. 

State Department Counselor Dan Holler, Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter, Lebanese Ambassador to the U.S. Nada Hamadah, U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa and several U.S. military representatives participated in Wednesday’s talks. The group will reconvene for the next round of talks the week of June 22 “with a view toward reaching a comprehensive agreement,” the statement said. A State Department official told JI that the exact time and venue for the upcoming discussions have not yet been decided. 

Speaking to reporters in Foggy Bottom, Leiter touted Wednesday’s agreement as a “relatively unprecedented” achievement.

“Israel entered Lebanon after Hezbollah decided to join the war of Iran against Israel, and we’re pushing Hezbollah back. We’ve brought the people of Lebanon to the understanding that we’re not the enemy, Hezbollah is,” Leiter said in response to a question from Jewish Insider. “Now, we’re going to work together to rid the country of this Iranian proxy on Israel’s border, which deprives Israel of its security and the Lebanese people of their freedom.”

On the creation of the “pilot zones,” Leiter said the effort “will be guided by the United States. Special units in the Lebanese army will take control of various areas and gradually spread out throughout the south, so we don’t go into another pattern where Israel leaves, Hezbollah comes back and we go through the same thing from the last 40 years.”

Leiter also noted that Israel would allow Hezbollah terrorists to evacuate from southern Lebanon to the country’s north for a brief, unspecified period of time.

“The first step is that the Hezbollah fighters, these terrorists who have come down to the south, have to go back to the north. They came down recently. We’re talking about some 2,000-plus terrorists,” the Israeli ambassador said. “So we’re going to see them go back to the north. We will guarantee them safe passage as long as they leave, but after a certain amount of time, which is not very long, if they don’t make their way back to the north, then they know exactly what’s coming, and Lebanon understands what’s coming.”

Asked by JI what Israel believes President Donald Trump’s red line is when it comes to their ability to go after Hezbollah in Beirut or elsewhere in Lebanon, Leiter said that Trump, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Lebanese President Joseph Aoun are in agreement about Israel’s right to respond to attacks from the Lebanese terrorist group. 

“If Hezbollah is intent on disrupting the ceasefire, the result is going to be on them, and that’s something that President Trump, Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Aoun have made very clear,” Leiter said. “We are together on this agenda to see to it that Iran is not to be allowed any longer to facilitate violence against Lebanon, against Israel through Hezbollah.”

The Israeli ambassador credited the Lebanese government for “trying for several weeks now to get Hezbollah to stop firing” at Israel and “to assert within Lebanon that there is a legitimate government, they are in control and Iran doesn’t control Lebanon.”

Leiter dismissed the suggestion that Trump and Netanyahu’s tense phone call on Monday, during which the president referred to the Israeli prime minister as “f***ing crazy” over Israel’s military escalation in Lebanon, impacted the outcome of this week’s talks or indicated a split between the two on the security concerns posed by Hezbollah.

“Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump have met seven times over the past year, more than any other foreign leader, and President Trump visited Jerusalem. They’ve spoken on the phone about 60 times, so we’re talking about hours and hours and hours of conversation,” Leiter said. “Taking out one ‘bleep’ from all those conversations and making that the hallmark of their relationship is a mistake. Lovers have spats. They may have had a little lovers’ spat this week, that’s OK.”

“When we’re so close, we’re going to have conversations that sometimes are heated, but the bottom line is that America, Israel, Lebanon are united on keeping Iran out of the equation. That’s the most important thing,” he continued.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) abruptly ended his meeting with Gen. Rodolphe Haykal, the head of the Lebanese Armed Forces, on Thursday after Haykal declined to refer to Hezbollah as a terrorist organization.

Graham met with Haykal in his Senate office for a planned discussion on the latest military developments in Lebanon and the LAF’s approach to Israel and Hezbollah. The South Carolina senator wrote on X that he asked the Lebanese military official at the start of the meeting if he viewed Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, and did not appreciate the response he received. 

“I just had a very brief meeting with the Lebanese Chief of Defense General Rodolphe Haykal,” Graham said. “I asked him point blank if he believes Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. He said, ‘No, not in the context of Lebanon.’ With that, I ended the meeting.”

“They are clearly a terrorist organization. Hezbollah has American blood on its hands. Just ask the U.S. Marines. They have been designated as a foreign terrorist organization by both Republican and Democrat administrations since 1997 — for good reason,” he added. “As long as this attitude exists from the Lebanese Armed Forces, I don’t think we have a reliable partner in them. I am tired of the double speak in the Middle East. Too much is at stake.”

Haykal has been in Washington this week for meetings with U.S. lawmakers and Trump administration officials. Aside from Graham, Haykal met with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Reps. Brian Mast (R-FL) and Gregory Meeks (D-NY), respectively the chairman and ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, respectively. Haykal also met with Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine and officials at the CIA, the Pentagon and the National Security Council.

