CAIRO, Dec. 25 (Xinhua) -- As 2025 draws to a close, a trio of Middle Eastern countries find themselves in a familiar interlude: the loudest battles have ebbed, yet the struggle over who holds power, and on whose behalf, has not.
These countries, namely Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq, face the same defining question: can they achieve a meaningful reset -- one that restores sovereignty, consolidates state authority, and charts an independent path forward?
ARMED ACTORS VS. STATE AUTHORITY
A common feature across the three countries is the uneasy relationship between state institutions and armed actors whose power was forged during conflict and has proven resistant to centralization.
In Lebanon, the government's attempts to disarm Hezbollah, the powerful Iran-backed Shiite political party and militant group, have been slow and fraught.
Under a ceasefire agreement with Israel, Beirut pledged to make areas south of the Litani River free of illegal weapons and deploy the Lebanese Army there. Yet Hezbollah continues to reject disarmament, arguing that its weapons remain necessary as long as Israel poses a threat.
Lebanese political analyst George Alam said the government's push to disarm Hezbollah reflects an attempt to end co-existence with a "mini-state," a situation he described as incompatible with restoring Lebanon's sovereignty.
Lebanese Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal has indicated that the preferable path would be a diplomatic one rather than confrontation. Yet Alam argued that dialogue has failed because the conflict is fundamentally embedded in a broader regional and international struggle.
In Syria, more than 13 years of armed conflict have left the country a fractured patchwork controlled by rival factions. The new administration, which took office one year ago, has vowed to integrate armed actors into a unified command. However, violence in Latakia, Rural Damascus, and Sweida has revealed just how far that vision remains from reality.
The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), considered the largest non-state armed force in Syria, signed an agreement with the interim government in March pledging integration, yet implementation remains stalled.
Kurdish journalist Baz Baqari told online news outlet Ultra Syria that placing such a comprehensive agreement on a fixed nine-month timetable was premature, given Syria's overlapping regional and international interests.
Syrian political analyst Firas Allawi also noted that the presence of weapons in the hands of individuals outside state control, and the lack of full state control over parts of Syrian territory, contribute to Syria's security vulnerability.
In Iraq, although many armed groups have been formally incorporated into the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), a number of them continue to maintain autonomous decision-making, operating in parallel with, rather than subordinate to, the central government.
Evidence of this is seen in frequent attacks by PMF-aligned groups against U.S. forces in Iraq and Syria, drawing military responses and turning the country into a battleground for settling scores.
Ali Mousa, a political analyst at Iraq's al-Rafid Center for Media and Strategic Studies, said the Iraqi government appears to be "walking through a minefield," seeking to balance between factions backed by regional countries and U.S. pressure for disarmament.
EXTERNAL INTERVENTION VS. SELF-RELIANCE
Even where political will exists to consolidate state authority, external powers operating through local actors severely constrain these nations' ability to chart independent paths.
In Lebanon, disarmament negotiations involving U.S., French, and Saudi officials highlight the degree to which security policy has become internationally mediated.
"Lebanon today is an arena of intense 'tug-of-war' between Iran on one side and Israel and the United States on the other. Until this equation changes, Lebanon will not enjoy full sovereignty," Alam said.
In Syria, since the ousting of former President Bashar al-Assad in late 2024, militia-turned interim authorities have struggled to establish stability, relying heavily on external support.
Türkiye has expanded its influence by backing Damascus' institutions, securing its borders, and providing humanitarian aid. Israel, meanwhile, has intensified military operations and positioned itself as a strategic actor in the post-Assad landscape.
"Syria is a land of conflicting interests for Türkiye and Israel, both of which maintain a military presence there for different reasons," Batu Coskun, a non-resident fellow at the United Arab Emirates-based Trends Research and Advisory, told Xinhua.
"Competition has clearly emerged in Syria," said Oytun Orhan, a senior researcher at the Ankara-based Center for Middle Eastern Studies. "These overlapping priorities inevitably lead to friction, particularly amid the diplomatic fallout from the Gaza crisis."
In Iraq, the dynamic is reflected in Baghdad's precarious balancing act between cooperating with the United States on security and reconstruction and accommodating Iran-aligned groups whose political footprints and military capabilities remain significant.
Yasir Mutlaq, head of Iraq's Fawasil Foundation for Research and Studies, said the delicate balancing act aims to ensure internal stability and prevent the country from being drawn into a broader struggle for influence.
With Iraq entering what could be a months-long government formation process following its parliamentary election last month, analysts again highlighted the decisive role of external influences. "Whether the waiting period for a new government is long or short, whether the people approve it or reject it, the government will not be born without the blessing of Washington and Tehran," Mousa said.
In the view of Lebanese writer and analyst Samir Mansour, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq are pursuing a preventive foreign policy, seeking to avoid and deflect risks by adopting moderate, centrist positions. However, he warned that such approaches offer little real protection when dominant powers impose obligations and reject neutrality.
As for the way ahead, Mousa suggested that regional countries coordinate their positions and cooperate through multilateral and regional bodies, including the United Nations, the Arab League, and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, adopting unified stances to counter unilateral actions and military solutions. ■
