Perspective

Lebanon and the region are virtually on "pause." President Donald Trump indicated at the start of the weekend that he had granted Iran a one-week reprieve as a goodwill gesture during the funeral of former Supreme Leader of the Republic Ali Khamenei, who was killed in the massive American-Israeli bombardment that triggered the war launched against the Iranian regime on February 28. The pause will end on July 11, the date announced on Saturday for the resumption of talks between Washington and Tehran, which will take place in Islamabad. On the agenda: sanctions, frozen Iranian assets, and the nuclear file.

“Even if a preliminary agreement is reached, it will not alter Iran’s perception of America.” In just a few words, the Iranian news agency Tasnim – which reflects the positions of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – indirectly pointed to the root cause of the existential crisis that has destabilized countries across the Levant and threatened several Gulf states for decades. The remark underscores a profound underlying problem: the divine ideological dimension that dictates the conduct of the mullahs’ regime, a dimension that some Western leaders consistently ignore – or at times fail to fully grasp.

In the current conflict that will likely determine the fate of the Islamic Republic of Iran, it is more vital than ever to be transparent and speak plainly, without complacency or evasion: many senior political officials, experts, academics and journalists are misreading the true stakes of this existential crisis shaking the entire region and reverberating, in turn, on the international market. The gravest mistake now would be to fight the wrong battle. The adversary to be confronted today is by no means President Donald Trump, regardless of any grievances one might hold against him regarding his behavior, arrogant attitude, verbal outbursts or relations with leaders who are supposed to be his allies. Is it necessary to remind ourselves, to illustrate this point, that these same shortcomings were criticized in Winston Churchill during World War II, yet General de Gaulle, locked in full conflict with the Nazi regime, did not focus his entire struggle on his quarrels and disagreements with the former British Prime Minister?

His name was Amirhossein Hatami; he was a musician, a talented guitarist, according to his relatives; he was 18 years old; he was hanged in the courtyard of Ghezel Hesar prison in the suburbs of Tehran… He had been accused of “enmity against God”... Mohammed Amin Beighari, 19, was allowed last week by his jailers to contact his father by phone to inform him (the height of sadism and cruelty on the part of the regime…) that he would be hanged the next morning; the execution took place as planned. His “crime”: having participated in the latest demonstrations against the mullahs’ regime… His name was Saleh Mohammadi, a professional wrestler; he had participated in wrestling competitions under the banner of Iran; he was 19 years old; he was hanged a few days ago for opposing the current dictatorship…

In a recent interview given to an English-language television channel, Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman did not mince his words in describing the late Ayatollah Ali Khamenei — and, by extension, the mullah regime in general — as the “new Hitler of the Middle East”… Offering a particularly lucid reading of the geopolitical context of the current conflict, the Crown Prince noted without circumlocution that the Iranian regime clearly adopts an expansionist posture and seeks to extend “its own project in the Middle East, in the same way that Hitler had done” in Europe. “Several countries had not realized how dangerous Hitler was until it was too late,” MBS emphasized, adding — touching the nerve: “I would not want that to happen here.”

People often spoke, especially before the war, of the « Lebanese miracle », of Lebanon compared to the phoenix rising from its ashes. A beautiful image… Except that by constantly rising from its ashes for more than half a century, the Land of the Cedar is today out of breath… Especially since it is undermined from within by a party that in no way cares about « the interest of Lebanon and the survival of its people », as President Joseph Aoun aptly emphasized in his online intervention addressing the leaders of the European Union. The head of state did not hesitate to put his finger on the wound by openly accusing Hezbollah of having reactivated the South Lebanon front to « serve Iranian interests », stating that the objective of the group allied with the Pasdaran is to provoke « the fall of the Lebanese state » to subsequently claim that it alone is capable of confronting Israel.

In times of total war or acute existential crisis, when the fate of an entire population hangs in the balance, timid and hesitant half-measures are no longer acceptable. When a nation faces the expansionist and hegemonic designs of a power unbound by law or principle, and when a tyrannical, blood-soaked regime commits large-scale massacres with impunity – striking indiscriminately at civilians, at youths, at teenagers – such extreme circumstances demand clarity. They require a firm, unequivocal stance, far removed from cynical equivocation or evasive maneuvering. That is, beyond any doubt – as readers will have guessed – the situation with the regime currently in power Iran.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio hit the nail on the head, without mincing words. Showing himself paradoxically not very 'diplomatic' on this occasion, he displayed magnificent frankness by summarizing in a few words, in a short laconic phrase, the basis of the Iranian crisis from the perspective of the strained relations between Washington and the Islamic Republic. 'The leadership in Iran is in no way a reflection of the Iranian population (…). I'm not sure we can reach a deal with these people'... These remarks echo those made in the same vein by former French Minister of Foreign Affairs and Defense Jean-Yves Le Drian, who is well acquainted with the centers of power in Tehran, having dealt with them. 'They are very good at trickery (…),' he emphasized in a televised interview. 'Their only concern is to buy time and (ensure) the longevity of the regime.'

Thus, after the 'brilliant' military performance (!) of the 'support war' for Hamas and Gaza, Sheikh Naim Kassem now promises us a new 'support war,' but this time with the objective of coming to the aid of an even more distant regional actor: Ayatollah Khamenei and the Islamic Republic of Iran. The leader of Hezbollah has therefore decided, or rather has announced (since he is not the one who decides on such matters…), that the Lebanese must show blind self-sacrifice, without any limit, up to the ultimate sacrifice, to 'defend' (?) a foreign force… For all those who still had some doubts in this regard, or who refused to acknowledge the truth, Sheikh Naim Kassem has just brilliantly confirmed what was, for informed observers, a truism: Hezbollah is not a Lebanese party. Its members are indeed Lebanese, but its political decisions, its line of conduct, its political project, are transnational and take no account of local realities or the higher interests of the Land of the Cedars.

Lebanon and, more specifically, the Shiite community commemorated a few days ago the 25th anniversary of the death, on January 10, 2001, of the former president of the Supreme Shiite Council (SSC), Imam Mohammed Mehdi Shamseddine. The man who was, for more than two decades, the spiritual leader of the Lebanese Shiite community, succeeding Imam Moussa Sadr – who mysteriously disappeared during a visit to Libya in 1978 – left behind a political 'will' whose existence and true scope are ignored (or concealed...) by many Lebanese and foreigners, particularly in academic and journalistic circles. The historical and truly existential dimension of this legacy is highlighted by the dramatic developments currently unfolding in Lebanon and the region.