Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas is expected to visit Lebanon in mid-to-late May to finalise an agreement with Lebanese officials on the disarmament of Palestinian factions in refugee camps across the country, including by force if necessary, according to recent reports.
The move, supported by both the Palestinian Authority and the Lebanese government, seeks to consolidate state control over all weapons in Lebanon, including those held by Abbas’s own Fatah movement.
Hussein Al-Sheikh, Abbas’s deputy and a senior Palestinian official, echoed these sentiments, stating on Sunday that Hamas must also “give up its weapons” and accept “one authority, one legitimacy, and one weapon”.
This marks a key part of the PA’s push for centralised control as part of what it sees as a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Observers told The New Arab that the anticipated announcement aligns with the broader American and Israeli vision for reshaping the Middle East. However, they caution that implementing such a move would be fraught with challenges and could ignite tensions between armed factions, the Lebanese state, and Palestinian leadership bodies.
The disarmament could also jeopardise the symbolic role of the refugee camps as enduring witnesses to the Palestinian right of return and may further erode the foundations of that claim.
Suleiman Bisharat, director of the Yabous Center for Studies, told The New Arab that the potential move "closely aligns with the American vision for the future of the Middle East and its approach to the challenges posed by resistance arms".
"The United States, along with Arab nations including Lebanon and Syria, is increasingly emphasising the restoration of full state sovereignty over national territories,” Bisharat explained.
“One of the key elements in this approach is addressing the question of armed factions, which the US and Israel often cite as justification for interference or instability.”
He added that this push may also tie into broader attempts to resolve the Palestinian refugee issue.
“There could be efforts to use the resistance’s arms as leverage to redefine the concept of Palestinian refugees,” he said, “which might involve demographic and geographic restructuring of the camps within host countries, or even encouraging resettlement in third countries. That scenario would serve Israel’s long-term strategy.”
He argued that such an initiative would be consistent with the doctrine President Abbas has followed since assuming office in 2005, one that prioritises diplomacy over armed struggle.
"Abbas has always noted that no weapons should exist outside the official Palestinian institutions,” Bisharat said. “This would be the practical application of that vision.”
A double-edged sword
Still, Bisharat cautioned that the policy is "a double-edged sword." On the positive side, he said it could help transform public perceptions of Palestinians in Lebanon’s camps, “shifting away from images of militarisation and toward the concept of Palestinian civilians with full rights”.
But the move could also undermine the camps’ role in maintaining the right of return.
“Israel, in partnership with the US, is already waging a campaign to dismantle UNRWA,” he said, referring to the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees. “Eliminating the camps’ military presence would align with that effort, effectively closing the refugee issue.”
Bisharat added that official Palestinian institutions are unlikely to act outside the scope of broader Arab and international consensus, “which appears to be pushing toward redefinition of the refugee identity, the relationship between the camps and the Palestinian cause, and the notion that negotiations are the only acceptable path forward”.
He highlighted that the camps have historically served as strongholds for resistance movements, particularly Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), which continue to advocate armed struggle against Israeli occupation.
“Any disruption to these camps or attempts to disarm them could lead to confrontation or weaken the resistance front, and it’s a goal that may well be behind the current push,” he said.
No clear resolution
Palestinian affairs expert Ahmad Abu Al-Hayja described the situation as still “murky,” especially in terms of implementation.
“It’s clear that a decision exists, but this is not something President Abbas can settle unilaterally with the Lebanese government,” he told The New Arab. “The weapons in the camps are deeply intertwined with the broader weapons issue in Lebanon, including Hezbollah’s arsenal.”
He added that the interconnection of Lebanese and Palestinian arms makes the disarmament of Palestinian factions not just a security challenge, but a political and strategic dilemma for all parties involved.
Al-Hayja also added that Hezbollah, despite current pressures, is unlikely to fully withdraw its informal protection of the Palestinian camps.
“The party’s position is complex,” he said. “Even in its current difficult situation, I don’t expect Hezbollah to lift its cover from the camps; it would set a precedent that could come back to haunt it.”
He added that instead of a sweeping disarmament, what may emerge is a framework of understandings to internally regulate the camps, limiting the use and presence of arms without a formal handover.
He cited a recent incident involving Hamas-affiliated elements that launched rockets from Lebanese territory without official sanction, an episode that embarrassed both Hamas and Hezbollah amid heightened tensions with Israel.
“This kind of independent action,” he said, “highlighted the need for internal control mechanisms, but it’s a far cry from actual disarmament.”
Al-Hayja dismissed the notion that Palestinian arms could be fully removed from Lebanon under current conditions.
“This isn’t a situation that allows for such decisive outcomes,” he said. “Yes, some forces may try to exploit Hezbollah’s moment of vulnerability, but Lebanon’s internal balances and political red lines will place hard limits on what’s possible.”
He predicted increased pressure on the camps and perhaps new restrictions, but not outright disarmament.
“There will be harassment, possibly tighter controls, but not a clean break,” he said. “Lebanon’s factions are too divided. Even the army, with its diverse composition, doesn’t speak with one voice.”
Al-Hayja also criticised the Palestinian Authority’s positioning, stating that if the authority in the West Bank justifies security coordination with Israel as a survival tactic, “what is the rationale for disarmament in Lebanon?”
“This seems more like a regional manoeuvre to resolve all pending issues under the cover of war’s chaos, without guarantees and with shifting variables still in play,” he said, noting that while Israel has recently wielded dominant influence across the region, it is also stumbling in its strategic planning.
“They’re pushing for resolution of every file simultaneously, but it’s resulting in a series of dead ends,” he said.
'Axis of Resistance' reconfigured
Al-Hayja told The New Arab that the traditional concept of a unified “Axis of Resistance” has collapsed.
“We can no longer talk about it as we used to,” he said. “There are still resistance hubs, Hezbollah and the Houthis in Yemen, but the classical axis model has dissolved in recent months.”
Looking forward, he expected new regional realignments and alliances in a “recalibration phase.” He warned that the open-ended nature of current conflicts and the inability to definitively resolve them will prevent any real stabilisation.
“This is a dangerous moment for Israel,” he said. “Even with its apparent upper hand, it is stuck in long-term, shifting conflicts that resist clean conclusions.”
Ahmad Rafiq Awad, director of the Jerusalem Centre for Studies at Al-Quds University, sees the current moment as a reflection of shifting Lebanese political dynamics, particularly Hezbollah’s retreat in favour of the state.
“There is an emerging formula in Lebanon - a monopoly of arms by the state,” he said. “That places Palestinian resistance factions within an entirely new equation.”
Awad added that President Abbas is responding to growing international and regional pressure to reform Palestinian governance, a reform that is often framed in terms of demilitarisation.
“Handing over weapons, or at least opening the subject, aligns with demands for political and institutional reform,” he said.
He acknowledged that the initiative would stir tensions and accusations, but expects that Palestinian factions like Hamas will recognise Lebanon’s difficult circumstances.
“These groups are not operating in a vacuum,” he said. “They understand that the Lebanese state, backed by the West, is under pressure to extend its sovereignty, even over Hezbollah.”
Awad concluded that the Palestinian leadership’s current direction reflects not approval, but acquiescence under duress.
“This comes at a time when the Resistance Axis has suffered partial defeats,” he said. “While factions may reject disarmament rhetorically, they are rational actors who understand the gravity of the situation.”
The article is published in collaboration with Egab