The pause in US-Iran hostilities reflects a tactical pivot toward reopening the Strait of Hormuz. Yet, the persistent survival of the Iranian regime threatens regional stability, as its “export of revolution” doctrine continues to undermine Gulf security and consolidate the long-term Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon through proxy exploitation.
In light of US President Donald Trump’s announcement that he has accepted a two-week delay for the military operation targeting Iran, much will depend on whether the “Islamic Republic” fulfills its pledge made to Pakistan regarding the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to international navigation.
The US President will view the reopening of the Strait as a personal victory. Conversely, Iran will consider the survival of its regime sufficient cover to compensate for the military defeat it has suffered. Whether we like it or not, the Iranian regime has endured in the face of the United States and Israel, relying on its missiles and drones and its ability to close the Strait of Hormuz on one hand, while pursuing an aggressive policy targeting the six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries and Jordan on the other. This major event begs the question: What role will Iran play in the post-temporary-ceasefire phase as it prepares to negotiate a “permanent peace” with the United States in Pakistan?
How Will the Gulf States React?
The announcement of a two-week ceasefire by the US President—who had previously threatened to “erase” Iran from existence—comes as a positive shock. However, this does not change the fact that the recent war, which began on February 28, revealed the depth of the hatred and hostility that Iran harbors toward the Arab Gulf states. The “Islamic Republic” utilized its entire arsenal in an overt assault against every member state of the GCC. It was astonishing to see the targeting of vital civilian infrastructure in countries that had done everything possible to avoid war.
The Arab Gulf states no longer harbor any illusions regarding the “Islamic Republic” and its current regime—a regime that has proven it never truly abandoned the slogan of “exporting the revolution.” How will the six GCC states deal with Iran in the aftermath of the US decision to refrain from going to the very end in a war whose origins and necessary exit conditions are well known? These conditions transcend the Iranian nuclear file; they also pertain to Iranian ballistic missiles, their launch platforms, and the “Revolutionary Guard” proxies in the region, particularly in Lebanon, which entered a losing war that has cost—and will continue to cost—it dearly.
Notably, amidst the current whirlwind of events, Gaza has seemingly faded from existence. What began with Gaza has ended in Iran. The Gaza war extended to Iran, taking Lebanon with it. Lebanon is now a primary candidate to be among the victims of the Gaza war that began with the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023. No one seems to remember the “Gaza Nakba” these days, now that the center of events is in the heart of Iran itself. There is a fear of a day when no one will remember the Israeli occupation of Lebanese land extending to the Litani River, or the tragedy of the inhabitants of destroyed villages. There is no guarantee of an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, where “The Party” (Hezbollah) took it upon itself to invite re-occupation, cause dozens of deaths, and trigger the displacement of over a million citizens from the south.
What must be remembered every hour is that the major battle was fought in Iran—an important country that the United States wishes to return to, and that Israel wishes to destroy. The most dangerous aspect remains that the battle for Iran is now overshadowing everything else, and entangling Lebanon in this battle is an unforgivable crime against the people of the south in general, and the Shiite community in particular.
Prey to the Iranian and the Israeli?
Before the success of the Pakistani mediation between the US President and Iran was announced, Donald Trump seemed determined to show he is not Barack Obama and that his administration is different from all those that preceded it. It was noteworthy how Trump, in his press conference setting the deadline for opening the Strait of Hormuz, focused on how previous US administrations had accommodated Iran since the success of the “Islamic Revolution” in 1979. He pointed several times to the difference he made himself when he took the decision to assassinate Qasem Soleimani during his time at the White House in early 2020.
What must be noted here is the depth of his knowledge regarding what Qasem Soleimani, commander of the “Quds Force,” represented in the structure of the Iranian regime. The US President was not fooled by the actions of the Barack Obama administration, which reached an agreement with the “Islamic Republic” regarding its nuclear file in the summer of 2015. That agreement allowed Iran to obtain billions of dollars dedicated to pursuing its expansionist project in the region. In 2018, Trump stood up and tore up the agreement, paving the way for the elimination of Qasem Soleimani shortly after he left Baghdad Airport.
It will soon become clear whether Donald Trump is truly different from Barack Obama and whether he indeed possesses that deep understanding of the danger of the Iranian regime—a regime that knew in 1983 how to drive the United States out of Lebanon after bombing the US Embassy in Beirut in April of that year, followed by the Marine barracks near the Beirut airport later on.
Donald Trump will enter history if he succeeds in taming Iran; he will also enter history if he fails. The only constant is that he will leave behind a region seeking to reshape its relationship with an important country that, at a certain stage, managed to control four Arab capitals—Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut, and Sana’a—and threaten every Gulf state using the weapons of terrorism, blackmail, and sectarian impulses simultaneously.
Donald Trump is writing history before our eyes. What is still unknown: Does Trump truly possess a strategic mindset… or will he be satisfied for the time being with his success in reopening the Strait of Hormuz, leaving the Gulf states as prey to Iranian hatred and Lebanon at the mercy of the Israeli and a “Party” whose only concern is appeasing its masters in Tehran?