Hezbollah MP Ali Fayyad admitted in an interview that the political changes in Syria represent a strategic setback for Hezbollah. He noted the group’s loss of influence due to Assad’s fall, loss of logistical routes, and changing alliances. Fayyad also highlighted a transition in Hezbollah’s internal leadership structure and emphasized the need for the Lebanese government to take charge of security, reflecting a cautious recalibration amidst challenges to Iran’s regional influence.
In an interview with the Iranian state newspaper Hammihan on March 11, Hezbollah MP Ali Fayyad admitted that the political changes in Syria represent a significant strategic defeat for the organization. He acknowledged the implications of the fall of the Assad regime, stating, “We cannot deny it,” which underscores the challenges now confronting Hezbollah’s standing in the region.
Fayyad discussed the new obstacles Hezbollah faces since Assad’s removal, indicating that the current leadership in Damascus is allied with factions that Hezbollah has previously opposed. This shift complicates the operational dynamics for Hezbollah, limiting its mobility and influence.
He also expressed concern regarding the loss of vital logistical routes for weapon supplies, necessitating an adjustment to a transformed regional context. The MP indicated that Hezbollah is vigilantly observing the new Syrian leadership’s stance towards Israel, highlighting potential complications that may hinder Hezbollah’s reliance on Syria as a strategic partner in the future.
On the topic of Hezbollah’s internal organization, Fayyad noted a transition from a leader-centric model under Hassan Nasrallah to a more structured framework under Sheikh Naim Qassem. He articulated that the group is moving away from its past dependence on charismatic leadership, signifying a pivotal change in its operation style.
Fayyad stressed the importance of the Lebanese government taking the lead on security matters, asserting that Hezbollah’s military forces would not integrate into state institutions in the short term. He maintained that the group’s strategic decisions would be heavily influenced by Lebanon’s advancement in its defense capabilities.
In his remarks, Fayyad recognized a shift in Hezbollah’s relationship with the Lebanese state by stating, “We consider this phase—the implementation of UN Resolution 1701—to be the government’s responsibility.” This sentiment reflects Hezbollah’s cautious adjustment amidst declining military strength and diminishing Iranian influence in the region.
His statements reveal Hezbollah’s strategic recalibration in response to the fallout from the Syrian conflict, where the Iranian regime’s regional control is increasingly being questioned. He candidly noted, “There is no doubt that the political transformation in Syria was a major strategic blow for us. We cannot deny this.”, indicating Hezbollah’s need to reassess its military approach and alliances in light of these developments.
In summary, Hezbollah faces significant challenges following the transformation of political dynamics in Syria, which has diminished its strategic position. The group is adapting to a new reality where its historical alliances are strained, prompting a reevaluation of its military operations and internal structure. This recalibration underscores Hezbollah’s vulnerabilities amidst the weakening influence of Iran in the region, calling for a more cooperative stance with the Lebanese government to navigate these changes effectively.
Original Source: www.ncr-iran.org
