Learning the Language of Balance: Ali Larijani’s Regional Tour to Baghdad and Beirut

I. Regional Tour Overview

In mid-August 2025, Ali Larijani, newly appointed Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, embarked on his first foreign trip in office—visiting Iraq and Lebanon. This two-stop tour came amid escalating Israeli–Iranian tensions, heated debates in Lebanon over Hezbollah’s arms, and Iraq’s ongoing security recalibration. The visits reveal Tehran’s evolving strategy: consolidating influence through formal state channels while publicly affirming respect for national sovereignty.

II. Visit to Iraq: Consolidating Security and Partnerships

Aim: In Baghdad (Aug 11), Larijani signed a security memorandum of understanding with Iraqi leaders to enhance cross-border coordination and strengthen joint defense capabilities.

Official Reaction: Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani stressed Iraq’s intention to “develop relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran” within a balanced foreign policy, while denouncing Israeli aggression and supporting diplomatic engagement between Tehran and Washington.

Political Outcome: The agreement positions Iraq as both a regional security partner and an independent actor capable of engaging Iran without alienating Arab or Western partners.

Significance: The visit comes amid sensitive internal debates over the Popular Mobilization Units (al-Hashd al-Shaabi) and signals Baghdad’s preference for multilateral balance. For Iran, it consolidates a strategic western front through state-level cooperation, reducing the optics of overt interference.

Impact on Relations: The deal strengthens Iran–Iraq security coordination, sends a message to Washington and Riyadh about Iraq’s autonomy, and embeds Iran’s influence through formal agreements rather than purely via militia networks.

III. Visit to Lebanon: Sovereignty, Sectarian Balance, and the Resistance Question

Aim: In Beirut (Aug 13), Larijani aimed to reaffirm Iran’s support for Lebanese sovereignty, resist Western and Gulf-backed calls to disarm Hezbollah, and present the “resistance” as a unifying national asset rather than a sectarian militia.

Official Reaction: President Joseph Aoun rejected any foreign interference, declared that “no armed group” could operate outside state authority, and insisted that relations with Iran should include “all Lebanese,” not just one sect.

Larijani countered by denying interference, suggesting the disarmament plan was a US initiative, and emphasizing Iran’s readiness to help Lebanon if requested. In a press conference, he said: “Dear beloved, who attacked you? Was it not Israel? Beware that Israel does not impose something else on you by another means. What Israel could not achieve through war, it should not use other ways to force upon you. Do not confuse friend with enemy. Resistance is your national treasure.”

This speech reframed Hezbollah’s arms as a national resource for defense, not a partisan weapon, directly challenging narratives that portray the group as an obstacle to national unity.

Political Outcome: The visit highlighted a diplomatic standoff: Lebanon reaffirmed its sovereignty and the primacy of the state, while Iran positioned itself as a defender of Lebanon’s right to resist Israeli aggression. Larijani’s framing sought to elevate resistance from a sectarian issue to a shared national responsibility.

Significance:

• Lebanon stands at a crossroads: dependent on foreign aid yet unwilling to dismantle its primary deterrent against Israel.

• The visit intensified Lebanon’s balancing act between satisfying donor conditions and preserving internal stability.

• Regionally, Iran used the platform to push back against Western pressure while avoiding overt interference rhetoric.

Impact on Relations:The trip reaffirmed Iran–Lebanon ties but shifted the tone toward formal state engagement. For Iran, it showcased the use of public diplomacy and symbolic rhetoric to defend allied forces without escalating tension into outright confrontation.