The shockwaves from Israel’s assassination of Hizbullah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut last week are still reverberating in Iran.

The events of the past two weeks, in addition to the assassination of Nasrallah also including the killing of many first and second-rank leaders of Hizbullah, have been so profound that discussions now revolve around a distinct “before” and “after” 28 September marking a perilous new phase in Iran’s history.

Tehran did not suffer just a single blow with Nasrallah’s death. It endured multiple, deeply painful setbacks with both immediate and long term implications. Israel’s ground invasion of Southern Lebanon has brought the “Axis of Resistance” that Iran sponsors to the brink of collapse.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made it clear that Israel’s military incursion into Lebanon is not limited to pushing Hizbullah back from the border or restoring security to northern Israel. The ultimate goal, with backing from the US, is the dismantling of Hizbullah’s military capabilities and infrastructure, signalling a potentially drawn-out conflict in Southern Lebanon.

Caught in the wake of these blows, Iran finds itself in a difficult position with few options. Nasrallah was more than a military ally, as he had cultivated personal, ideological, and organisational bonds with the Iranian leadership over nearly four decades.

In the homes of key Iranian figures, it is common to see portraits of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Nasrallah side by side. His loss is a devastating blow to Iran’s regional strategy.

Nasrallah’s role in driving Israeli forces out of Lebanon in 2006 made him a revered figure in Iran. During a visit to the office of Hussein Shariatmadari, the influential editor-in-chief of the Iranian newspaper Kayhan, which reflects Khamenei’s views, Al-Ahram Weekly noted prominent portraits of Khamenei and Nasrallah side by side.

Shariatmadari praised Nasrallah as the “soft power” of Shiite Islam among the Arab public.

It is therefore not surprising that Nasrallah’s assassination, along with the loss of other key Hizbullah leaders, has triggered a storm of confusion and internal blame-shifting in Iran. The situation represents a seismic shift, and Tehran has yet to grasp the magnitude of the blow.

Iranian officials admit their options are constrained, and the assassination was both painful and unexpected. When Tehran and Hizbullah initially decided to offer support to Hamas in Gaza by launching limited strikes on northern Israel, their goal was to pressure Netanyahu into halting the assault on Gaza. However, neither Tehran nor Hizbullah anticipated the rapid escalation that followed.

For over two weeks, both have been pulled into a conflict that they had sought to avoid since the 7 October attacks last year. Tehran’s frustration is compounded by the fact that it had no prior knowledge of those attacks, nor did it play a role in them.

When they occurred, both Iran and Hizbullah resented the timing, as the attacks came at a time when neither was prepared for such a confrontation. Iran is facing significant domestic challenges, while Lebanon remains fragile, grappling with severe political and economic crises.

Thus, officials in Tehran felt that Hamas had placed the entire Axis in a difficult position through a unilateral decision based on narrow calculations and poor timing. Iranian sources note that Hamas has historically maintained a precarious relationship with the Axis, often having “one foot inside and one foot outside.”

Although relations with Hamas were later restored, lingering doubts about its past actions persisted. Hamas’ unilateral attack on Israel last October thrust Iran, Hizbullah, and Syria into a highly dangerous situation, according to Iranian diplomatic sources who spoke to the Weekly on condition of anonymity.

One Iranian source compared Israel’s actions after 7 October to the way the US exploited the events of 11 September 2001 as a pretext for reshaping the region. He argued that Israel’s primary objective is not the return of the hostages held by Hamas, but the reoccupation of Southern Lebanon and the destruction of Hizbullah’s military capabilities.

After achieving this, the source warned, Israel’s attention would shift to Iran, aiming to deliver a devastating blow to the regime, perhaps even attempting regime change.

This view was expressed by Netanyahu himself, who in a video address to the Iranian people on Monday suggested that regime change in Tehran could come “much faster than people think.”

His remarks were seen in Tehran as thinly veiled incitement, encouraging internal opposition to rise against the regime. Netanyahu promised that Israel would “stand with the Iranian people” in their quest for peace and prosperity, framing the regime as a barrier to their hopes.

Any retaliatory action from Iran could give Israel a pretext to escalate, pushing Iran into a direct conflict it is unprepared for. While there are calls both within and outside Iran to move away from the doctrine of “strategic patience,” many believe Tehran is already cornered with no easy options.

The regime is likely to adopt a wait-and-see approach, observing Israel’s next moves before making any decisions.

Beyond the geopolitical ramifications, Nasrallah’s assassination is also sparking significant domestic repercussions within Iran.

A fierce blame game is emerging, with the country’s political factions divided. Key conservative figures, such as former MP Ali Motahari, argue that Tehran’s failure to respond to the earlier assassination of Hamas Political Bureau chief Ismail Haniyeh emboldened Israel to target Nasrallah.

Conservatives hold reformist President Masoud Pezeshkian, along with advisers Mohammad Javad Zarif and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, responsible for this inaction, claiming they persuaded Khamenei to hold back to avoid further costly entanglements.

Reformist supporters, however, argue that all final strategic decisions lie with Khamenei and that the internal bickering between conservatives and reformists only serves Israel’s interests.

Yadollah Javani, deputy commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, defended the decision not to retaliate for Haniyeh’s assassination. In a speech delivered in Qom on Monday, he emphasised the need for rational, calculated responses, taking into account the full strategic picture.

For now, Iranian sources say the focus is on uncovering the security breaches that allowed Israel to carry out the recent attacks on Iranian and Hizbullah assets. Supporting Hizbullah militarily and politically remains a priority, as does protecting Iran from being dragged into a direct war, they stated.

Though Iran’s alliance with Hizbullah remains strong, the broader Axis of Resistance appears increasingly fragile. Tehran will likely reassess its relationships within it, particularly in the light of the fact that a single partner, like Hamas, can pull the entire Axis into disastrous conflicts that undermine Iran’s broader strategic goals.

---

* A version of this article appears in print in the 3 October, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly