By Charbel A. Antoun

In the week marking the first anniversary of the fall of Hafez Al‑Assad’s regime in Syria, Tehran’s axis absorbed two blows — one from Baghdad, one from Beirut. Lebanon moved to reclaim state independence by appointing Ambassador Simon Karam to lead ceasefire talks with Israel, while Iraq briefly froze Hezbollah and Houthi assets before backtracking under militia pressure. These cracks confirm the free fall of Iran’s proxy empire, even as Washington doubles down on “maximum pressure” in its 2025 National Security Strategy.

Lebanon’s Breakaway

Lebanon’s presidency has taken a bold step to reclaim sovereignty from Hezbollah’s shadow. By appointing Ambassador Simon Karam to lead the Lebanese delegation to the “Mechanism” — the ceasefire monitoring committee with Israel — the state asserted independence from militia dominance.

At the first meeting, Karam narrowed the agenda to halting Israeli strikes and securing withdrawal from occupied territories. This was more than diplomacy; it was a declaration that Lebanon’s decisions would be made by the state, not Hezbollah. With U.S. envoy Morgan Ortagus present, Washington signaled its determination to shepherd incremental steps toward peace, even as Netanyahu’s government continues its bombing campaign without a clear “day after” strategy.

A senior U.S. official, speaking privately, underscored Washington’s approach to Lebanon: “We want practical, incremental steps that can be built upon.” The official added that while America is pressing Netanyahu to adopt the same approach, “we will not dissuade Netanyahu from continuing to strike Hezbollah militias because eliminating Iranian‑backed militias is a priority for the Trump administration.” Washington is simultaneously leveraging its ties with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, and other allies to reinforce this policy.

Baghdad’s Backtrack

In Iraq, the government briefly froze Hezbollah and Houthi assets, listing them as terrorist entities under the Central Bank’s Anti‑Money Laundering Committee. The decision was based on months of investigation by a high‑level body chaired by Governor Ali Mohsen al‑Allaq, involving intelligence, finance, and counterterrorism agencies.

This was no clerical error. It was a sovereign Iraqi move to protect financial security and comply with international standards, particularly FATF requirements. Yet Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al‑Sudani quickly backtracked under militia pressure, calling the listing an “error.” The reversal exposed Baghdad’s vulnerability to Tehran’s proxies, but the precedent is historic: Iraq has not issued such a decision since 2003 and reversing it permanently will be difficult.

Washington’s Maximum Pressure

The U.S. National Security Strategy of 2025 frames Iran as “the leading state sponsor of terrorism and a source of regional instability.” It highlights nuclear breaches, missile threats, and proxy networks — Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis — as direct dangers to U.S. interests and global energy security.

Washington’s approach is clear: maximum pressure through sanctions, alliances, and burden‑sharing by GCC states, while rejecting “forever wars.” The Trump administration sees eliminating Iranian‑backed militias as a priority, even as it pursues peace deals and economic zones to stabilize Lebanon and Israel.

Lebanon’s Strategic Imperative

It is crucial that the Lebanese state develop a comprehensive strategy for negotiating with Israel and Washington, particularly regarding the details of Trump’s proposed demilitarized economic zone on the border. Lebanon’s ability to capitalize on Trump’s determination to achieve a breakthrough could finally end the suffering of southern Lebanon caused by Hezbollah’s reckless actions.

This is Lebanon’s moment: to move beyond militia dominance and seize the opportunity to anchor peace in economic development. Without a clear national strategy, the chance may slip away — leaving Hezbollah’s defeat on the battlefield untransformed into lasting sovereignty.

The Proxy Empire Cracks

Together, the Lebanese and Iraqi moves mark cracks in Tehran’s regional empire. Lebanon is cautiously asserting independence from Hezbollah, while Iraq has shown — however briefly — that it can treat Hezbollah and the Houthis as terrorist entities. These shifts confirm the freefall of Iran’s axis, already weakened by Assad’s flight to Moscow and Israel’s relentless strikes.

The challenge now is whether Beirut and Baghdad can leverage U.S. and international momentum to consolidate sovereignty. Washington can pressure, sanction, and negotiate, but ultimately, the responsibility lies with Lebanon and Iraq to free themselves from decades of Iranian control.

Iran’s proxies thrive in the gaps between strategy and execution. The U.S. can unite Arab capitals at Sharm el‑Sheikh, but it cannot erase the smuggling routes from Iraq to Lebanon. The question is not whether Tehran’s networks will exploit these corridors — they already do. The real question is whether Washington, Beirut, and Baghdad will seize this moment to dismantle them, or continue to pretend that the “axis of resistance” is anything but a crumbling empire.

Share

Comments

Add your comment