Iran uses its 'party' and its weaponry and slogans of 'resistance' and 'defiance' to consolidate the influence it has invested in at Lebanon's expense and against the will of all community components.
When the disarming of "Iran's Party/Hezbollah" became a Lebanese demand, it also became a global one. Therefore, it is a condition imposed by Israel, which uses it to justify its occupation/destruction of wide areas of Southern Lebanon. However, it is noteworthy that it does not face criticisms and condemnations like those directed at it due to its excessive brutality in Gaza, or because of its plans to annex the West Bank and its use of its army and settlers' violence to intimidate Palestinians.
Even its occupation of areas in southern Syria and its daily incursions into its regions and attempts to impose a fait accompli in Sweida do not break the international silence, despite the apparent interest in rehabilitating Syria. If Israel had thwarted negotiations on the three issues when Donald Trump was at the height of his power, it does not hesitate to exploit his predicament now, when he is at the peak of his confusion.
In the grey period between the United States and Iran, leading up to elections in Israel, it was announced that its army is preparing for a new phase in Lebanon. This may mean more incursions if Benjamin Netanyahu's electoral needs require them, but it may also indicate that the enemy is filling the wasted time by strengthening its occupation in the strategic southern highlands and sites it intends to maintain.
Meanwhile, direct negotiations remain suspended, and are likely to remain so for a long time, as Washington may see no point in pressuring Israel or demanding its withdrawal. Because the impasse remains unresolved, there is no room to push the issue of Israeli withdrawals, as Lebanon demands, whether because the level of intransigence is high during the election season or because the American-Israeli side sees only Iran and its "party"'s intransigence regarding weapons. Conversely, there is no new stance from the Lebanese state and its army.
Iran uses its "party" and its weapons and slogans of "resistance" and "defiance" to consolidate the influence it has invested in and seized at the expense of Lebanon—the state—and against the will of all community components, including the "supportive sect." Visits by Iranian officials and their meetings have long suggested that they want a good relationship with Lebanon, "state to state," but their deceit is quickly exposed, to a degree that allows no retreat in their stance, nor even a superficial reliance on their negotiations with Washington.
The handing over of the political and military leadership of the "party" to the "Revolutionary Guards" is enough to sever any connection to national interests, whether they concern the people or the state. The president, Nawaf Salam, may have heard peaceful and reasonable words from the Iranian president, but Masoud Bakhshi is a facade meant to appear normal and open, while his role in Iranian decision-making and influence on the Supreme Leader's directions are nearly nonexistent, compared to Rezai, Qalibaf, and Vahidi.
The Lebanese state has made its position clear internally and externally, through Cabinet decisions and on international platforms, and it has global political support except from Iran. As for its "party," which revived the anniversary of its defeats, it no longer serves any function except to work on undermining the state and punishing it for not siding with it in the two "support" wars, going so far as to wrong its environment and displace it. But after two years, it stubbornly claims to continue its "resistance," only to provoke the occupation, and wants to be Lebanon's negotiator in the name of Iran, though it no longer has any status after the state stripped it of all legitimacy. What can be said about the claim that the "party" has reviewed and found that the decision to engage in the two "support" wars was "right"?
There is no doubt that the sycophantic subordinate to his Iranian master is blinded, unable to see the true interests of his country and people.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Annahar.
Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter
