Iran’s Security Strategy: Balancing Defensive Deterrents and Offensive Proxy Warfare

The conflict in Syria quickly escalated into a complex and prolonged civil war where states outside the conflict fueled rebel groups to fight. The onset of multiple proxy wars befell Syria. Proxy war happens when a ruler of a state devises and facilitates the provision of support to a rebel group that is engaged in carrying out violent activities in another state. Thus, an external state can influence the outcome of a civil war without having to bear the heavy costs of sending its army forces. States that wage proxy wars risk a potential conflict escalation, and gamble with provoking retaliation by either the offending state or its allies. Furthermore, inadvertent conse quences of backing rebel forces are also possible such as international condemnation. So, why does a state choose to form a relationship with a proxy group, instead of intervening directly? Why invest money and military power in a third party that could lead to a prolonged conflict? The analysis highlights that the political survival of regimes in the Middle East caused leaders to support rebel groups in Syria. I present a causal mechanism that is based on transnational threats to explain the phenomenon of proxy war in the Syrian civil war. Keywords: Syria, proxy war, Middle East, qualitative analysis, foreign policy.

Yemen's strategic position in the region has led to the escalation of its internal conflict into a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran. This study aims to analyze the impact of Yemen's proxy war on Middle East geopolitics from 2015 to 2023, employing a qualitative descriptive content analysis with a regional geopolitical approach, informed by literature study techniques in data collection. The results showed that the proxy war in Yemen has impacted Middle Eastern geopolitics, particularly in the security and economic sectors. Iran's support for the Houthis militia has prompted responses from other regional countries based on their respective interests. The intensity of Houthi attacks on Yemen's border areas has also created border insecurity and increased tensions between countries in the region. Meanwhile, in the economic and trade sectors, the proxy war in Yemen has resulted in increased operational tariffs on regional trade, forcing countries to adjust their economic policies. This study reinforces the notion that a country's geographic position influences the geopolitics of the surrounding region and has the potential to create a domino effect on regional political instability, as seen in the conflict in Yemen.

This paper will argue the concept of ?Arab Spring? which has been used as a tool for perception management to cover up a multi-dimensional Proxy War that is ongoing within the borders of Middle East.Being an allusion to 1848 revolutions, which is known as ?Spring of Nations?, Arab Spring is ought to be a grassroots movement. It is accepted as a breaking point for Arab Peninsula by western scholars, intellectuals and policy makers. However Liberte-Eqalite under the concept of democracy seems to be the subject matter of the process, the debate was rounding about establishment of legitimate governments immediately.Therefore, until the government of Syria?s unexpected resistance to so called social movements, Western countries insisted on the existence of the uprisings autonomous character in Middle East. After the challenge of Syria it became harder to claim autonomy or civility for the movements at the region. The direct intervention of western countries to the process made it even harder. In light of these developments building an intellectual argument on what is happening or expected in Middle East became more and more blurry. To clarify the process we propose a new point of view which suggests to rethink the Arab Spring starting from scratch. Can the so cold autonomous revolt against authoritarian regimes in Middle East be a proxy war which is sponsored by international actors?The Western Governments? publicly discussions of some vital issues which includes direct violations of a ?sovereign states? sovereignty rights such as weapon supplying to rebellions, can be considered as an indicator for such a hidden agenda. Likewise the refugee inflow to other countries can be a supporting indicator of this theory. The people who were so determined to take over the authoritarian regimes in their countries by revolution are now fleeing to Europe. What has changed and why those revolutionist are not holding the lines. Were they ever? This process is either a Global Civil War, which seems unlikely since nation states still exists and international law protects their existence, or more likely a Proxy War which makes it possible to fight war in a foreign country without any declaration. The ongoing Proxy War in Middle East is an example of post-modern warfare. The new wars will not seem to be fought by national armies. To ovoid the political and legal consequences of modern war, using proxies seems to be the future of new warfare.

