Danielle Pletka

Lebanon often finds itself at the center of Middle Eastern tensions. At an AEI event in late May titled "The Middle East Unravels: Lessons from Lebanon," experts on the Middle East discussed U.S. policy in Lebanon and throughout the region.

Since the end of a fifteen-year civil war in 1990, Lebanon has been split into two states living under one name, explained Hassan Mneimneh of the Iraq Memory Foundation. One Lebanon is working for peace in the Middle East, and another Lebanon, led by Hezbollah, is perpetuating conflict. "If [Hezbollah is] left without being countered, the future is not promising. Lebanon is the first round of something more dramatic," Mneimneh said.

Hezbollah will continue to fight for Lebanon, agreed Lee Smith of the Hudson Institute, who added that the recent peace agreement in Doha is only a temporary fix. "The peace process has come to a dead end, at least for the time being." He suggested that the next U.S. administration use regional instability to gain power to broker peace deals.

Robert Malley of the International Crisis Group spoke about the region more broadly, insisting that an open mind about alternative courses for the future is necessary, including contemplating what U.S. engagement with Syria or Iran would look like rather than continuing with the current administration's laissez-faire approach.

In order to maintain hope for peaceful resolutions in the Middle East, the United States must be committed to implementing policy on a daily basis, AEI's Danielle Pletka insisted. "If you want to be part of a different Middle East, you have to be there." 

"Iran will remain after the U.S. loses interest in Iraq, and they will be very influential," she continued. "Iranians are meeting very little resistance . . . which is a serious problem for us because I wonder whether we have even begun to notice."

For video and audio of this event, visit www.aei.org/event1734/.