Al-Fassel | 2026-01-13

Since October 7, 2023, groups such as Kata'ib Hizbullah (KH) have been subjected to sustained pressure, growing political isolation and intensified scrutiny.

For KH, one of Iran's most capable proxy forces, the ceasefire raises urgent questions about reliability, sustainability and the limits of Iranian support.

Iran's waning reliability

The recent conflict exposed a central vulnerability in Iran's regional posture that many allied armed groups can no longer ignore.

When allied armed groups in Gaza and Lebanese Hizbullah faced overwhelming pressure, Tehran avoided direct military confrontation as much as it could.

Instead, Iran emphasized restraint, plausible deniability and careful risk management to prevent retaliatory strikes against its own territory.

This approach has significantly reshaped perceptions across the Axis of Resistance regarding Tehran's willingness to absorb costs on behalf of its allies.

Lebanese Hizbullah, for example, has sustained significant military and political damage and now faces increasing domestic and international pressure to disarm.

These outcomes suggest Iranian support is conditional and sharply limited when escalation risks reach levels Tehran deems unacceptable.

Therefore, Iranian-aligned militia groups are reassessing Tehran's role as a dependable long-term security guarantor.

What was once portrayed as a unified resistance front is increasingly characterized by strategic hesitation, fragmentation and internal doubt.

Kata'ib Hizbullah is under pressure

For KH, these implications are becoming increasingly difficult to dismiss or strategically postpone.

The group has begun questioning the long-term effectiveness of its relationship with the Iranian leadership.

Western pressure, including sanctions, intelligence surveillance and diplomatic isolation, has steadily constrained the group's operational freedom.

At the same time, Iran's finite resources are increasingly directed toward internal stability rather than external confrontation.

This calculated distance leaves the group exposed as regional tolerance for armed non-state actors continues to erode.

In response, politically aligned Iranian-backed militias have reduced dependence on Iranian material support, seeking alternative sources of legitimacy and influence.

This shift reflects strategic pragmatism rather than ideological rupture within the broader resistance framework.

Iran's regional stagnation has increasingly become a breeding ground for skepticism among its proxy networks.

The Gaza ceasefire has therefore accelerated a broader regional reckoning with Iran's strategic limitations.

Iran's unwillingness to fully shield partners during critical moments has weakened their operational confidence and long-term planning.

KH's continued reliance on Iranian backing amid rising Western pressure risks marginalization and diminished regional relevance.