The heated bilateral relation between Iran and the United States has brought the middle east into another level of problem. The divided geopolitical and regional interest of both countries has led to several and many multidimensional issues, ranging from political, security, and even to economic ones. This article discussed the Iran – US tension on their proxy conflict in the Middle East. This article employs the Regional Security Complex Theory to construct the events related to both states’ proxy conflicts. The polarized region for sure has drawn another line that seems to be more complexed for both countries to achieve mutual understanding and continued peacebuilding. The US withdrawal from JCPOA, killing of Soleimani, and Saudi Arabia – Iran Yemen proxy war exacerbated the status quo. This article perceived that the intertwined issues show how the traditional thought of security should be redefined as both countries try to gain bargaining power. Especially with Iran that was hindered very much by sanctions and embargo placed by the US. This article discusses many important issues on Iran, US, and Saudi Arabia involvement and their correlated dynamics within the UN. This article analyzed Trump’s leadership style in the Middle East and its implication from the proxy war to the Middle East security architecture.

This article explores the longstanding regional animosities and power rivalries among Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia in the Middle East, focusing on their impact on regional peace and stability. Despite extensive research on Middle Eastern geopolitics, there is a need for a comprehensive understanding of how these rivalries shape the region's security dynamics. The study aims to analyze the geopolitical goals driving these powers towards regional dominance, including territorial disputes, religious or ethnic tensions, resource distribution issues, and ambitions to alter the regional structure. Using qualitative analysis of historical and contemporary conflicts, the research highlights how sectarian warfare, proxy wars, and transnational violence contribute to regional instability. The findings reveal that the use of proxies by regional powers exacerbates tensions, leading to humanitarian crises and escalating conflicts. This study underscores the necessity for diplomatic interventions and international cooperation to mitigate the adverse effects of these rivalries on the Middle East's stability. Highlights: Dominance Goals: Driven by territorial, religious, and resource issues. Proxy Wars: Heighten instability and humanitarian crises. Regional Impact: Escalate tensions and threaten peace. Keywords: Middle East, Proxy Wars, Sectarianism, Geopolitical Interests, Destabilization

The article deals with Israel’s factor which influences Iran-Azerbaijan relations. The article highlights the following issues when assessing the impact of the Israeli factor on Iran-Azerbaijan relations: • Represent Israel’s foreign policy priorities on Azerbaijan, • Assess the position of the Islamic Republic of Iran on Azerbaijan-Israel cooperation and analyze Iran's policy within this context, • Analyze Azerbaijan's motives for strengthening cooperation with Israel. The nuclear program, Iran's missile systems, the Shia factor, the Iranian-speaking peoples of Azerbaijan (Tats, Talish), the activities of Azerbaijani Shia opposition figures, the 760-kilometer border between Azerbaijan and Iran – these are the main factors underlying Israel's policy towards Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan first of all justified the establishment of relations with Israel with the expectation of receiving military-political assistance from Israel in the settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. During the presidency of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (2005-2013), when one of the scenarios for suspending Iran's nuclear program was considered a military attack, the territory of Azerbaijan was considered a platform for attacking Iran. While Baku has made every effort to exclude the Iranian factor in Azerbaijan-Israel military cooperation, the Iranian military-political management has always been skeptical of Baku's assurances, claiming that Israeli drones could easily be used for reconnaissance against Iran. • During Hassan Rouhani's presidency, as compared with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's presidency, positive developments took place in the relations between Azerbaijan and Iran, and bilateral economic cooperation strengthened. In order to weaken Israel's influence in Azerbaijan, Iran replaced its policy of harsh response to Azerbaijan with economic cooperation. Iran was more concerned about the growing influence of Israel in various spheres in Azerbaijan than the use of a possible Israeli threat against Iran from the territory of Azerbaijan, which has always been raised in the past. • Azerbaijan tried to bring counterargument against Israel-Azerbaijan relations with Armenia-Iran relations. • In order to weaken Iran's religious influence, Azerbaijan, on the one hand, repressed the country's Shiite opposition figures, and on the other hand, Baku managed to obtain military-political support from Israel by exploiting the Iranian-Shiite "threat". • According to Iranian experts, the strategic relations between Azerbaijan and Israel have been established in the South Caucasus, in particular due to Iran's wrong policy towards Azerbaijan. • Currently, if in the Middle East, Iran more or less manages to control the threats appearing from the proxy war with Israel, than on its immediate border Iran is trying to avoid a direct confrontation with Israel. During the Second Artsakh War, the transfer of Israeli UVC of the territory of Iran, and in this regard, Iran's cautious statements are evidence of that.

