The issue of reconstructing affected areas in Lebanon has ignited a political debate over who should bear the costs, with Hezbollah placing the primary responsibility for housing, reconstruction, and supporting displaced persons on the government. While Hezbollah stated that it is "working on a program for this matter, contingent upon the availability of financial resources," opposition lawmakers have interpreted this as an admission of the group's inability to shoulder such burdens. They argue that any sustainable solution requires returning the entire process to the state and ensuring that the state holds a monopoly on the use of arms. This debate unfolds as those affected and displaced by the war continue to suffer, and at a time when no comprehensive mechanism for financing reconstruction has yet emerged—a political discourse that extends beyond the mere securing of funds to the definition of responsibilities and the conditions under which the state and international donors might contribute.
Figures compiled by "Statistics Lebanon" reveal that the issue of reconstruction and housing in Lebanon is not limited to the damage caused by the 2026 war; rather, it compounds the losses from the 2024 war—a situation Lebanon had not yet finished addressing. In 2024, direct material damage reached approximately $6.8 billion, with $4.6 billion of that in the housing sector, while recovery and reconstruction needs were estimated at around $11 billion—all before the new war inflicted further extensive damage on buildings, homes, and infrastructure.
In reality, there is no definitive national tally yet regarding the cost of damages from the 2026 war or the requirements for reconstruction, as military operations are ongoing and comprehensive assessments have yet to be completed. However, preliminary figures compiled by "Statistics Lebanon" indicate that, as of April 2026, direct damage to buildings has exceeded $1.745 billion across Southern Lebanon, Beirut, and Mount Lebanon—with more than $1.38 billion in the South alone, and over $365 million in Beirut and Mount Lebanon. These are partial figures that do not represent the final cost of the war; consequently, they cannot be directly compared to the comprehensive national assessment of damages from 2024.
More than 21,000 housing units destroyed
The severity of the crisis is most evident in the residential sector. In the region south of the Litani River, 11,095 buildings have been completely destroyed, in addition to 146 buildings in Beirut and Mount Lebanon. Assessments further indicate that 17,891 residential units have been completely destroyed in southern Lebanon, along with 3,168 units in Beirut and Mount Lebanon—bringing the total number of completely destroyed residential units in the assessed areas to over 21,000.
These losses are accompanied by massive volumes of debris: approximately 3.1 million cubic meters in southern Lebanon and about 649,000 cubic meters in Beirut and Mount Lebanon. This means that the return of residents is not merely a matter of rebuilding homes; vast areas will first require the removal of debris, as well as the restoration of roads, water and electricity networks, and essential services, before a stable return of the population becomes possible.
Displacement exacerbates the shelter crisis
This destruction of housing intersects with a widespread crisis of displacement and shelter needs. According to international data, approximately one million people were internally displaced at the onset of the escalation, while about 100,000 crossed into Syria. As of September 1, 2026, 329,240 individuals remained internally displaced—a situation that underscores the ongoing need for temporary and medium-term shelter solutions, particularly for families whose homes have been destroyed or whose towns now lack the minimum requirements for their return.
A return to the origin—that is, the state
In this context, Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem stated that the party is committed to contributing to the provision of shelter and reconstruction for those affected in the south, while also urging the state to fulfill its own role. He added that the party "will soon announce its contribution to a housing project."
However, in an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, Member of Parliament Ibrahim Mneimneh remarked that "for years, Hezbollah has been appropriating the government’s achievements and claiming credit for them." He pointed out that "in 2006, Arab states provided the bulk of the funding, yet Hezbollah exploited gaps in the state’s performance to take credit for that effort." Mneimneh added, "Now, however, things are returning to their proper foundation—the state. It is the state that will carry out the reconstruction... and this serves as an admission by the party that it is no longer in a position to exploit the situation."
Mneimneh, a Member of Parliament for Beirut, also addressed remarks made by MP Hassan Fadlallah—a representative for Hezbollah and the southern region—who claimed that the state possesses the necessary funds. Mneimneh remarked: "It is ironic for Fadlallah to claim that the state has the money; it is as if he is accusing the state of failing to fulfill its duties in this regard—even though he knows this is untrue. Furthermore, his party—Hezbollah—is represented within the government. Consequently, the party’s statements are both inaccurate and populist."
Mneimneh continued: "Anyone who wishes to address the issue of reconstruction must first engage with the government to discuss it, and must also implement the decisions made by the government—or the state—regarding the consolidation of arms. This is the essential first step toward any process of reconstruction."
It is worth noting that Representative Fadlallah had previously stressed that “when there is a government in Lebanon, it is responsible for its people and every citizen on its land, regardless of the reasons for the war, whether we are with it or opposed to it, knowing that it has the financial and economic capabilities and capabilities.”
