I renew my sincere appeal to our Arab Shiite brothers: Let your belonging to your Arab nation be, and let your loyalty to your homeland be advanced over any partisan or external loyalty. Face the current challenges in a spirit of courage and responsibility, it is time to say: Enough. Enough successive losses that have exhausted you and exhausted your homelands. Revisit honestly, and stay away from a project that has brought you and your partners back to the country nothing but blood, destruction and woes.
Today, Arab Shiites are going through a milestone in their political and social history, one of the most complex and sensitive milestones. The regional and international transformations that followed the events of October 7th have created a new reality, the most prominent feature of which is the decline of Iranian influence, which has presented itself for decades as the protector and defender of their interests. With this decline, Arab Shiites find themselves facing a crucial test that requires a reordering of their internal priorities and a greater reliance on their domestic forces, which in turn suffer from marginalization and weakness.
Based on a careful analytical vision, I renew my call to the elites and actors of the Arab Shiites to the need to reconnect what has been interrupted by their Arab roots and national affiliation, and to consolidate their presence within the framework of the national state. This option alone ensures stability and active participation in shaping a future based on Arab citizenship and belonging, without harming their sectarian privacy or breaking their connection with their religious references.
Return to Beginnings, Call of Reason and Reality
The speech of Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem on September 19, 2025, reminded my long-standing and repeated advice to our Arab Shiite brothers: The safe path of the future lies in the sincere integration with their Arab surroundings, foremost of which is Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Jordan, as the pillars of moderation and stability in the region.
I have clearly expressed this conviction on more than one occasion, including my article in the London Arab newspaper and the Strategic Institute under the title: “A plan to contain Hezbollah as a civilian party with an Arab identity! “, as well as in another article published in the Arab day entitled: “Return our Shiite brothers to their Arabism.”
In my article published on March 22, 2022, on the London-based Al-Arab newspaper and the Strategic Institute, I stressed the importance of convincing Hezbollah to open serious channels of dialogue with the Arab parties and political work as a representative of a large segment of the Lebanese people. She stressed at the time that the Lebanese did not need weapons to be expressed or to preserve their right, and that this applied to Hezbollah supporters and its popular base, which could feel safe when it guaranteed its rights within the framework of the state. She also made it clear that no one in Lebanon wants to pass on the civil war to future generations after its causes have faded, especially with increasing indications of Iran’s inability to continue supporting Hezbollah or having to stay away from it, in pursuit of potential international gains from any future nuclear deal.
In the same context, I wrote in my second article on the pages of the Lebanese newspaper An-Nahar on October 21, 2024, that Iran’s adherence to its armed arms in Lebanon and the rest of the region remains subject to its tactical calculations, while its deeper strategic goal remains to preserve its long-term “alliance” with the Arab Shiite component. I also pointed out that Khomeiniyya succeeded in establishing a dangerous equation, based on the combination of sectarian affiliation and political loyalty to Iran, and portraying the differences with the brothers of the homeland from other sects as an inevitable existential conflict. However, this vision is no longer necessary in the next phase, but will not serve either side. The region, in its Shiite version of political Islam today, after its Sunni version faltered yesterday, has gained nothing more division and tension.
The instantaneous entitlement: the national state or nothing
Since the outbreak of the Iranian revolution in 1979, Tehran has sought to present itself as a protector of the vulnerable, led by Arab Shiites. But this role did not remain in the framework of slogans and speech, but was embodied in an organized project aimed at politicizing the sectarian identity of the Arab Shiites, and separating them from their national and Arab space. This was evident in the establishment and patronage of dozens, perhaps hundreds, of armed factions that have taken their main human base from Arab Shiites.
Iran’s role has thus shifted from a supporter of Shia communities to a political and security guardian, reshaping their reality and linking it to the course of its broader regional project. However, this project is no longer without change, owing to ongoing regional and international transformations. If Iran decides to adapt to these new data, it will send a positive message to the Arab and Islamic world, and even to the international community, that it supports the idea of a national state. The gain will be doubled: Iran itself on the one hand, and our Arab Shiite brothers on the other, through their stability and integration into their countries on solid foundations of citizenship.
In particular, the region’s political memory cannot easily ignore Iran’s decades-long approach, marked by a series of major geopolitical events and shocks, from the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq to the 2011 Arab Spring shifts to the ongoing war in the Gaza Strip. This war has already produced a very complex reality at the level of the entire region, and Iran has been at the forefront of those affected by it, as it has lost an important part of its internal and external strength, and it has become clear that it is forced to review its positions and policies towards the countries of the region and the world.
The political promises and regional projects promoted by Tehran for decades have exposed its fragility to the shock of the war. This was reflected in its most prominent tools, namely the Lebanese Hezbollah, which suffered severe losses, such as the collapse of part of its historical leadership structure, the erosion of its missile capabilities, and the decline of its political influence in the Lebanese arena.
