Peloni: Amb. Tom Barrack raises a rather revealing window into his vision of the Middle East when he argues “How is it going to go away if you don’t have Hezbollah and Iran involved?” The simple answer to this puzzle is that the solution to Iranian control over Lebanon can not be solved in Lebanon, but instead must be riddle out in Iran. Indeed, Hezbollah and Iran are not at the table in Lebanon because they have no right to be at the table. They are a terrorist proxy and a state sponsor of terror, respectively, and that is the only basis of legitimacy which either of these organizations hold over Lebanon. Despite this being true, Barrack calls for these unrelated parties to play a decisive role in deciding the fate of Lebanon, when the better solution would be to eliminate the influence which these non-Lebanese players have in deciding Lebanon’s future. Notably, Lebanon today stands as a vassal state of Iran, and so long as Iran is ruled by the IRGC and the Mullahs, Lebanon will be controlled by Iran, yet the solution to this quandary is not to validate Lebanon as Iran’s legitimate colonial possession, but rather to eliminate the regime in Tehran which simultaneously holds dominion over both the peoples of Iran and Yemen, while funding proxy wars across the Middle East and promoting a terror cascade across Europe and North America. Indeed, instead of surrendering to Iran that which decisive roles over lands which are not Iranian, the Iranian regime, which is today threatening American positions and allies in Europe after having made war on America’s positions and allies in the Middle East, must be brought to a state of collapse, not containment, and certainly not expansion, the latter being what would follow from offering Iran any role of negotiating for its control in Lebanon.
The conceptual basis for the recognition and therefore legitimization of Iran and Hezbollah ruling Lebanon denies the very agency which the Trump administration has founded its policy supporting the Lebanon-Israeli negotiations. While it is true that Lebanon
Happy Barrack is finally saying his thinking out loud: He was Prez Trump’s channel to Hezbollah, through Berri, when Trump said a few times that “we talked to Hezbollah.”
Barrack wanted Islam Abad channel and agreement to prevail at the expense of the elected Lebanese… https://t.co/TbQr9c0C9c
— Hussain Abdul-Hussain (@hahussain) August 21, 2026
Text:
Happy Barrack is finally saying his thinking out loud: He was Prez Trump’s channel to Hezbollah, through Berri, when Trump said a few times that “we talked to Hezbollah.”
Barrack wanted Islam Abad channel and agreement to prevail at the expense of the elected Lebanese government and in favor of Hezbollah. He’s done everything he can to undermine the Lebanese-Israeli channel, a channel that’s the official policy of Prez Trump (and his idea, he called the Lebanese and Israeli ambassadors to the Oval Office to launch it) and Sec Rubio has been faithfully and skillfully implementing it.
This week Barrack denounced Israel for striking a Syrian airport to warn Turkey against taking it. Reports have it that Israel had cleared the strike with DC, which stayed silent, but Barrack was conducting his own policy and issued a strong statement against Israel.
Two contradictory US foreign policies in the Middle East spell doom, and it’s doom that we’re seeing.
And what’s Barrack’s idea? Concede to reality that Hezbollah rules Lebanon and Iran rules the region. Even Biden and Malley didn’t come up with such appeasement.
And by the way, his diplomacy has so far not resulted in resolving a single sticking issue anywhere in the Middle East. All he’s done is nodded to and helped Turkish expansion, including in Syria.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.