The opinions of experts and specialists differed regarding the nature of the Iranian role in the Arab region, between those who see that Iran has contributed to building an Arab defense force, and others see it that has weakened the countries and their sedition.
The debate revolves around the hypothesis that wondered whether they were countries like Lebanon AndYemen AndIraq You will have armies that were not Iranian support.
The episode (6/26/6/6) of the “Bab Hawar” program – which was registered before the Israeli aggression on Iran in (13/6/1925) – dealt with this issue, in which a group of academics, media professionals and political analysts participated in various intellectual backgrounds.
The academic and researcher Hassan Ahmadine defended the hypothesis strongly, stressing that US AndIsrael They work to weaken and destroy the main Arab armies systematically.
Ahmadine said that this destruction affected the Egyptian army, then the Iraqi, then the Syrian, Yemeni and Libyan, noting that all of these countries were affecting the Arab -Israeli conflict.
Journalist Hawra Al -Hillani agreed with him in justifying Iranian support, considering that Iran was supporting “resistance movements” and not militias, stressing that Iran is fighting mainly against Israel and America and not against the Arab countries.
Al -Halani asked, “If we are on the same side, then why not fight the enemy itself?”
In the same context, the researcher in political science, Khalil Ahmed Andach, stressed that he does not see harmful for the occupier to use any party to liberate his land, comparing the situation with the international use of the liberation. Kuwait From the Iraqi occupation.
Andach said: “I will use any to be the liberation of my land,” stressing that this principle applies to the resistance in Palestine AndLebanon.
Building an aggressive culture
In contrast, the journalist Muhammad al -Dhabi al -Farda strongly rejected Iran, accusing Iran of building militias of an aggressive culture instead of the regular armies. Al -Dhabiani pointed to the destruction of Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, blaming Iran responsible for converting these countries into rubble.
It was compatible with this proposition, the writer and journalist, Malaz Al -Zoubi, who was considered the hypothesis completely inverted, stressing that had it not been for Iran, there would be national armies and stable countries in Syria, Yemen and Lebanon.
Al -Zoubi accused Iran of working to create militias as its arms, and by “a part of the components of Arab societies to become a sabotage and fragmentation of states.”
Al -Zoubi strongly criticized what he described as the Iranian “expansionist” imperial project “, considering that Iran has worked to sabotage armies, societies and countries instead of building them, and that it took advantage of the Arab Shiites as an essential component in the Arab culture to serve its expansion goals.
For his part, the writer and political analyst Daham Al -Qahtani presented another vision, considering that Iran has lost a lot of support for the so -called resistance, and that this support constitutes one of the main obstacles to the existence of normal relations between Iran and the Arab countries.
Al -Qahtani pointed out that the Palestinian resistance was achieving important gains even before external support, citing the success of the peaceful and civil resistance after the October 1973 war, and with the occurrence of Palestinian Authority On the ruling in 1993 without external support.
He warned that Iranian support made the resistance “described as non -patriotic and that it is strengthening abroad,” especially since “what happened in Lebanon and Yemen is not a war against Israel and America, but sometimes a war against the interior.”
16/6/2025