Iran’s Supreme leader adviser lectures Beirut on “resistance,” while Lebanon pays the price of a war that was never its own
Former Iranian Foreign Minister and Supreme Leader advisor Ali Akbar Velayati recently warned Lebanon’s Prime Minister Nawaf Salam that ignoring Hezbollah’s “indispensable role” would expose Lebanon to “irreparable security risks.”
He insisted that Lebanon’s stability depends on “synergy” between the state and what he calls the “Resistance.”
He has it exactly backward.
Hezbollah is not Lebanon’s shield. It is the very reason Lebanon is unstable.
First, Hezbollah was never a true resistance movement. From its inception under the patronage of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps—specifically its Quds Force—it was designed to serve Tehran’s strategic interests, not Lebanon’s national interest.
Second, Hezbollah has never prioritized Lebanon. Its decisions—war and peace alike—are dictated by Iran, not by the Lebanese state or the will of the Lebanese people.
Third, Hezbollah functions as an extension of Iran’s regional apparatus—a de facto mercenary force advancing Iran’s geopolitical ambitions across the Middle East.
Fourth, despite decades of rhetoric, neither Hezbollah nor its patrons have liberated a single inch of Palestinian land. Their wars have produced slogans—not results.
History further dismantles the “resistance” myth.
After the Black September, when Yasser Arafat and the Palestine Liberation Organization relocated to Lebanon and launched attacks on Israel, southern Lebanese communities bore the consequences. Many local Shiite groups—resentful of the destruction brought upon their مناطق—aligned tactically with Israel against the PLO. This reality contradicts today’s simplified narrative.
Likewise, the evolution of Palestinian factions tells a similar story. The early dynamics between groups like Hamas and Fatah were shaped as much by internal rivalries as by resistance.
In other words, the region’s so-called “resistance movements” have often fought each other more than they have fought Israel.
But the most devastating truth is this:
No force has inflicted more damage on Lebanon than Hezbollah.
It has been implicated in political assassinations that robbed Lebanon of some of its finest leaders. It has paralyzed the state, crippled the economy, and dragged the country into repeated wars that served Iran’s agenda—not Lebanon’s survival.
These wars did not defend Lebanon. They exposed it.
They led to destruction, displacement, and—ironically—continued Israeli presence in contested areas.
And now, Iran dares to lecture Lebanon on sovereignty?
Prime Minister Nawaf Salam does not need guidance from Tehran. His integrity, international standing, and commitment to the rule of law speak for themselves.
If anything, Lebanon needs less interference—not more.
Mr. Velayati should understand a simple truth:
Lebanon will never be stable as long as it is treated as a battlefield for others.
With friends like Iran, Lebanon needs no enemies.
