The Shia Question

A “Shia question” has now forcefully emerged within Arab reality — a reality that is not isolated from its regional environment or from the policies of the major powers.

Some argue that the “Shia question” reveals, in certain of its manifestations and circumstances, a weakening or a wavering of Arab Shia loyalty toward their national states, owing to an Iranian centralism that seeks to extend its influence throughout the Arab region by exploiting existing vulnerabilities and creating new ones in the foundations of those states.

Those Shia targeted by this accusation respond collectively, arguing that their movements in their respective countries arise either from the raising of grievances and a demand for political and social justice — Iraq and the Gulf countries being cases in point — or from a commitment alongside their compatriots to the duty of resisting Israeli aggression, as in Lebanon and Palestine.

The “Shia question” intensified in the wake of America’s war on Iran in March 2026, reaching the threshold of a reawakening of old demons and stoking atmospheres of sectarianism and doctrinal fanaticism, and total rejection of the Other.

This rejection is further fed by the conduct of certain groups such as Hezbollah and its involvement in killings perpetrated in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere — to say nothing of Iran’s bombardment and targeting of Arab capitals in the Gulf throughout the ongoing war.

Lebanon, by virtue of its diversity, holds a distinct advantage in contributing to the correction of a distortion that has now spread across the Arab world. This diversity constitutes Lebanon’s contribution to the enrichment of human civilization — a necessary contribution in this era of history, when humanity is traversing a painful labor, and an existential question insistently arises: how can we live together, different and equal?

For the way out of this crisis does not consist merely in awaiting the outcome of the Iran-America war, nor in Lebanese-Israeli negotiations, nor in reliance on balance-of-power politics. Addressing the “Shia question” requires a cultural foundation built on accepting the Other as they are.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, there was a “Christian question”: rather than separating from the Other, the Maronites chose Greater Lebanon, built on the living together.

At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the “Shia question” resurfaces in Lebanon. What, then, is the choice of its elites, its thinkers, and its leaders?