The Jerusalem Post, on Lebanon, 26 October 2026

8.7out of 10Severe

Hezbollah readies for new regional war with funds from Iran, sources say

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.6 findings

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 Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in 1982, has been dealt severe blows in two wars with Israel since 2024, with thousands of fighters and many of its leaders killed, and much of its arsenal destroyed., and political pressure has built up in Beirut for its disarmament.It nevertheless remains committed to attacking Israel 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 the security zone, 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 terror group previously received from Tehran, which Reuters reported earlier this month.

The group 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, Hezbollah's media office rejected the suggestion that its command-and-control systems had been 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.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The Post omits Hezbollah's main reply to Reuters: that Israel's occupation of Lebanese land made any resistance to it a legitimate right. The article says Hezbollah 'remains committed to attacking Israel' but never gives its stated reason. A reader sees the rearmament only as unprovoked aggression.

How we know

A US Treasury spokesperson said Iran was running out of money and ways to move money.Hezbollah on alert for potential of renewed fightingHezbollah's effort comes amid continued tensions in the wider Middle Eastern conflict ignited by .Hezbollah attacked Israel in support of Iran on March 2, .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 .Hezbollah is on alert for a possible US-Iran escalation, potentially reigniting the Lebanon front.

The sources told Reuters the terror 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.Hezbollah struggled to fight IDFThe terror 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 anti-Hezbollah efforts.

Read the original article on jpost.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (6)

The Jerusalem Post republishes a Reuters report but rewrites key lines in its own voice. Where Reuters says an Israeli offensive killed more than 4,000 people and uprooted a quarter of Lebanon's population, the Post says only that people were 'evacuated'. It also labels everyone Israel is still striking 'Hezbollah terrorists' and states Israel's rationale for occupying southern Lebanon as fact.

  1. Writes the death out

    Severe

    “triggering an Israeli response that led to a large number of individuals, mostly members of Hezbollah's Shi'ite Muslim constituency, being evacuated from areas in southern Lebanon”

    Why this matters
    The Post replaces the Reuters wording with 'an Israeli response that led to a large number of individuals... being evacuated'. The deaths caused by the offensive disappear entirely. Mass displacement becomes an orderly 'evacuation', and the offensive becomes a 'response'.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes Israel's campaign moved people out of harm's way and killed no one.
    The context
    The Reuters text the Post is republishing says the Israeli offensive killed more than 4,000 people and uprooted a quarter of Lebanon's population. The record shows Israeli strikes destroyed more than 40,000 homes and displaced more than 1 million people.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    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 Shi'ite Muslims.

  2. Labels people on one side's word

    Severe

    “Israel continues strikes on Hezbollah terrorists in the south”

    Why this matters
    In its own voice the Post calls everyone Israel is striking in the south 'Hezbollah terrorists'. It also drops the word 'deadly' from the Reuters line it is rewriting.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes Israel's continuing strikes hit only Hezbollah fighters and that no one else dies in them.
    The context
    Reuters wrote only that 'Israel continues deadly strikes in the south' and made no claim about who the dead were. Nothing in the article supports the label. Its only basis is Israel's own account of its targets.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Full-scale hostilities have not resumed in Lebanon despite the collapse of the US-Iranian deal, though Israel continues deadly strikes in the south.

  3. States one side's claim as fact

    Minor

    “As part of efforts to combat Hezbollah, IDF troops now occupy a security zone in southern Lebanon”

    Why this matters
    The Post states Israel's own reason for occupying southern Lebanon, 'efforts to combat Hezbollah', as fact in its own voice. It also adopts Israel's term 'security zone' without attribution.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes the occupation is a defensive anti-Hezbollah measure, and that this is an established fact rather than Israel's stated rationale.
    The context
    The zone is self-declared by Israel. Other coverage of the same report describes Israeli forces occupying southern villages, and notes Israeli officials calling the zone 'permanent'.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  4. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah”

    Why this matters
    The Post changes the Reuters descriptor 'Lebanese armed group' to 'Lebanese terrorist group'. It repeats the label as 'the terror group' throughout.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes the terrorist label as a neutral description rather than a designation made by Israel and the US.
    The context
    The Reuters original the Post republishes calls Hezbollah a 'Lebanese armed group'. The Post's own earlier article grounds the label in a designation by Washington.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  5. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “the US-Israeli war with Iran that began in February”

    Why this matters
    The Post changes the Reuters wording 'US-Israeli attack on Iran' to 'US-Israeli war with Iran'. The new wording hides which side began the hostilities.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes the war with Iran was mutual from the start rather than begun by a US-Israeli attack.
    The context
    Reuters describes the regional conflict as ignited by the US-Israeli attack on Iran in February.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  6. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The Post omits Hezbollah's main reply to Reuters: that Israel's occupation of Lebanese land made any resistance to it a legitimate right. The article says Hezbollah 'remains committed to attacking Israel' but never gives its stated reason. A reader sees the rearmament only as unprovoked aggression.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from The Jerusalem Post

  1. 24 OctAre Lebanese Shi'ites abandoning Hezbollah? Poll shows majority favor disarming group - analysis6.0
  2. 23 Oct Lebanese people want Israel ties, stronger government to oust Hezbollah, AMCD head says8.7
  3. 22 OctDefense Ministry sanctions UK registered company after transfer of fuel to Hezbollah-owned company7.3
  4. 22 OctHezbollah recruiting convicts in Latin America for revenue, relaxing ideological requirements7.3
  5. 22 OctHezbollah rebuilding military capabilities in Beirut as IDF prepares for possible renewed fighting8.2

Everything we scored from The Jerusalem Post