MENA Strategic Bulletin

Hezbollah names Naim Qassem as its new leader

Hezbollah’s recent appointment of Naim Qassem as its new leader marks a pivotal moment for the organisation, especially following the high-profile assassination of his predecessor, Hassan Nasrallah, in an Israeli airstrike on September 27. Qassem, 71, was elected by Hezbollah’s Shura Council, adhering to the group’s traditional selection process for leadership.

Israel’s Defence Minister, Yoav Gallant, was quick to dismiss the significance of the appointment, warning that Qassem’s tenure would be “temporary”. This suggests the IDF will prioritise assassinating Qassem and reflects Israeli bullishness following the killings of former Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and the man touted to replace him, Hashem Safieddine.

 Stakeholder and regional impact

Qassem’s rise to leadership comes at a particularly tumultuous time for Hezbollah. Having served as deputy chief since 1991, he has long been a prominent figure within the organisation.

Qassem’s public profile contrasts sharply with Nasrallah’s: he is widely perceived as lacking the latter’s charisma, and speaks in formal modern Arabic instead of the colloquial Lebanese dialect Nasrallah preferred. This raises concerns about his ability to effectively maintain unity within the group in the face of growing internal and external pressures.

Rather than being an authoritative leader, Qassem may emerge as a coordinator among various factions within Hezbollah, reflecting a leadership vacuum at senior levels of the group.

What’s next?

As Qassem assumes leadership, Hezbollah faces an uncertain and precarious future, characterised by intensified Israeli military scrutiny and operational challenges. His ability to adapt to these dynamics will be critical in determining the group’s influence in the region. The international community will be closely monitoring how Qassem navigates Hezbollah’s response to ongoing Israeli threats. The implications of his leadership extend beyond Hezbollah itself, potentially affecting regional stability and Iran’s strategic interests.

Although a ceasefire continues to appear unlikely, Qassem’s statement that Hezbollah are open to negotiate, provided Israeli terms are revised, has kept it on the table. US negotiations for a ceasefire in Lebanon have been ongoing this week, with Secretary of State Anthony Blinken saying on Thursday that there had been progress.

Iran to increase its defence budget by 200%

 A spokeswoman for Iran’s government announced on Tuesday that the Islamic Republic would look to effectively triple its military budget, signalling a shift in its defence posture following recent exchanges with Israel. The planned budget is part of a proposal submitted to parliament for approval, with the finalised version expected to enter law in March 2025. The announcement comes in the wake of Israeli strikes on Iranian military bases on October 25, which struck around 20 sites across Ilam, Khuzestan and Tehran, and resulted in the death of 4 Iranian soldiers.

 Stakeholder and regional impact

This increase is part of a shift towards a more aggressive military posture from Iran, which has historically prioritised keeping conflicts away from Iranian territory. In response to Israel’s recent attacks, Iran vowed to “use all available tools” for retaliation, prompting the US to warn against any further aggressive actions. In 2024, Iran’s defence budget is projected to reach $16.7bn, marking a 20% increase from the previous year and constituting 25% of the national budget. This rise occurs despite an ailing economy characterised by soaring inflation – hovering around 30% – and stagnant growth rates of approximately 2%.

By signalling its commitment to significantly enhance its military capabilities, Iran risks prioritising its military position over economic security and domestic stability, with citizens already suffering from cost increases to basic necessities. As regional dynamics evolve, this bolstered military budget may further escalate tensions and provoke a recalibration of responses from both Israel and the US.

What’s next?

As Iran seeks to bolster its military capabilities, particularly in ballistic missile development and nuclear programmes, it will likely face challenges in balancing these ambitions with pressing economic concerns. The country’s outdated energy infrastructure, operating at only 70% of capacity, further complicates its ability to fund military enhancements, especially as Western firms continue to withdraw from the Iranian market.

Additionally, Iran’s commitment to supporting proxy groups in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen and Gaza requires substantial financial resources, potentially stretching its budget even further. This military budget increase may align with Iran’s attempts to reconcile relations with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, as well as plans for closer cooperation with Egypt and Turkey. The outcomes of these diplomatic efforts and military investments will shape Iran’s strategic posture in the region and could influence the broader geopolitical landscape amid rising tensions with Israel.

Knesset votes to cut UNRWA funding

The Israeli parliament overwhelmingly voted on October 28 to ban the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) from operating within the country, marking a significant escalation in ongoing disputes over the provision of humanitarian aid to Palestinian civilians.

This legislation classifies UNRWA as a terror group and would shut down its operations in East Jerusalem, disrupting critical services for millions in the West Bank and Gaza. The move has drawn sharp criticism from global leaders, with UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini condemning the vote as setting a dangerous precedent that undermines the UN Charter and violates Israel’s obligations under international law.

Stakeholder and regional impact

Lazzarini highlighted the detrimental consequences of the legislation, which threatens to deepen the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza, already experiencing severe shortages of food, water and medicine. More than 1.9m Palestinians are displaced, and the implications of restricting UNRWA’s operations could be catastrophic.

Other leaders have expressed grave concerns over the legislation’s potential impact, with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer stating that it jeopardises UNRWA’s ability to deliver vital health and education services in both Gaza and the West Bank. He called for an immediate ceasefire and a significant increase in aid to the region, emphasising Israel’s responsibility to facilitate humanitarian access.

The US State Department also echoed these concerns, urging Israel to “pause implementation” of the legislation, which could have implications under US law regarding military aid to countries that restrict humanitarian assistance. This sentiment was shared by foreign ministers from several countries, including Canada, Australia, France, Germany, Japan, South Korea and the UK, who warned that the legislation could lead to devastating consequences for the humanitarian situation in the region, while urging UNRWA to demonstrate its commitment to neutrality.

What’s next?

Following the vote, the future of UNRWA and its vital services hang in the balance. Israel’s own allies are beginning to exert pressure on the government to reconsider these decisions, particularly in light of growing international condemnation. By entangling itself with UN processes, Israel may face heightened scrutiny and diplomatic fallout as the UN and its member states respond to the legislation.

Moreover, this situation could have significant repercussions for ongoing legal proceedings. Just this week, South Africa submitted 750 pages worth of evidence to the ICJ as part of its genocide case against Israel. The action against UNRWA is likely to increase the urgency of calls for the enforcement of ICJ orders against Israel, further complicating its standing in the international arena.