According to Ghassan Charbel’s article for Asharq Al-Awsat, he adds, “Iranian interference is nothing new. But after the blatant Iranian role in Yemen, it took a more dangerous course. What is new, however, is that targeted countries feel that they can no longer avoid calling things by their proper name and that this interference is a fixed item in Arab meetings and talks with international powers.”
The policies of the American administration toward Iran is also new. After signing the nuclear agreement, Iran stepped up its intervention in the region, and the US president refused to re-certify compliance, leaving the future of the deal uncertain.
Now that threats posed by ISIS have diminished, talks regarding Iran have reemerged. Some believe that Iran’s sectarian-based policy of destabilization is the reason for the fragmentation of national unity in more than one Arab country and that ISIS was born out of these ruptures.
On the eve of the Cairo meeting, Donald Trump and Emmanuel Macron discussed the situation in the Middle East. According to the White House, the two presidents “agreed on the need to work with allies to counter the destabilizing activities of Hezbollah and Iran in the region.” At the meeting, Iran was accused of pursuing sectarian policies, deploying its militias on Arab soil and interfering in internal affairs.
Charbel writes that “Three parties must reflect on the outcome of the emergency meeting of Arab foreign ministers.” He identifies the three as:
Iran — whose behavior was condemned by the participants. The question is whether it wants to coexist with its Arab neighbors, or continue trying to subjugate them.
Hezbollah — which is no longer seen as a resistance against Israel, but as a terrorist organization, based on its role in the Iranian coup.
President Michel Aoun — whose role as president will be meaningless if he does not use his position to defend the interests of the Lebanese people.