These facts confirm that Iran has long relied on the policy of exporting its crises and transferring its battles outside its borders, to avoid paying direct human costs, at the expense of Arab blood and lives. Today, however, it has begun to taste some of the same adversities and suffering it has endured for our Arab Shiite brothers across the region.
Iran must now realize that retaining its traditional ideological discourse, which is hostile to the United States and Israel, is no longer feasible at a time when the U.S.-Israeli project to reshape the Middle East on the basis of ending the phenomenon of militias is realistic and tangible. However, due to internal and external calculations, Tehran continues to avoid publicly acknowledging this fact, leaving behind millions of Arab Shiites facing their fate alone, at a time when the local forces to which they have gradually relegated. The continuation of this situation threatens, at a future political moment, to transform this broad component into a group without effective representation and real weight in the equations of their national states.
This reality, in essence, represents a warning and a warning to the Arab Shiites of the need to re-read the current transformations, appreciate their outcome, and anticipate their future paths. From this point of view, the return to the national and Arab space seems to be the most worthy option, because of its ability to ensure protection, safeguard rights, ensure equitable representation and active participation in political and social life, away from dependence on cross-border projects whose shortcomings and negative repercussions have been proven.
Axis of Resistance to Abhal: Idea and Applications
The repercussions of the war in the Gaza Strip, both in terms of its direct effects of the displacement of the vast majority of the population of the Gaza Strip, or in its catastrophic humanitarian repercussions that threaten famine and the transformation of Gaza into a space dominated by death and destruction, indicate the limitations and failure of the strategy of the so-called “axis of resistance.” This war has clearly revealed the failure of the “disproportionate armed resistance” model to achieve its political and military objectives, as it has only contributed to deepening the human tragedy and exposing communities to high costs, without causing any tangible change in the balance of regional power.
This is also true in the Lebanese arena, where a large part of the people of the south live in a state of long-term displacement away from their homes and livelihoods, in light of the continued Israeli military incursions and the inability of the state to secure resources for the reconstruction of what was destroyed by Hezbollah’s military adventures. The same scene is repeated within the Houthi-controlled areas in Yemen, where vital transport and energy infrastructure is under continuous Israeli strikes on Sanaa airport, the port of Hodeidah, electricity networks and oil stores. Despite the heavy losses, the Houthis insist on continuing limited-efficient military operations, increasing the suffering of the population and not changing the strategic equations.
With the recent shifts, Israel has adjusted its national security strategy, getting closer to the U.S. model of “chasing the sources of threat wherever they are, regardless of their geographical distance.” Thus, the components of the entire region have become vulnerable to the possibility of direct targeting by Israel.
If Hezbollah’s leaders in Lebanon, the factions in Iraq, and the Houthis in Yemen do not realize the reality of this new reality and continue to follow the same methods, they risk repeating the tragedy of Hamas in Gaza. Then they will be held responsible for the innocent blood that is shed by their people, and regret will not be enough for them too late, in the face of an opponent who has proved his strength and brutality.
I am not here to review the balance of power, but to present facts that many refuse to acknowledge or listen to. Everyone sees how Israel is carrying out its attacks on multiple fronts, inflicting casualties on Iran and its allies after losses, without Tehran being able to send an equivalent response that saves its face, even to a minimum.
Here I renew my advice to our brothers: that getting out of the hateful sectarian impasse is the only safe option, and that moving away from the Iranian political project is no longer a luxury, but a necessity, because it does not serve them and does not serve their people in any way. The tendency towards the surrender of arms, the involvement of the State and the exercise of their role as committed citizens within its legitimate institutions is the way to guarantee their rights and safeguard their future.
In the same context, this reading applies to the Syrian situation, as after the decline in the frequency of Israeli strikes against the so-called “axis of resistance,” Israeli attention began to turn towards the Syrian territory and the armed groups to which the PA has become there. The fundamentalist jihadi ideology, which this authority claims to have been derailed from, and the currents behind it, is still one of the most prominent strategic opponents of the United States and Israel, and the possibility of a violent and existential confrontation against it remains in the strategic mind of both Washington and Tel Aviv, depending on the changing circumstances and data.
This perception, of course, does not contradict the proposals for possible security agreements between Syria and Israel, but their feasibility for Syria and the countries of the region remains subject to clarification of their details and the provision of adequate guarantees that prevent the disintegration of Syrian territory or prejudice its geographical and political unity.
Stressing the importance of Turkey to manage its regional files in line with the level of political acumen, especially in light of the increasing talk of rearranging the balance of power in the region, in order to achieve stability and enhance its role as a responsible and balanced actor in the regional environment.
There is no alternative to the national Arab countries
Despite the ongoing shifts and the relative decline in power and influence, the parties to the so-called axis of resistance remain committed to their traditional discourse and agenda, which experiments have proven to be incapable and have negative effects on the stability of the region. This was clearly highlighted in the message sent by Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem on September 19, 2025, about dialogue with Saudi Arabia, as this dialogue remained subject to a basic condition based on hostility to Israel. This reflects a continuing preoccupation with the old ideological discourse, with a clear disregard for the limited real capabilities of the axis of resistance.
