Times of Israel, on Iran, 26 October 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Hezbollah rearming for possible renewed conflict with Israel ...

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.2 findings

Hezbollah rearming for possible renewed conflict with Israel, Lebanese sources say

Iran-backed terror group reportedly receives fresh cash from Tehran, rebuilds drone and explosives capabilities; claims right to ‘resistance’ against Israel

BEIRUT, Lebanon (Reuters) — has spent three months preparing for a possible resumption of hostilities with Israel, after receiving an infusion of cash from Iran, according to Lebanese security personnel briefed on its activities.

The group, founded by Iran’s Revolutionary Guards in 1982, has been dealt severe blows in two wars with Israel since 2024, with thousands of its operatives and many of its leaders killed, and much of its arsenal destroyed.

Israeli forces now control its heartland of villages in southern Lebanon, and political pressure has mounted in Beirut for its disarmament.

, where civilians have been ordered to evacuate and . Israel says the zone is intended to prevent Hezbollah from reestablishing itself near the border and threatening communities in northern Israel.

But and has used a lull in hostilities since June to rearm, with a focus on procuring explosives and producing drones that can be flown into Israeli positions, two Lebanese security sources told Reuters.

One of the sources, and another close to Hezbollah, said the group had received tens of millions of dollars from Iran to help boost its military capabilities. That is in addition to around $200 million that the group received from Tehran to aid displaced families in its Shiite heartlands, which Reuters reported earlier this month.

Hezbollah has been restoring command-and-control structures that broke down in key battles, according to one of those sources and three other security officials familiar with the group’s operations.

In response to questions from Reuters, Israel’s presence on Lebanese territory gave it a legitimate right to any resistance. It rejected the suggestion that its command-and-control systems had broken down.

Israel’s military declined to comment. Iran’s permanent mission to the United Nations in Geneva did not immediately respond to Reuters questions.

A US State Department spokesman said Washington would keep strangling Hezbollah’s finances through sanctions and other measures. A US Treasury spokesperson said Iran was running out of money and ways to move money.

Hezbollah on alert

Hezbollah’s effort comes amid continued tensions in the wider regional conflict following US-Israeli strikes on Iran in February.

Hezbollah opened fire in support of Iran on March 2, triggering an Israeli offensive that killed more than 4,000 people and uprooted a quarter of Lebanon’s population, mostly members of Hezbollah’s Shiite Muslim constituency.

Hostilities largely abated over the summer as an interim Iran-US deal included a Lebanon ceasefire and Washington mediated talks between Lebanon and Israel. Full-scale hostilities have not resumed in Lebanon despite the collapse of the US-Iranian deal, though Israel has continued to strike Hezbollah targets in southern Lebanon.

Hezbollah is on alert for a possible US-Iran escalation, potentially reigniting the Lebanon front.

The sources told Reuters the group had not yet managed to fully prepare its stockpiles or fighting force.

Hezbollah is still restocking, acknowledging this month that explosives seized by Lebanese authorities belonged to it and were intended for use against Israel. A Hezbollah official and a Lebanese security source told Reuters they were specifically for its explosive drones.

Israel’s remote warfare proved a challenge, sources say

The group will also need to repair command-and-control capabilities after losses on key fronts, including the flashpoint town of Bint Jbeil and the strategic Ali al-Taher ridge, according to one of the Lebanese sources and three security officials.

They said Hezbollah’s tactic of operating in small units and rationing the use of anti-tank rockets left some units isolated on those fronts, struggling to confront Israel’s remotely operated systems including weaponized drones and armed remote-controlled vehicles.

The Israeli military told Reuters it uses remotely operated systems to monitor southern Lebanon and reduce troops’ threat exposure.

Hezbollah has not explicitly said whether it would take part in the eruption of fresh hostilities, but its media office said it was wary of giving Israeli leaders any justification to escalate in Lebanon, particularly as the group was concerned about its constituents being displaced once more.

The Times of Israel contributed to this report.

The Times of Israel Community.

Read the original article on timesofisrael.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (2)

The Times of Israel runs a Reuters report on Hezbollah rearming. In its own voice it adopts Israel's term 'security zone' for the Israeli-held area of southern Lebanon and calls Hezbollah a 'terror group' throughout. It also writes that Hezbollah 'claimed' where Israel 'says'.

  1. States one side's claim as fact

    Minor

    “Israel currently maintains a security zone in southern Lebanon”

    Why this matters
    The outlet uses Israel's own term, 'security zone', as its plain description of territory Israeli forces hold inside Lebanon.
    The impression it gives
    A reader understands the area as a defensive buffer, which is Israel's account of its purpose.
    The context
    The article itself says Israeli forces 'now control' the villages of southern Lebanon and that civilians have been ordered out. Hezbollah describes this as Israel's 'presence on Lebanese territory'. 'Security zone' is one party's name for a military hold on another country's land, and the outlet uses it without attribution.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“Israeli forces now control its heartland of villages in southern Lebanon”
    • Elsewhere in the article“Israel’s presence on Lebanese territory gave it a legitimate right”

    Show it in the article

    “IDF troops are dismantling Hezbollah infrastructure”

    Why this matters
    The outlet describes in its own voice what Israeli troops are doing in an area emptied of civilians, using the Israeli army's description.
    The impression it gives
    A reader accepts that what is being destroyed in southern Lebanon is military infrastructure.
    The context
    No source is given for this description, and the same sentence says civilians were ordered to leave the area. The article's only basis for the description of the operation is Israel's own stated aim, which it attributes in the next sentence.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“Israel says the zone is intended to prevent Hezbollah”

    Show it in the article

  2. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “The Iran-backed Hezbollah terror group”

    Why this matters
    The outlet calls Hezbollah a 'terror group' in its own narration, not as anyone's designation.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes the label as a neutral fact about the group.
    The context
    The label is a verdict carried by the outlet's voice. Nothing in the article attributes it to a government or a body that applies it.

    Show it in the article

    “the terror group nevertheless remains committed to attacking Israel”

    Why this matters
    The outlet repeats the label at the point where it reports what anonymous security sources say about Hezbollah's intentions.
    The impression it gives
    A reader reads the sources' account of Hezbollah's plans through the outlet's verdict on the group.
    The context
    The claim about intent comes from 'two Lebanese security sources', yet the label in front of it is the outlet's own.

    Show it in the article

    “Hezbollah’s media office claimed”

    Why this matters
    The outlet introduces Hezbollah's statement with 'claimed', while Israel's statement of the purpose of its zone is introduced with 'says'.
    The impression it gives
    A reader treats Hezbollah's account as doubtful and Israel's as plain.
    The context
    Both are one party's account of its own position. The article gives no fact that makes one more doubtful than the other.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“Israel says the zone is intended”

    Show it in the article

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Times of Israel

  1. 26 OctNetanyahu pushed for Iran strike before election but Trump refused, CNN says3.0
  2. 26 OctReport: Netanyahu likely to fire IDF chief if reelected; Zamir alone in ...3.0
  3. 26 OctAfter reports of rifts over Iran, IDF says it's focused on missions, 'any ...0.0
  4. 26 OctIran says Mecca Agreement meeting in Tehran will discuss ‘Zionist expansionism’3.0
  5. 26 OctIran president urges ‘regional unity’ in meeting with Mecca pact countries0.0

Everything we scored from Times of Israel

See how 13 outlets covered this story