He was previously slated to visit the U.S. in November, but scrapped the trip after Graham and others canceled their meetings over a statement Haykal released weeks prior that blamed Israel for the unrest in Lebanon without mentioning Hezbollah. Graham, who has visited Lebanon multiple times in the last year to encourage the Lebanese government to disarm Hezbollah and stabilize its border with Israel, warned in numerous statements responding to Haykal at the time that his position toward U.S.-Lebanon relations would likely shift if changes were not made. 

“It is clear that the Lebanese Chief Head of Defense — because of a reference to Israel as the enemy and his weak almost non-existent effort to disarm Hezbollah — is a giant setback for efforts to move Lebanon forward,” Graham wrote on X in November. “This combination makes the Lebanese Armed Forces not a very good investment for America.”

“The idea of the Lebanese military joining forces with Hezbollah to combat Israel would put in jeopardy everything that I and many others are trying to do to help Lebanon move forward,” he cautioned in another tweet. 

The U.S., along with Graham, has been pushing Lebanon to follow through on its commitment to disarm Hezbollah, made as part of the Trump administration’s ceasefire deal between Israel and Hezbollah in 2024. The first phase of the deal, which went into effect in November of that year, called for the Lebanese military to remove Hezbollah from the territory south of the Litani River, near Israel’s border, by the end of 2025. The second phase would then focus on Hezbollah’s disarmament north of the Litani. 

The Lebanese government announced it accomplished that goal in early January, though Israel has disputed that claim, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office saying, “Efforts made toward this end by the Lebanese Government and the Lebanese Armed Forces are an encouraging beginning, but they are far from sufficient, as evidenced by Hezbollah’s efforts to rearm and rebuild its terror infrastructure with Iranian support.”

Graham said while in Israel in late December that the “trend lines in Lebanon” were “optimistic” following months of public statements from several senior Lebanese government officials calling for Hezbollah to be disarmed. 

“If you want peace, deal with the people who do not. Take them out of the game. Get your head out of the sand,” Graham said at a press conference in Tel Aviv. “If you want a peaceful Lebanon, you need to find a way to deal with Hezbollah because they don’t want peace with Israel. They want to destroy Israel. Most people in Lebanon don’t want to destroy Israel.”

The Lebanese Armed Forces announced Thursday that it had taken operational control of the south of the country and successfully completed the first phase of its operation to disarm Hezbollah — a claim that experts say is unlikely to satisfy Israel and could risk further escalation. 

Under the November 2024 ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hezbollah, the Lebanese government was tasked with removing the terror group south of the Litani River, near Israel’s border, with a deadline of Dec. 31, 2025, before moving to the second phase of disarmament north of the Litani. 

Experts told Jewish Insider that the Lebanese army’s claim has done little to quell Israeli concerns. In response to the announcement, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said the efforts by Lebanon’s government and army thus far were “far from sufficient.” 

“Despite the statements published today in Lebanon, the facts remain that extensive Hezbollah military infrastructure still exists south of the Litani River,” Israel’s foreign ministry stated in a post on X on Thursday. “The goal of disarming Hezbollah in southern Lebanon remains far from being achieved.” 

The foreign ministry also cited concerns over “cooperation between elements within the LAF and Hezbollah,” calling such coordination “regrettable.” 

Former IDF intelligence chief Tamir Hayman, head of the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University, called Lebanon’s announcement “an illusion … far from the truth.”

“On the ground, south of the Litani River, remain thousands of Hezbollah sites that were not cleaned of arms,” Hayman wrote in an analysis for Israel’s Channel 12. 

The ceasefire agreement followed more than a year of war that erupted after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel, which displaced more than 60,000 residents from northern Israel.

While Israel significantly degraded Hezbollah during the 2024 fighting — taking out the group’s leadership and destroying much of its arsenal — concerns have remained over the group’s continued presence near the Israeli border and rearmament during the ceasefire.

“My view is that the ceasefire itself, at the time it went into effect, was a mistake, because you had Hezbollah on the ropes,” said David Daoud, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “There was no indication that the Lebanese were going to start moving against Hezbollah if a ceasefire was going to go into effect.”

Daoud added that the ceasefire gave Hezbollah “breathing room.” Israel has remained skeptical of Lebanon’s ability to fully disarm the terrorist group, even with Hezbollah’s weak stature. 

Hayman warned that “Hezbollah is not extinct. It is in an accelerated recovery process,” backed by Iranian funding, which includes training officers, opening small workshops that manufacture drones and procuring Syrian Army weapons on the black market. 

Since the establishment of the ceasefire, Israel has continued to strike inside Lebanon, citing Hezbollah’s violations and efforts to rebuild its military capabilities. 

Most recently, the IDF struck “Hezbollah infrastructure” in southern Lebanon on Sunday, citing “continuous violations of ceasefire understandings.”

“A short while ago, the IDF struck shafts used for storing weapons in several military sites belonging to Hezbollah in southern Lebanon,” the IDF said in a statement. “Hezbollah’s terror activity at these sites constitutes a violation of the understandings between Israel and Lebanon. The IDF will continue to operate to remove any threat posed to the State of Israel.”

