The attack of October 7, 2023, triggered a chain of events: Israel attacked Iran and a 12-day war between the two countries followed; it escalated against Hezbollah in South Lebanon and Beirut’s southern suburb, continuing to strike the party even after the announcement of a ceasefire; operations against Hamas in Gaza are ongoing, and military strikes (albeit with limited impact) on the Houthis in Yemen have not ended either. This trajectory has left the “Axis of Resistance” in retreat, with regional and international shifts redrawing influence in the Middle East. One cannot overlook the dramatic collapse of the Assad regime in Syria after Syria had long served Iran’s linchpin, allowing it to equip its proxies militarily.
The new regional power dynamic, despite the brutality we are seeing on a daily basis in Gaza, including systematic starvation, forced displacement, and targeting of civilians, alongside clashes in Syria and Tel Aviv’s efforts to exploit these contradictions to change the region after having been intoxicated with triumphalism. All this has raised many questions about the future of sectarian and ethnic communities in the Middle East: will one dominate the others?
Anyone following the tectonic shifts that have shaken several countries since October 7 understands clearly that division along religious, sectarian, or ethnic lines has become untenable. The future must be shared by all communities. Either peace prevails across the region, and all its peoples will benefit from it, or chaos will hurt everyone. Israel, with its extremist policies, will be the biggest winner, creating a vacuum that fundamentalist groups will seek to exploit.
One commonplace reading of this phase is that the “Axis of Resistance” shattering and the Assad regime falling will necessarily undercut the power of Shiites in Arab countries, and with Iran and Hezbollah weakened, the Shiites will become marginal communities in their respective states. To reassert the communities’ strength and prestige, this view holds, the “Axis of Resistance” must revitalize itself and rebuild.
Despite the popularity of the earlier narrative, it amounts to a fallacy. The decline of the “Axis of Resistance” does not, as some have claimed, weaken Shiites in the Arab world. On the contrary, it is a pivotal moment that could allow Arab Shiites to break free of the grip of a transnational political project in which sectarianism was used as an ideological tool rather than a form of legitimate religious or doctrinal diversity.
The “Axis of Resistance” was founded on slogans of confronting Israel and the United States; in practice, however, it became entangled in sectarian conflicts and disregarded statehood, empowering militias and transnational loyalties at its expense. This approach contributed to shaping an image of Shiites as proxies serving a foreign agenda, fostering an atmosphere of sectarian tension that turned religious affiliation into a political dispute.
No sensible person with a moral conscience can justify the Israeli assaults that have targeted unarmed civilians and killed thousands of children, women, and the elderly; these are clear war crimes and violations of international law. At the same time, these strikes and their consequences can also be read as actions that were not merely military, but political and security-related. Israel has exposed the fragility of the “Axis of Resistance’s” security apparatus and its inability to deter and hurt the Jewish state. Its attacks also exposed the limits of Iran’s capacity to protect its allies, particularly in light of its aggravating domestic and economic crises.
Moreover, with an influential elite of national Shiite figures in the Gulf, Iraq, and Lebanon now distanced from this “Axis,” and with their open criticisms and calls for a “national civic project,” a fundamental rupture has undercut the traditional “Resistance” narrative, which had long sought to monopolize Shiite identity.
Shiite citizens in the Gulf, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen are not fleeting or anomalous communities; they are key components of their societies. They have contributed to building their countries’ modern states and have been part of the administrative, cultural, and economic elite. Their loyalty is tied to the political leadership of their respective homelands.
In light of the above, it is essential (especially at this critical juncture) to reinforce the independence of national decision-making among Arab Shiites. This can be done by developing a political and cultural discourse that affirms the primacy of national belonging and rejects subservience to transnational projects, as well as promoting a spirit of free and critical civic thinking.
Further, the importance of breathing new life into the "social contract" across the Arab world is also an obvious need. Entrenching the principles of the rule of law and equal citizenship, and expanding the space for equal opportunity, would close the door to external powers seeking to interfere in Arabs’ domestic affairs and sow discord.
To prevent transnational forces from exerting influence, we relentlessly push back against sectarian discourse that fuels conflict and scrutinize religious rhetoric of all sects. Arab media and cultural elites must be vigilant against normalizing "political sectarianism"- it poses serious risks to civil peace.
The foundations for a national, civil, Arab, and domestic vision must be laid- a vision one grounded in equality and justice. The future does not belong to one sect. It cannot come at the expense of a sect. The future belongs to every citizen who sees the state as the only legitimate framework, nothing more, nothing less.
