The small country of Lebanon lies at the center of the Middle East jigsaw. Its labyrinthine internal politics reflect and connect with all the complexities of the region and the surrounding countries.

To grasp what is happening in divided Lebanon, one has to understand the bigger Middle East picture. That picture is dominated by two disruptive sources that poison everything around them, namely Iran and the Israel-Palestine dispute.

Ever since the invasion of Iraq and the toppling of President Saddam Hussein, Iran has been expanding its influence and building up its role as the leading force against America and the West, and in favor of Islamic extremism. It has seized the lead from the Arab world in the promotion of violent challenges to established regimes friendly to the West, notably Israel.

Its malign influence has divided Lebanon by succoring the armed Hezbollah movement. It has supported the Hamas Gaza militants within a divided Palestinian state, disturbed Saudi Arabia, frightened the Gulf emirates, shaken the Egyptian political balance, disrupted Iraq's attempt to regain national unity and now threatens the whole region, and arguably the whole world, with its remorseless advance toward weaponized nuclear power. In response, the prospect of a proliferation of nuclear-armed states now looms.

Iran's agents and assassins have spread money and arms to every corner of the region. Its longer-range missiles, now being developed, could spread its menace beyond the region and into Europe and the Mediterranean.

The longer any two-state agreement is delayed between Israel and a new Palestine state, the more this reinforces Iran in the leadership seat against Western presence, and Western interests and values.

Iran has been propelled into this position by a decade of truly disastrous Western policy, based on a deep ignorance of Persian and Iranian history. It is necessary to look back not just centuries but millenniums to see that Persian imperial ambitions were always contained by a buffer to the west in the region that is now Iraq, and to the east by the warring tribes of Afghanistan.

It was this western buffer zone, under the Romans, the Byzantines, the Ottomans and finally the British, that kept Persia from renewing its assaults on the West in the style of the earliest Persian kings, such as Xerxes.

And it was the wild men of Afghanistan, whose successors are today's Taliban, who kept Persia, or Iran, contained on its eastern side. In deciding to destroy Iraq and overthrow the admittedly horrible Saddam Hussein, and in invading Taliban-held Afghanistan, the U.S.-led strategy effectively removed Iran's enemies and placed it in pole position throughout the region.

It seems that the Americans, amazingly, failed completely to see that this would be the consequence of their actions. The British probably knew well what would happen, given their history of deep involvement with the Middle East, but under the tragically inexperienced leadership of former Prime Minister Tony Blair — who seemed at times not to "do history" — they totally failed to warn their American allies.

Hence today's quagmire. The more that Barack Obama's current attempts to get Israel-Palestine talks moving forward are frustrated by Israeli intransigence over settlements and Palestinian divisions, the stronger Iran's influence becomes, with neighboring Syria dutifully in compliance with Iranian aims. And this means more support to Lebanon's Hezbollah militia, more killings (still almost daily) in Iraq, more help to Hamas and more rivalry between Islam's Shiite (Iran-supported) and Sunni worlds — all fertile soil for breeding terrorists for export to the advanced world.

As one veteran Lebanese leader recently put it, "Everything is getting worse."

Is there any light at all to be found at the end of this long night of instability, violence and global danger? The answer is "yes" — there are some glimmers of change that might just help tilt events in a better direction.

First, it is no longer just the Western alliance that sees the dangers of a nuclear Iran. Encouraged by Obama's decision to shift antimissile defenses from Russia's borderlands to sea-based systems, the Russians have signaled that they might join in pressurizing Iran to see sense. If tougher U.N. sanctions could be reinforced, both by Russia, and maybe China and other Asian powers, instead of being undermined, the squeeze on Iran, and on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's erratic and dubiously legitimate regime, might begin to bite.

Second, the Obama charm offensive toward Syria might just begin to wean that country away from its Iranian puppet-master and make it both more responsible and readier to support Lebanese unity, and even make peace with the Israelis.

Third, the situation in Afghanistan, where Iran has a vested interest in chaos and violence even to the point of supporting its former Taliban foes, could at least calm down as politics and diplomacy replace the military stalemate.

Fourth, within Iran itself, the grim rule of the clerics may be weakening as appalling economic mismanagement grows. If all responsible nations round the world would cease investing in Iran or buying its oil — despite the substantial interests these nations still have in Iran — that could well accelerate the process.

A weakened and less belligerent Iran would unlock dialogue in the whole region and replace aggressive violence with sensible diplomacy and discussion.

Giving Iran deadlines to conform to international nuclear standards is probably a mistake. No one expects Middle East feuds to be ended overnight. But at least, with Iranian influence steadily curbed by a united world, the issues could be argued through without destroying Lebanon and blowing us all up in the process.

David Howell is a former British Cabinet minister and former chairman of the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee. He is now a member of the House of Lords ([email protected] www.lordhowell.com).