Hospital supplies are beginning to run out in Lebanon and people are living in almost complete darkness in this scorching hot summer weather. Most people are barely scraping by, no longer able to afford fuel for their homes, much less their cars or public transportation. With matters now this bad, as the US still prevents any alleviation of the Lebanese people's suffering, aiding in the depletion of the little foreign reserves and resources Lebanon has, Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah announced that it is no longer acceptable for the Lebanese people to be subjected to this. Despite US warnings, Hezbollah will bring in fuel from Iran, and it will break the embargo. 

This didn't happen just now. This moment didn't come to pass because of the developments in the past few months, rather it is inextricably tied to the events of the past few years and the changes in the international arena. 

The international scene

The world is changing, the West is in decline, and China and Asia (as a whole) are on the rise; as such, war seems almost inevitable in the coming rearrangement of world order. One lesson the Thucydides trap teaches us is that the prospects of increasing scuffles and war seem increasingly more probable under these settings, as the dwindling power takes on a more aggressive approach when challenging the rising power for dominance, which explains much of the United States’ approach with regards to China and the former’s allies’ comportment in Asia.

Ever since its inception, post-revolutionary Iran has been challenging Western presence in the region, be that through the development of its military technology, or through the successive victories scored by the Axis of Resistance that slowly bit away at US hegemony in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine. These achievements meant that the West, try as it might, could no longer contain the rise of Iran as a regional power. Even more so, Iran has grown so sure of its power and of the US' decline that it has challenged US dominance on an international level by challenging its sanctions on Venezuela and Syria.

China, on the other hand, is increasingly gaining a footing in West Asia, edging closer to implementing its “Belt and Road” plan, as is Russia with its presence in Syria and its overtures towards Lebanon. Both the US plans to “reduce the strategic importance of the Middle East” and the ensuing void are set to be filled by both China and Russia. Despite this, the US will certainly not substantially disengage from the region.

The Axis on the rise

The aforementioned leads us to the conclusion that this scene grants the Axis of Resistance much freedom in challenging US presence in the region. This is why this coming period will be one branded with tension. Sure, there’s been an ongoing clandestine naval war between "Israel" and Iran since May 2019, when "Israel" began attacking Iranian ships carrying Iranian cargo or oil, but the region became tenser as of late as a result of a number of incidents that set the stage for this scorching heat: the Israeli airstrikes on South Lebanon and the MV Mercer Street incident.

As far as the latter is concerned, it seems that this war’s clandestine aspect was no longer tolerable for the West, especially since "Israel" was punching above its weight, which necessitated upping tensions with Iran, thus increasing the costs of any future attack (or retaliation) against Israeli vessels.

Related News

New US strike on alleged drug boat in Caribbean kills three people

Kazakhstan to join 'Abraham Accords', Trump announces

The P5+1 has been urging Iran to go back to the negotiating table, be that through weak incentives (easing maximum pressure) or through the threat of imposing more sanctions aimed at encouraging "Iran to stay at the negotiating table or up the cost of leaving it.” However, Iran is no longer in any hurry for a return to the nuclear deal, which it was in full compliance with, as per the IAEA, but is now actually expanding its nuclear capabilities, in light of the West’s non-compliance with the deal, also within the framework of the JCPOA (as per a report by the US Intelligence Committee).

Having tested the West and reaped no significant benefits from the deal, Iran believes that the incentive to return to the JCPOA, although real, "is not as substantial as generally thought.”

And let’s not get into the resounding defeat in Afghanistan. This, in fact, deserves a full-blown interview of its own with a specialist in US military disasters. Luckily, there is one.

It is amid this international setting that the most recent development came from Lebanon, no less.

The Lebanese connection

In this country facing an economic collapse, described by the World Bank as one of the world’s three worst since the mid-19th century, a year after the Beirut port explosion which led to the martyrdom of more than 200 civilians and the injury of thousands, and as a growing number of households ended up with no food or money to buy any, the US is placing increasing pressure on Lebanon. This is intended to achieve multiple goals, including, but not limited to, forcing Lebanon into conceding a portion of its maritime borders in the South and mounting the popular pressure on Hezbollah from within; a step the Israeli pundits attest to be the only way to weaken the Resistance.

Amid a fuel and gas shortage, which threatens households, hospitals, livelihoods, and the basic needs of a people’s electricity consumption (some areas now have electricity for less than one hour a day), and amid a steady increase in chaos and a decline in all kinds of security, the US has been warning Lebanon against heading East towards China, Russia, or Iran. Hezbollah had earlier said that it was willing to import fuel from Iran in late June, but the move was met with a resounding “no” from the United States and its allies, as the US Ambassador to Lebanon Dorothy Shea told a local news outlet that this “was not a viable solution to the problem.”

Now that the fuel crisis has reached a breaking point with subsidies set to soon be removed, despite governmental opposition, Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah said that the fuel from Iran is indeed on its way to Lebanon.

Let's go back a bit to clarify.

Early in August, “Israel” attacked an open field in southern Lebanon. This was a huge shift from previous attacks considering that this was the first time in 15 years that “Israel” launches an airstrike on Lebanese soil. The Resistance was quick to respond, retaliating with rockets on an open field north of the occupied Palestinian territory. The message was clear: any attack on Lebanese sovereignty will be met with an attack on "Israel".

This time, Nasrallah announced that the ship was indeed inbound for Lebanon, designating the ship as Lebanese territory. Any attack on the ship carrying fuel for generators to be used in hospitals and securing people’s livelihoods would no longer only constitute an attack on an Iranian ship, rather, it would be a violation of Lebanese sovereignty, as the ship "has become linked to the pride of the Lebanese people, and we refuse to humiliate them." This statement alone effectively means that an entirely new equation has been set for this round: Iranian fuel ships to Lebanon are now part of Lebanon’s national security, and any move against them will be met in that capacity.

So what’s next? Things are not all set and done. It’s one thing for the ship to set sail, and another for it to arrive to the Mediterranean, another still for it to safely unload its cargo, and yet another for where it will unload the cargo. From now until then, it’s too soon to tell how the situation will unfold. The US may take the decision to challenge the move with increased pressure or to alleviate the crisis to lessen the move’s impact. For now, we need to wait and see how the US, and not "Israel", decides to tackle this development, keeping in mind that Hezbollah will reply accordingly.

Summer still isn’t over. It can still get very hot.