The road back from Washington is never the same as the road there. Travel between Washington and the capitals of the Middle East is rarely a routine diplomatic event - least of all when the destinations are Baghdad and Beirut, the two capitals separated by geography have been bound by fate since their states were founded more than a century ago.
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun's visit to Washington converges with Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi's first trip abroad, also to the American capital. What the two visits share goes beyond the timing and symbolism. They could soon yield similar results and prove the first milestones of a new regional order of interests, with its own geopolitical balance and economic corridors, rising from the ruins of the system that the October 7, 2023, Al-Aqsa Flood Operation brought down.
Baghdad and Beirut had effectively become Tehran's backyard - Baghdad after 2003 and Beirut after 2005. This was an arrangement born of the upheavals that followed September 11, 2001, and one Washington accommodated for years. The two capitals have now begun to shake off Iran’s influence, and the costs of being drawn into the strategic sphere of the network Tehran built.
The fall of the Assad regime closed the corridor linking that network and gave Syria back its natural geopolitical position. It also ended a period in which Baghdad and Beirut have bridged the distance between them created on Iran's terms.
Syria's return to its place strengthens the prospect that Baghdad and Beirut may reclaim their historic ones. Rather than remaining arenas of influence, they could become founding partners in a new regional order of interests - one built on geographic integration, overlapping interests, and a different balance of power, free of ideological alignments and the politics of rival blocs and spheres of influence.
In practical terms, returning from Washington matters more than going there. The two visits will not be measured by the statements issued or the meetings held, but by whether Baghdad and Beirut can turn the moment into a new strategic choice - one that takes them out of the geography of influence that has governed them for two decades and into the geography of interests now taking shape in the Levant.
This explains why the Iraqi prime minister traveled to Tehran days after returning from Washington, and why Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam is expected in Baghdad after Aoun's return.
On the first visit, al-Zaidi may have carried American messages to Tehran. More importantly, he sent Iraq's message: Iran must distinguish between a positive role in Iraq and harmful influence.
The second visit may be indirectly linked to al-Zaidi's trip, but it is important because of the partnership it reflects. It could help establish a new regional space founded on a more conciliatory relationship between Beirut and Baghdad.
Experience has shown that, in this emerging space, Iraq and Lebanon’s socio-political makeup does not allow Iraq to be governed with hostility to Iran, or Lebanon with hostility to Syria. However, it has equally shown the failure of governing Iraq from Iran or Lebanon from Syria.
Their new shared environment expands the formula: Lebanon cannot be governed against Iran, but neither can it be governed from Iran. Iraq cannot be governed with hostility to Syria; nor can it be governed from Syria.
For both capitals, then, the road back from Washington matters more than the road there. These were not merely diplomatic visits and could become the beginning of a transition from a geography of influence to a geography of interests.
