Lebanon may not be the centre of attention for many countries in the Middle East or internationally these days, despite the recent conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. However, it will be at the heart of the geopolitical changes that have swept throughout the Levant. Whatever happens regionally – polarisation, conflict or reconciliation – tends to be reflected in Lebanon in a concentrated way.

This is unlikely to soon change.

Today, the Levant, corresponding roughly to Syria, Lebanon and geographical Palestine, has seen a radical shift in power relations. Where Iran had been a dominant power in Syria and Lebanon for more than a decade, within the space of three months Turkey and Israel have asserted their dominance there, military or political.

For the US, long regarded as being on the way out in the Middle East, this constitutes a major gain. Now, two of its allies, one of them a Nato partner, dominate the Eastern Mediterranean seaboard, while Iran, one of whose clerics had boasted that Tehran controlled four Arab capitals, has been pushed back to the Iraqi border.

In Lebanon, despite the nonsense peddled by members of the pro-Israel American political right that the administration of President Joe Biden prevented Israel from destroying Hezbollah, the group and Iran effectively accepted a surrender in November. Israel was given a green light to continue attacking Hezbollah if the group failed to disarm, and this process is being overseen by a committee now headed by an American general.

In nine days, it’s possible the US may push to have the Lebanese army commander, Joseph Aoun, elected president. This would give the armed forces a major boost to fill the vacuum left by Hezbollah after its defeat by Israel. Gen Aoun has maintained close ties with the Americans, and has shown a willingness to stand up to Hezbollah.

Turkey can be expected to play a major role in Syria. In what was a remarkable sign of confidence, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently declared that Ankara would help the new Syrian leadership restructure its administration and help draft a new constitution. Turkish intervention has led to a sense of reaffirmation by Syria’s Sunni community, a feeling that will have repercussions in Lebanon.

Caught in the middle of all this is Hezbollah. The group still retains what remains of its weapons, but for what strategic end? Facing communities that opposed its opening of a front with Israel, the group is more isolated than ever. It has lost its strategic depth in Syria and its more obvious weapons supply lines from Iran and Iraq. This will entail a rebalancing of its role at home, where the prospect of Hezbollah hegemony has all but evaporated.

Two decades of a sense of marginalisation among many in the Sunni community, after the assassination of former prime minister Rafik Hariri in 2005, is bound to be reversed. But in what direction? The community still does not have a unifying leader, and it’s not yet clear whether Turkey can assert influence over Lebanon in the face of the traditionally strong ties between Lebanon’s Sunni population and key Arab states.

Beyond the Levant, the redrawing of the region may continue.

While US president-elect Donald Trump has vowed to bring an end to American wars in the world, his administration sends a very different message in the Middle East. Whether it’s his nominees for defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, secretary of state, Marco Rubio, national security adviser, Mike Waltz, or ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, all are staunch supporters of Israel, therefore may embrace an Israeli project of regime change in Iran.

Moreover, Iran is more vulnerable than ever. With two of its Axis of Resistance allies situated closest to Israel militarily neutralised, and Iranian air defence systems believed to have been seriously damaged in the Israeli attack on Iran last October, Israel’s backers in Washington may see an opportunity to strike in tandem with Israel.

Some of Mr Trump’s major funders, notably Miriam Adelson, who gave his campaign $100 million, would probably favour such an outcome. Mrs Adelson and her late husband have long financed Republican candidates, and did so for Mr Rubio’s presidential campaign in 2015, so she has powerful allies throughout the new administration.

If Mr Trump is compelled to take such a route, it is conceivable the region could find itself under a new Pax Americana, even if there is an infinite number of potential complications that would undermine such a neat plan. In that case, what may emerge from this is actually a growing rivalry between Turkey and Israel, as each country seeks to assert its predominance in a region transformed.

Lebanon would be at the heart of such struggles for influence. Hezbollah might no longer pose a major threat to Israel, but if Iran’s regional sway were to be crippled, the group would have to adopt a radically new outlook at home. Faced with a re-energised Sunni community, it may have few options than to engage in an unexpected sectarian repositioning, for example working towards an alliance with Maronite Christian parties.

All possibilities remain open in the coming period, a decade and a half after the Arab uprisings of 2010-2011. Change can bring hope, at least in the Middle East, but it can also bring new tensions and fears. Expect Lebanon to experience the full gamut of this.