The end of the Cold War and the emergence of a new global security and economic environment (Defence budgets’ decline, imminent threats from the Gulf War and NATO’s quest for a new identity), provided a window of opportunity for establishing and designing the EU’s security institution. Thus, what was initially considered farfetched after the 1992 Maastricht Treaty, entered a new phase, which included perception transformation, to be gradually incorporated into daily discourse. Hence, the 2003 “European Security Strategy”, the 2010 “Internal Security Strategy”, and later the 2016 “Global Strategy” reflect Member States’ perception of transformation and their belief that the EU needs a Common Security and Defence Strategy approach. Given these documents that indicate determination for notable integration and institutional restructuring, this analysis delves into the impact of Europeanisation concerning the implementation of institutional reforms and the CSDP. More specifically, this analysis probes the constraints of Europeanisation concerning the EU’s real operational dynamics, especially in light of the Eastern Mediterranean and Aegean Sea security challenges. These challenges are examined in relation to Türkiye’s revisionist public diplomacy, public policies, and the militarization of its foreign policy (including ongoing negotiations centered on migratory flows, assertions, and constructed narratives over Greek and Cypriot islands and seas). The situation has become more pronounced following the identification of gas and oil reserves in the area in 2010. This analysis has a two-fold focus: Firstly, to investigate Europeanisation impact on the operational implementation of CSDP (Common Security and Defence Policy) in time of crisis, and secondly, to evaluate the behavior of Türkiye within the Europeanisation framework, as proposed by Radaelli and Violakis.

The Saudi Arabian and Iranian rivalry has torn the Middle East apart, aggravating the region’s struggles concerning persistent authoritarianism, militia violence, and sectarian tensions. This paper explores the impact of proxy warfare on sectarianization by studying the case of the Saudi-Iranian rivalry in both Syria and Yemen. It analyses the reasons for using the proxy warfare as a means to further assert rival dominance in the Middle East and examines how the rivals use existing sectarian tensions to further their cause, leading to further division. The paper finds that proxy warfare has fortified the sectarian rift in the Middle East, increasing the risk of confrontational war between Saudi Arabia and Iran and exacerbating already existing religious strains across the region.

Superpower conflict in the Middle East: War by proxy

This review paper investigated how Iran’s strategic partnerships are affecting its nuclear ambitions. The purpose of the study was to analyze how Iran’s alliances either deter or support its nuclear program, aiming at the impact of sanctions, geopolitical alliances and its role in proxy wars. The research investigated Iran’s nuclear program that is being influenced as a result of its strategic relationships. The researcher reviewed the relevant literature from March 2025- April 2025. The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework. Based on the PRISMA method of screening, evaluation and selection, the researchers collected a total of 31 records from the selected database. After thorough screening, n=15 were reviewed for this research. The paper ultimately argued that while international sanctions have been imposed on Iran even then, it worked on its nuclear program and also manipulates regional security by supporting proxy groups. It also showed consequential impact of Iran’s allies on its nuclear program despite the international disapproval.

This article delves into the complex dynamics of hybrid warfare and cyber conflicts, particularly in the context of the ongoing rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and its implications for Pakistan. It investigates how the strategic competition between these two Middle Eastern nations is expressed through proxy warfare, cyber attacks, and ideological influence, significantly affecting Pakistan's internal security and regional policy. The study provides a thorough analysis of how Iran and Saudi Arabia's ambitions for regional supremacy intertwine with Pakistan's socio-political landscape, intensifying sectarian divisions and contributing to political unrest. By utilizing a qualitative approach that combines historical data with current geopolitical developments, this research highlights Pakistan's challenging position: striving for diplomatic neutrality while dealing with the overwhelming influence of its powerful neighbors. The findings emphasize the urgent need for Pakistan to strengthen its cybersecurity capabilities and infrastructure resilience to protect its national interests amid rising regional cyber conflicts. Ultimately, the study stresses the strategic importance for Pakistan to enhance its diplomatic efforts and capitalize on its geopolitical relevance to promote regional stability. This article adds to the wider discussion on the effects of hybrid warfare in the Middle East, offering insights into the intricate relationships between cyber warfare, regional politics, and national security strategies in a turbulent geopolitical landscape.

