For years, Iran has entrenched itself across the Middle East, leveraging proxy militias such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and various factions in Syria to project its power. This approach, part of a broader “axis of resistance” strategy, sought to bolster Iran’s influence by fueling instability and conflict. Yet, with each Israeli strike targeting these militias, particularly in Syria, it has become clear that much of the local population views these operations not as acts of aggression, but as a form of liberation.
The celebration of Israel’s actions by Syrians and Lebanese, many of whom have long suffered under the domination of Iranian-backed forces, signals a dramatic shift in public sentiment. In a region historically characterized by hostility toward Israel, this newfound support reflects disillusionment with Iran’s role in their countries’ devastation. Hezbollah, once seen by some as a legitimate resistance movement, has lost credibility, particularly after its involvement in the Syrian civil war on behalf of President Bashar al-Assad. The group’s transformation into a tool of Iran’s regional ambitions has alienated many, contributing to its moral and political collapse.
The assassination of Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, and other high-ranking figures in Israeli strikes underscores the magnitude of this moment. Nasrallah’s death, while speculative at this point, would represent not just the elimination of a key figure, but a crippling blow to the Iranian project in the region. Hezbollah, once a formidable force, is now seen as a hollow extension of Tehran’s will, and its collapse may be a harbinger of the broader disintegration of Iran’s influence.
This turning point is not merely the result of military precision but also a reflection of Israel’s evolving role in the region. Where once it was seen as an adversary, Israel is increasingly viewed as a potential ally, especially among those who have suffered under Iranian-backed regimes. The strikes against Iranian proxies have sparked discussions about regional cooperation and the possibility of building trust between Israel and its Arab neighbors, marking a “rebirth” of sorts for the Middle East.
However, the collapse of Iran’s influence presents both opportunities and challenges. In Syria, where more than 63 pro-Iranian militias still operate, security upheaval is likely as the power vacuum left by Tehran’s retreat could lead to further instability. Lebanon, already teetering on the edge of collapse, may face renewed civil conflict as Hezbollah’s grip weakens. The disintegration of these militias will not happen overnight, and the international community must play a role in ensuring that the transition is managed carefully to avoid a descent into chaos.
One proposed solution is the establishment of a Regional Security Council, an idea that has gained traction as a mechanism to address not only the Iranian threat but also other protracted conflicts in the region. Saudi Arabia, under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and the UAE, with its positive relations with Israel, are seen as potential leaders in this initiative. Such a council could pave the way for more formal cooperation, including the creation of a NATO-like alliance that would oversee security in hotspots like Syria, Lebanon, and Gaza.
In the immediate term, there are practical steps that could be taken to mitigate the risks of further conflict. Lebanon’s airports and seaports, vital conduits for Hezbollah’s arms supply, could be placed under NATO supervision, while Israel’s military operations could be extended to create a buffer zone in southern Lebanon, south of the Litani River. Meanwhile, strikes on Iranian militias in Syria could be expanded to dismantle arms caches and tunnels that have been strategically placed across the region.
The international community’s support is crucial in this endeavor. If left unchecked, Iran’s militias will continue to pose a threat not only to Israel but to the broader stability of the Middle East. NATO and other multinational forces may need to be deployed to secure the Syrian-Lebanese border and dismantle Hezbollah’s remaining infrastructure. The discovery of tunnel networks, some dating back to 2013, highlights the extensive preparations these groups have made to sustain their operations, even as their influence wanes.
In this new geopolitical reality, the question remains whether Iran’s influence can be fully dismantled. While Hezbollah and Assad’s regime are in decline, Iran’s nuclear program remains a significant pillar of its regional ambitions. It is likely that Israel will eventually confront this issue directly, as stability in the Middle East cannot be fully realized until Tehran’s broader ambitions are curtailed.
The fall of Assad’s regime in Syria, a likely consequence of Iran’s diminishing influence, could usher in a new national leadership backed by military officers not affiliated with Tehran. Russia, which maintains a military presence in Syria, could play a constructive role in this transitional period, potentially acting as a stabilizing force as the region recalibrates.
Israel’s role in this process is pivotal, and its recent military operations may be seen as the “mother of all battles,” a defining moment in the broader struggle for the future of the Middle East. If managed carefully, this period of upheaval could lead to a lasting peace, paving the way for regional cooperation that once seemed impossible. As the region’s political landscape shifts, the prospect of a new Middle East—one built on mutual trust and shared interests—appears closer than ever.