He added: “Instead of spending this potential in places other than its proper places, it can harness part of the potential for the issue of reconstruction and shelter and to support the displaced. This is a fundamental responsibility of the government, and regardless of the disagreement with it, we will hold it responsible, and we are working through it and the Parliament, to provide whatever financial resources possible for this file.”
In contrast, Mneimneh explained that "the hesitation regarding reconstruction is not because the state is failing to fulfill its duties." He added, "First, the donor nations that would assist with reconstruction are unwilling to invest funds only for another war to break out. Furthermore, the debate over the state’s exclusive control of arms remains unresolved... Consequently, while such rhetoric may implicitly acknowledge the role of the state, it is fundamentally incomplete." He emphasized that "Hezbollah bears a responsibility to truly integrate into the state framework by addressing the issue of the state’s exclusive control of arms."
Regarding Hezbollah’s responsibility to compensate those affected, Mneimneh stated, "In my view, they have essentially failed to keep their promises in this regard. People are growing increasingly frustrated because there is no funding—not even for basic shelter—especially for those who remain displaced. It is clear that Hezbollah is currently unable to handle this matter, and, having lost that capacity, they have effectively abandoned it."
The government is responsible for its people
Meanwhile, there is talk within Hezbollah’s circles that the party is preparing to provide cash assistance to those affected—framed as a "compensatory gift"—though no official announcement has yet been made regarding the amount, the intended recipients, or when distribution will begin.
In his recent statement, Naim Qassem made it clear that the party would merely "contribute." This implies that Hezbollah does not intend to be the primary financier; instead, it is looking to the state—which the party claims it will continue to urge to undertake the reconstruction process.
In a related vein, the position of MP Mark Daou, who represents Mount Lebanon, aligns with Mneimneh’s interpretation of Hezbollah’s shift toward relying on the state. Daou told Asharq Al-Awsat that Hezbollah’s decision to hold the government responsible for reconstruction "confirms its own incapacity," suggesting that the party’s move to rely entirely on the state reflects its inability to bear the consequences of what has occurred.
Daou added: "When the entire burden is placed upon the government—with claims that everything now depends on it—this is a clear admission of incapacity." He continued: "He [Hezbollah] calls on the state and the government to take responsibility for reconstruction, yet his political conduct does not reflect such an acknowledgment... Ultimately, he expects the state to handle the reconstruction of what resulted from his own errors and actions."
Alternative paths prior to charging the cost to the treasury
For his part, MP Adib Abdel Massih told Asharq Al-Awsat that "Hezbollah is evading its responsibility regarding reconstruction, attempting to shift the burden of a war—which it was primarily instrumental in igniting—onto the state and the Lebanese people." He argued that the party has several alternative avenues to address this issue, rather than demanding that the state shoulder the entire cost.
Abdel Massih, a representative from North Lebanon, stated: "Hezbollah is represented in the government by two ministers; let them step forward, call for a government resolution on reconstruction, and seek to build a consensus within the cabinet. If they are capable of doing so, let them."
He added: "If the party cannot secure a government consensus on reconstruction, there are other paths. First, it must take responsibility, as it was the party that embroiled Lebanon, opened fire on Israel, and triggered this war. Second, it has ties to Iran; the Foreign Minister could, for instance, seek reparations from the Iranian state for the damages incurred, given that Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is present on Lebanese soil through its support for the party."
Abdel Massih continued: "Then there is Israel, which is the direct cause of the destruction. One could pursue international legal avenues and courts to claim rights and reparations; once secured, these funds could be used for the reconstruction of the South. These are practical solutions that can be pursued."
MP Abdel Massih firmly rejected the idea that the Lebanese treasury should bear the full cost of reconstruction alone, stating: "The notion that the Lebanese state should ultimately shoulder the responsibility—collecting taxes from the people, meaning you and I would end up paying for the reconstruction of the South—is something that will absolutely not happen."
He argued that the party is "evading" its responsibility; it begins today with demands and protests, which could tomorrow escalate into street actions directed against the government or the army. Instead of taking accountability, the party attempts to shift it onto others—this is one hundred percent clear. It starts with these demands, followed by the organization of protests along the same lines, in an attempt to appear as part of the opposition—calling for rights similar to those sought by state employees or other Lebanese citizens—even though the party was a primary actor in this war, not merely an ordinary participant."
War undermines the Lebanese economy
In conclusion, the expansion of shelter and reconstruction needs comes at a time when the ability of the Lebanese economy and the state to bear additional burdens has declined. The numbers indicate that the real domestic product is expected to contract by 6.4 percent during 2026, while the current war needs are added to the 2024 reconstruction bill, which was originally estimated at about 11 billion dollars. Accordingly, The file is no longer limited to compensating the owners of damaged homes, but rather includes providing shelter for the displaced, removing millions of cubic meters of rubble, rehabilitating services and infrastructure, and then rebuilding thousands of buildings and more than 21 thousand completely destroyed housing units within the scope of the assessments completed so far.