After the Arab Spring that started in the Middle East in 2011, a civil war broke out in Syria. Syria has become a proxy war zone due to many global and regional actors intervened in the crisis. The most important regional actor supporting the Bashar al-Assad regime against the opposition in Syria is Iran. Syria, ruled by Bashar al-Assad was Iran's only ally in the region. For this reason, the most important router of the proxy war in Syria has been Iran. The purpose of this article is to explain the reasons why Iran, which supports the reflections of the Arab Spring and changes of authority in other countries, changed its stance after the protests spread to Syria and implemented a proxy war policy in order to protect the Bashar al-Assad regime. The dynamics that enabled Iran-Syria relations to continue at an almost smooth level from 1979 until the end of the Assad regime in December 2024 are included in the article. In this regard, the proxy war implemented by Iran in Syria has been explained. Iran's proxy war policy in Syria has been analyzed based on the arguments of defensive realism.

The general meaning of “proxy war” is the pursuit of one’s interests exploiting other actors. Measures to this end can be implemented in two ways: through hard and soft power. As far as countering the activities of terrorist organizations is concerned, it can be seen that self-interest is placed above efforts against terrorism. The civil war in Syria and the activities of terrorist organizations have become grounds for greater involvement of global powers in the struggle for gaining influence in the country. This paper aims to show the actions of global and regional powers and other state actors taken in an attempt to assert power and influence under the guise of the fight against terrorism. The paper is divided into two parts: theoretical and practical. The theoretical part discusses aspects related to Josepha Nye’s concept of “smart power” and the notions of “proxy war” and “proxy activities”. The practical part discusses the activities of international actors pursuing their interests through official involvement in the fight against Daesh in the Syrian territory. Keywords: proxy war, Middle East, soft power, hard power, Daesh, Syria

The study focusses on the ongoing proxy wars in the Middle East between Hamas and the state of Israel in terms of the supports given to Hamas by Hezbollah, Houthi and other militant groups affiliated to Iran, and highlighted regional consequences and lessons for West Africa leadership. It adopted case studies research design, whereby a particular case is intensively studied in a manner that the nuances and implications are seen as architype for generalisation. The paper relies chiefly on secondary data which are sourced from textbooks, scholarly journals, publications of governmental and non-governmental organisations, and the internet. The data were qualitatively presented and analysed thematically. The study argued that Hamas – Israeli conflict of 2023 is an architype of proxy war, with regional and global consequences. It highlighted lessons to learn by West African leadership, given the renewed interest of Russia and China in the subregion which may lead to proxy wars with the West, especially France, and the impacts of intensive spread of Islamic fundamentalism in the region. It concluded that being an agent of a proxy war is a political gambling with short term benefit, but proxy wars leave behind wreckages and loss of lives, difficult to replace. Therefore, political actors in West Africa should avoid becoming proxy agents for imperial ambition of any power bloc.

The Islamic Republic of Iran’s efforts to export its revolution in the Middle East is quite old news. The largest regional conventional war in recent history was the Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988), which not only sharpened the historical enmities and hostilities between Arab-Sunnis and Persian-Shiʿi but also revealed Iran’s new foreign policy activism among the other Shiʿi communities in the Middle East – but not only them. This article argues that, after having failed to establish a pro-Iranian government in Iraq, Iran’s regional foreign policy, especially in the matters of managing its proxies and allies in its efforts to build a functional territorial corridor between Iran and Lebanon via Iraq and Syria, views the Syrian geographical region as the last important fortress it needs to complete this strategy. Even though Iran’s economic problems are acute because of decades of sanctions and isolation, Iran still invests billions of dollars in order to safeguard this bastion. The central argument of this work is that the tactical success that the proxies are presently providing for Iran and Syria has been limited to the very specific goal of preserving the Syrian regime since this is what has been enabling Iran to expand its regional stronghold. In terms of this being an effective long-term strategy, however, and despite Iran’s insistence that a proxy war is necessary, such a war benefits its rivals as well. This is because the strategy leads to Iran isolating itself even more in the region and to a loss of its territories of influence.