US politicians should not pretend that military strikes can alone solve the problem of Iran and its proxies.
In the mid-1980s, during the long war between Iran and Iraq, students at Tehran’s Jewish high schools would watch their friends suddenly disappear, and then reappear six months later in Europe, the U.S., or Israel. They would get there through a sophisticated smuggling operation that spirited Iran’s Jews out of the country and into Pakistan.
As two contradictory trends of de-escalation in the Persian Gulf and a new round of war between Palestinians and Israelis unfold at the same time, Iran is trying to play its best cards and navigate its position. Iran views the region’s geopolitical and security conflicts as a chance to uphold its position and leverage it to advance its defined national interests.
Iranian strategy in the Middle East has long centered on nurturing regional proxies and partners — a so-called “Axis of Resistance” — to mount an existential threat to Israel by encircling it in a ring of fire. The bloody war between Israel and Hamas sparked by the latter’s Oct. 7 massacre is the first large-scale implementation of this Axis of Resistance doctrine. Quds Force commander Esmail Ghaani’s lasting contribution will be the network’s entry into the battlefield in a comprehensive and coordinated manner.
The Oct. 7 Hamas attack against Israel and the latter’s ongoing military operation in Gaza have stalled progress in the development of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor and raised questions about its prospects for eventual completion. The IMEC faces multiple viability challenges, but none of them are insurmountable; thus, its participants are unlikely to abandon it.
The Israel-Hamas war provides Tehran with a meaningful opportunity to fundamentally shift its position toward Israel. Should a peace process follow this latest war, Iran will have a hard choice to make – double-down on upholding its Axis of Resistance against Israel, or look for ways to work with the majority in the region that seek a feasible political settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
What would it take to start a new Israeli-Palestinian peace process that could actually have the prospect for enduring success? MEI has asked a group of regional and U.S. experts to weigh in.
As the war in Gaza continues to unfold, essential questions about Russian and Iranian support for Hamas remain. They include whether Russia played any role in providing support to Hamas ahead of its Oct. 7 attack on Israel. Evidence available from foreign-language publications in Russian, Persian, Arabic, and Hebrew, as well as those in English, provides provocative leads, which, if accurate, have serious potential implications.
A long courtship
Read MEI’s weekly briefing featuring expert analysis of key regional developments for the week ahead.
The renewed violence in Gaza could not have come at a less opportune time for the climate agenda in the Middle East. From energy economics to environmental degradation, the ripple effects of conflict will complicate the path ahead.
The following quantitative analysis explores the core of Israel’s strategic airstrikes in Syria between 2013 and August 2023, a critical aspect of its defense policy during this time, aimed at mitigating Iranian influence in the region and protecting its national borders.
Oct. 7 sounded the death knell of the Abraham Accords. Yet the end to the initial conceit of the Abraham Accords does not mean an end to the essential role that the Abraham Accords partners can play in helping broker an Israeli-Palestinian agreement.
Outside of the security risks brought about by war, the Israel-Hamas conflict has yet to result in major changes in the regional natural gas market.
Despite the Houthis’ geographical distance from Israel and perceived limited capabilities, the threat they represent is all too real and if underestimated, they have the potential to derail diplomatic efforts and destabilize the region, with potentially catastrophic consequences.