In an introductory lecture to SVM (Support vector machine), we are given a review of The inequality constrainted optimization. Which is summarized in a single lecture slide. The slide reads as the following:
The problem
$$ \min\limits_{\mathbf{x} \in \mathbb{R}^n} f(\mathbf{x}) \quad \text{ subject to } \quad h(\mathbf{x}) \geq c\,. $$
Conceptually the problem is solved as the following:
Write the Lagrangian $$L(\mathbf{x}, \lambda) = f(\mathbf{x}) - \lambda(h(\mathbf{x}) - c)\,.$$
Introduce the dual function $$ d(\lambda) = \inf\limits_{\mathbf{x}} L(\mathbf{x}, \lambda)\,. $$
Solve the dual problem $$ \lambda^* = \text{arg}\max\limits_{\lambda} d(\lambda)\quad \text{ subject to } \lambda \geq 0\,. $$
The optimal $\mathbf{x}$ (assuming strong dality) is $$\mathbf{x} = \text{arg}\inf\limits_{\mathbf{x}} L(\mathbf{x}, \lambda^*)\,.$$
When $f$ is convex function and $h(\mathbf{x}) \geq 0$ defines convex region of space, this gives the global optimum.
Question
What I am looking for is not necessarily rigorous explanation but rather intuitive interpretation of why each of the steps indeed goes in the "right direction" so that the above interpretation indeed leads to the optimal minimum under the constraints.
In contrast: for equality constrained optimization I do understand the intuition behind the Lagrangian. To outline, the derivatives of the Lagrangian introduce the requirement that at the solution the gradients of the constraint and the objective be parallel.
EDITED This already contain the answer I was looking for, see answer there by @Dan Piponi.