The announcement about disarmament is “a stunt meant to get what they want out of the Israelis, meaning an end to the attacks [on Hezbollah military infrastructure],” said Daoud. “The Lebanese talk about it and nothing ever gets done.” 

Daoud added that Lebanon has “not done anything to counter Hezbollah,” even in “minimal areas.”

Hanin Ghaddar, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said the situation has become increasingly tense because there is “no indication” that Lebanon will move forward with the next phases of disarmament and that it is “more likely” the country is “not going to move north of Litani” in order to avoid confrontation with Hezbollah.

Analysts said this inaction could prompt Israel to resume broader military strikes against Hezbollah targets, potentially reigniting tensions along the border. 

“The reaction would be another escalation, and that’s what everybody is expecting, including the Lebanese government, president, army, etc.,” said Ghaddar. “It seems to me they know this is going to be the reaction of the Israelis. They know that there will be escalation if they don’t do more [to confront Hezbollah].”

Daoud agreed that further rounds of hostilities are “possible,” adding that the Israelis “have been talking about amping up escalation.” However, he noted that he does not expect a return to war. 

“My sense is we’ll see punctuations of escalation, maybe some weeks where there’s more intense bombing, more wide-scale bombing, maybe some more operations, more targeted killings, but that remains short of war … [and] short of provoking Hezbollah into a massive response,” said Daoud.

“If it continues to remain true that Lebanon is not going to act against Hezbollah in a meaningful way, then the necessary evil, if you will, of military escalation by Israel is the only option to prevent Hezbollah from regenerating,” said Daoud.

Hayman said that Israel will need to take action, but should weigh the right timing to ensure it doesn’t draw attention away from the mass protests currently taking place in Iran. 

In addition, he wrote, Israel must find a way to ensure the next operation against Hezbollah brings long-term safety to northern Israel.  

Reports have indicated that Washington has also been unsatisfied with the Lebanese government’s efforts to confront Hezbollah. Israeli media reported that Netanyahu told members of his Cabinet that President Donald Trump gave him the “green light” for further operations in Lebanon to counter the group. 

However, Daoud said the Trump administration would likely prefer to avoid the resumption of hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah, noting that Trump’s “green light” likely refers to strategic operations rather than all out conflict.

“I don’t think President Trump wants to see another war,” said Daoud. “The administration wants to free up attention and resources to deal with bigger problems [such as Gaza or Iran], rather than what is perceived as a small fish like Lebanon, despite the fact that I would say Hezbollah is a significant threat to the United States.” 

The terrorist group has thus far refrained from responding to Israeli strikes in what Daoud described as an effort to rebuild, prepare for the “long run” and not provoke Jerusalem or the U.S.

“[Hezbollah is] far from done. What they want is to stanch the bleeding as much as possible,” said Daoud. “That’s why they’ve been taking all these assassinations very quietly. Their calculus is: ‘Do we lose five guys a week maximum, or do we trigger the Israelis with the Trump administration in office to the point where we lose 100 guys a week?’”

JI’s senior political correspondent Lahav Harkov contributed to this report. 

The Lebanese Armed Forces is facing pushback from two U.S. lawmakers over a statement it posted to social media on Sunday blaming Israel for flare-ups with Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. 

The LAF wrote in a post on X, “The Israeli enemy persists in its violations of Lebanese sovereignty, causing instability in Lebanon, obstructing the completion of the army’s deployment in the south.”

“The latest of these condemned aggressions was its targeting of a patrol of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon” on Sunday, the post added.

The IDF said that the U.N. soldiers had been “classified as suspects due to poor weather conditions” and that the incident was under investigation.

The LAF post went on to state that it is “working in coordination with friendly countries to put an end to the ongoing violations and breaches by the Israeli enemy, which require immediate action as they represent a dangerous escalation.”

The Lebanese government has agreed to begin efforts to disarm Hezbollah, though reports indicate the terror group is attempting to rebuild its stockpiles after Israel degraded its weapons capabilities over the past several years.

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) responded to the post later that night, writing that she was “disappointed by this statement.”

“The LAF are a strategic partner, and — as I discussed with the CHOD in August — Israel has given Lebanon a real opportunity to free itself from Iran-backed Hezbollah terrorists,” Ernst wrote. “Instead of seizing that opportunity and working together to disarm Hezbollah, the CHOD [Chief Head of Defense] is shamefully directing blame at Israel.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) also weighed in, criticizing the LAF for the statement and its failure to target Hezbollah militarily.

“It is clear that the Lebanese Chief Head of Defense — because of a reference to Israel as the enemy and his weak almost non-existent effort to disarm Hezbollah — is a giant setback for efforts to move Lebanon forward,” Graham wrote on X. 

“This combination makes the Lebanese Armed Forces not a very good investment for America,” he added.  

Ernst and Graham have both visited Lebanon in recent months amid efforts to encourage Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah and stabilize its border with Israel.