Indeed, the concept of “resistance” as put forward by the followers of the Iranian axis is nothing more than a use of partisan and military work in the service of Iranian regional policies. It is a newly emerging concept associated with Iran after the Khomeinist revolution, and I believe – as the current indicators suggest – that Tehran will reformulate it, or introduce it in a long period of sleep, after it was found that it is not able to keep pace with the changes of reality and the requirements of the future.
This call cannot be seen as a serious critical review by Hezbollah. They are:
First, it did not come from the most influential historical leaders, who had more opportunities to take more realistic positions, but chose to adhere to a cross-border sectarian discourse, in line with the Iranian agenda, at the expense of its Arab affiliation and its common ties with the people of the homeland. That speech, which has long raised the slogan of weapons directed against Israel, today has lost most of its credibility in the face of the facts of the present.
Second, this call reveals that the party is still committed to its independence from the Lebanese state, practically holding the right to political representation of the Shiite community, reflecting the continuing gap between Hezbollah’s discourse and the official discourse of the state and the requirements of national reality. It is a gap between the true interests of the Shia community and the actual political practices of its partisan component.
This rhetoric reflects the loss of Hezbollah leaders’ connection to the actual reality, at a time when it requires recognition of the facts and the limits of the available force. Such recognition is not a retreat, but rather a strategic intelligence and political acumen, as long as it is a prerequisite for the preservation of societies and the maintenance of national balance.
Saudi Arabia has never been far from the approach of cooperation and dialogue in its regional and international relations. Since 1989, when it sponsored the Taif Agreement, which was a pivotal milestone in Lebanon’s history, the Kingdom, along with many Arab countries, has continued to support Lebanon’s stability and strengthen its institutions, despite the complexities imposed by the political reality. During that phase, these States were keen on a clear distinction between the Lebanese State and the Lebanese people on the one hand, and entities outside the State on the other. Hence, the Kingdom does not enter into a discussion or receive invitations issued by transgered entities that do not recognize the idea of a national state, but always adhere to dealing with the state as the owner of the general mandate and the legitimate responsibility.
In the same vein, our Arab Shiite brothers face a fundamental challenge that requires them to look deeply into what Iran and its proxies are trying to hide from their consciousness and the independence of their decision. The ability to read regional transformations and understand the limits of Iranian influence is a key factor in reordering the priorities and loyalties of Arab Shiites in a way that protects their national interests and ensures them fair representation and entrenched effectiveness within the framework of the national state.
The obvious and unbearable fact is that Iran has reached a stage of internal wear and tear that can no longer sponsor any new expansionist project in our region, or make it fuel for our Shia brothers. Hence, the Arab Shiites in Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen must re-establish their national and national role, which is honored by history, by supporting the sovereignty and independence of their countries on the basis of full citizenship, and learning from the bitter experiences that some countries in the region have paid a heavy price for because of wrong alliances. This alone offers solutions to problems, dispels fears, and safeguards national interests.
At the end of this third call, I renew my sincere appeal to our Arab Shiite brothers: Let your belonging to your Arab nation be, and let your loyalty to your homeland be given to any party or foreign loyalty. Face the current challenges in a spirit of courage and responsibility, it is time to say: Enough. Enough successive losses that have exhausted you and exhausted your homelands. Revisit honestly, and stay away from a project that has brought you and your partners back to the country nothing but blood, destruction and woes.
I do not want this appeal except to advise, in order to preserve the blood and safety of Muslims and Arabs, to break the cycle of conflict, and to liberate peoples from the mentality of false nationalist narratives that have taken the issue of Palestine and Jerusalem as a mere narrative to justify their projects, while the truth is that Jerusalem and Palestine deserve a more complete and noble project than this misinformation.
Today, I stress that what is required is the full involvement of the Arab Shiites with their people and their homelands, not in a separate sect, but as an integral part and a basic component of the national fabric, which brings them together with the rest of the components a healthy relationship based on the foundations of inclusive citizenship. Perhaps Iraq offers a clear example in this path, as it manages its political, economic and military capabilities according to its national interests, taking advantage of the decisive transformations witnessed by its surroundings.
To unite and stand united in the face of attempts to tear up the Arab fabric, and to reject all forms of sectarian and sectarian incitement, is the safe way, but it is a lifeline for all of us. The Arabs, in their various components, have been and continue to be the sincere and protective incubator for all their children, without discrimination or exclusion, in a manner that preserves dignity and preserves identity.
Out of my deep belief in the Arab national role and the moral responsibility towards our Shiite brothers, I renew my appeal to this trust, and I sincerely raise it: O Allah, I have reached out, O Allah, witness.