The question is no longer whether Iran supports Hezbollah, but rather how far it is willing to bear the cost of that support in a regional moment where events on the ground are accelerating. The recent Israeli airstrikes in southern and eastern Lebanon, accompanied by direct civilian evacuation warnings, are not merely a temporary military escalation. They clearly expose the fragility of the balance that has governed the relationship between Tehran and Hezbollah for years.
اضافة اعلان
Israel, which continues to violate the ceasefire signed in November 2024, now operates with greater confidence, benefiting from international political cover and increased U.S. pressure on the Lebanese state. The warnings preceding the strikes on four villages, followed by the expansion of the bombardment without prior notice, reflect a shift from deterrence to a policy of imposing facts on the ground—leaving civilians exposed and testing Lebanon’s ability to control weapons outside its authority.
In this context, Iran’s absence is striking. Tehran, which rhetorically opposes disarming Hezbollah, shows no real willingness to escalate: there is no direct intervention, no parallel deterrence, and not even a calculated escalation. What is happening now, in my view, is loss management rather than conflict management, and the reduction of influence rather than its expansion.
Yet, this shift does not mean Iran has abandoned Hezbollah. Rather, it is no longer capable—or willing—to pay the price of defending it. Hezbollah, meanwhile, faces a difficult test: continued targeting by Israel, mounting internal Lebanese pressure, and the official plan to centralize arms under state control, with regional support whose outcomes are no longer guaranteed.
Here, Lebanon emerges as the biggest loser in this equation. The state demands the implementation of the disarmament plan under fire, while its territories are subjected to bombardment, warnings, and evacuations, without real guarantees of halting the attacks. Hezbollah’s weapons, which once served as a protective element, are gradually becoming a permanent pretext for escalation and a political and security burden internally.
In conclusion, Israel’s recent airstrikes target not only military positions but also the core of the regional balance. Iran withdraws silently, Israel imposes its rhythm by force, and Hezbollah is left in a gray zone between historical commitment and practical incapacity. In such moments, alliances are measured not by past declarations, but by actual performance under the first real test—and that test is unfolding now, with these strikes.
