The unmovable borderland: war, home, and the decision against displacement in South Lebanon

Abstract Despite recurrent cycles of armed conflict and destruction, many residents of South Lebanon choose to remain in their homes, resisting internal displacement even amid extreme insecurity. This paper examines the humanitarian dimensions of this decision, exploring how risk, resilience, and distrust in institutional protection mechanisms shape displacement choices. Drawing on qualitative interviews and ethnographic reflections following the - latest escalation of hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah in 2023, the study investigates why individuals and families remain despite persistent threats to their lives and livelihoods. The findings challenge conventional humanitarian assumptions that civilians will flee to safety when conflict intensifies, revealing instead that displacement decisions are shaped by deeply rooted socio-political and historical factors, including attachment to land, community ties, and prior experiences of forced displacement. The paper argues that for many, insecurity itself becomes a paradoxical form of security, as familiarity with conflict is often seen as less precarious than the uncertainties of flight, the vulnerabilities of displacement, and the shortcomings of humanitarian response. Furthermore, it critically examines the limitations of humanitarian interventions in such contexts, where aid structures prioritize those who flee while offering limited support to those who remain. By centering the voices and lived experiences of those who stay, this study contributes to broader discussions on protection in conflict zones, underscoring the need for more nuanced humanitarian approaches that recognize immobility as a coping strategy rather than an oversight. In doing so, it highlights the importance of addressing the full spectrum of humanitarian needs—not only for the displaced but also for those who, by choice or necessity, remain in harm’s way.