When President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will visit South Lebanon in the context of his trip to the country, Iran will literally put its foot on the border with Israel. Indeed, ever since the Israeli invasion in 1982 and the ousting of the forces of the Palestine Liberation Organization from the South, it has been trying to influence the course of the conflict based on the dogma saying that whoever fights, governs. In this sense, Ahmadinejad's visit marks the epitome of the Lebanese developments since 1982 and the arrival of Hezbollah - which represents a Shi'i tradition linked to the Iranian Wileyat e-Faqih and acts as the implementer of its fatwas – to an advanced position in the Lebanese political structure and a quasi-exclusive decision-maker in it. Regardless of the regional circumstances which led to these results, especially the Syrian role, its strategic identification with Iran and its transformation into a gateway that provided Hezbollah with all the requirements of strength, the current Lebanese reality has become greatly flawed. This has reached the point where all the state institutions have lost their functions to serve the political position of Hezbollah, and consequently Iran. This flaw surfaced throughout the Lebanese crisis since 2005, with the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri who – when he moved to the opposition – was suspected of trying to reactivate the institutions based on the Lebanese consensus featured in the Taif Accord, through the expansion of the circle of his domestic alliances to include factions which were excluded and isolated during the era of Syrian hegemony over the Lebanese decision-making process. This hegemony was the one that allowed Hezbollah to reach the level of power it now enjoys. Also on the eve of his assassination, Al-Hariri was suspected of being among the activators of Resolution 1559 which calls for Lebanon's sovereignty over all the territories, and consequently for the Syrian military pullout and Hezbollah's relinquishing of its arms, i.e. the source of its strength. Al-Hariri's stand was not only identical to the international position, but also to the Arab position reached during the summits and the overall Arab perception of Lebanon as a country whose political and sectarian plurality should be respected in the context of a balance upheld by the institutions. This is how Cairo and Riyadh along with the other Arab countries of the Gulf and the Arab Maghreb perceived Lebanon throughout the stages. The flaw affected these meanings, which are closely linked to the very existence of modern Lebanon, the final country for its entire people in accordance with the Taif Accord. Indeed, the institutions no longer had a role to play, plurality was rendered without value and the decision was transferred to the strongest on the ground. As for the current dispute in Lebanon – regardless of the file over which it erupted – it is one between the attempts to resort to the institutions and the attempts to confirm the priority of the element of strength or threaten with it, in order to consecrate the domestic flaw and change the country's image. This is what Ahmadinejad came to see with his own eyes. He came to watch the outcome of the transformation that has been secured by Hezbollah in Lebanon since 1982, considering that the party is a theoretical and practical extension of the Revolutionary Guard, the actual ruler in Iran under the current Guide. Therefore, Ahmadinejad's visit to Lebanon marks the epitome of this effort's success, unlike the visit of former President Muhammad Khatami whose goals converged with the Arab vision of the entity and the state in Lebanon. Still, the current visit points to a new stage in Iran's dealings with the Arab countries in which it can find a pied-à-terre, after it was successful at the level of the Lebanese experience. The complications to form the Iraqi government constitute the best example for this Iranian direction, which cannot tolerate a partner wherever it can refuse partnership, regardless of the local reality. There are also signs emerging in Arab countries neighboring Iran, pointing to the fact that this direction has become clearer and more public. Hence, Ahmadinejad's visit concludes the Lebanese stage and constitutes the prelude of the regional stage.
