Caroline Akoum – Middle East
The Shiite street in Lebanon is witnessing an increasing state of discontent, which goes beyond the traditional political discourse of Hezbollah and the Amal Movement, and directly affects Iran, after many people felt that the war that was opened to support Iran ended in the destruction of their villages, the displacement of their families, and the loss of their children, while they were left alone to face war, displacement, poverty, and destruction.
This restlessness began to appear clearly on social media, especially among supporters of the Amal Movement, headed by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, in addition to supporters of Hezbollah, such that ideological and political slogans were no longer able to contain the amount of anger and despair.
This anger comes despite Hezbollah officials continuing to thank Iran and emphasizing its role in supporting the “resistance,” in addition to relying on Tehran to put pressure on stopping the war.
A large portion of the Shiite environment now sees a contradiction between this discourse and their daily reality. Tens of thousands of displaced people live in harsh humanitarian conditions, without a clear horizon for return or reconstruction.
An ideological speech met with southern anger
In this context, the statements of Sheikh Assad Kassir, affiliated with Hezbollah, sparked widespread controversy, after he considered that “preserving the (Islamic Republic) in Iran is a religious duty that takes precedence over preserving individuals; Because it constitutes a guarantee for the preservation of Islam itself,” according to his opinion.
Kassir based his speech on ideas attributed to the late leader Khomeini, and on the concept of sacrifice that was embodied in the Karbala incident.
But this speech was met with rejection by a wide segment of the population, who began to view the war from the perspective of its losses in people and stone.
Zainab, a displaced woman from the south, says: “The war was opened under the pretext of supporting Iran, but today we feel that we have been left alone.” Even the representatives of Hezbollah and the Amal Movement do not ask about the people living in displacement centers.
She adds: “I feel that dying under the roof of our house is easier than the life of displacement that we live today.” We can no longer bear this psychological and living fatigue, and no one feels what we are going through.”
“The South is more important than all conflicts.”
As for Mona – a mother of two children who rents a house in Mount Lebanon – she says that what the people of the south experienced during the past months changed the convictions of many within the environment supporting the resistance: “The war began under big slogans, but the result was the destruction of our villages, the loss of our youth, and the displacement of our families. Today, people feel oppressed by the South more than anything else.”
She adds bitterly: “Many have come to the conviction that the South and its people are more important than all regional conflicts. The people of the south are saying: Let Iran and the whole world burn and the south will remain.
The fall of the “one axis” slogan
Umm Muhammad also expresses deep disappointment with the idea of the “one axis,” saying: “Over the past years, they have been telling us that we are one axis, and that we must support any battle this axis is waging. But when the war came upon us, we felt that we were alone.”
She added: “Tehran was saying that it would not enter into any negotiations before the ceasefire in Lebanon, and then it said that it had reached a ceasefire agreement as a result of negotiations with America, while the Israeli bombing and occupation expanded every day.”
State option
Like most Lebanese, Laila calls for supporting the Lebanese state in the option of direct negotiations with Israel and ending the war. She says: “Iran works in its interest, and this is its right, but why don’t we also think about the interest of our people and our country?” “We are tired of waiting and of linking the fate of the South to the accounts of other countries.”
She pointed out that “many are now demanding that the Lebanese state alone undertake the management of the war file and negotiations. Because the continuation of the current situation means more destruction and losses without any clear horizon.”
Anger at the decline in Iranian support
Political analyst Ali Al-Amin talks about “the clear change that the Shiite environment is witnessing in its view of Iran, and the escalation of feelings of anger and disappointment within the (Hezbollah) public as a result of what is happening in southern Lebanon.”
Al-Amin told Asharq Al-Awsat, “The strength of Iranian influence was not based only on the sectarian or political dimension; But also on the network of support and services that the party provided with Iranian support, which for years constituted a source of safety for many families.”
Al-Amin points out that this feeling began to decline with the scenes of the destruction of southern villages, the displacement of residents, and the deaths and injuries, at a time when many do not see any actual Iranian support equivalent to the size of the losses.
He points out that a large part of Hezbollah’s environment has begun to wonder about the reason for the absence of a direct Iranian response, or the application of real military pressure on Israel, despite the constant talk about “the unity of the battlefields” and Iran’s missile capabilities.
Unprecedented criticism
Al-Amin adds, “This reality has created a feeling among some that Iran is using Hezbollah and the Shiite environment within its regional calculations, without being prepared to pay an actual cost to protect Lebanon, or limit the continuation of war and destruction.”
Hence, he says: “This disappointment opened the door to unprecedented criticism within the Shiite environment towards the Iranian role, and the policies that some consider to be linked to the interests of the Iranian regime more than to the interests of the Lebanese in the south.”
He continues: “Iran was saying that the ceasefire in Lebanon came as a result of Iran’s agreement with America in Islamabad, and therefore, as long as Israel violated the ceasefire, Iran was supposed to violate the ceasefire and work to pressure Israel to at least stop its aggression and expansion, and limit the displacement of residents from dozens of southern villages.”
