Iran feels trusted and emboldened in the Muslim world.This does not bode well for the region

Iran’s leadership is a direct beneficiary of the months-long war in Gaza. Every time Israel launches a missile into Gaza, every time the U.S. vetoes a UN Security Council cease-fire resolution, every time an anti-war demonstrator is arrested on a U.S. college campus, every time an Iran’s refusal strengthens its credibility in the Islamic world. .

Iran’s ruling clerical regime has built its foreign policy around anti-Americanism, rejecting the “injustice” of American rule and the “bullying” of other countries. Washington’s continued support for Israel’s war on Gaza in the face of growing international backlash only strengthens this narrative.

America’s credibility is being undermined as it backtracks and attempts to signal that humanitarian considerations should guide Israel’s war effort. Many around the world, especially in Muslim countries, do not believe that America’s belated warnings to Israel are genuine.

And the Iranian government’s anti-American message resonates with most people in the Muslim world.

For example, in a regional poll in late October, only 7% of respondents said the United States had a positive impact on the war, compared to 40% who saw Iran’s role as positive. Ta.

And in December, the respected Arab Barometer newspaper reported that Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei had higher approval ratings than the Saudi crown prince and the president of the United Arab Emirates.

Iran’s changing position in the region has been noted with concern by neighboring political elites.

What Iran sought to accomplish by attacking Israel

Iran’s image was further enhanced by the fact that it was the only Islamic state to attack Israel due to public anger over the Gaza war.

Iran’s missile and drone strikes against Israel on April 13 were coordinated to accomplish two important objectives.

First, Iranian leaders seek to preserve their country’s image as the self-appointed head of an “axis of resistance” made up of regional proxy groups, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and other militias in Iraq and Syria. I tried.

Iran also wanted to demonstrate the effectiveness of its model of deterrence, which is based on the threat of retaliation against Israeli aggression through proxies and expanding missile and drone technology.

Two weeks after Israel’s attack on its diplomatic mission in Damascus, Iran could no longer afford to rely on its proxies to handle the response. It is clear that Iran is not ready to go to war with Israel, but not responding in kind to an Israeli attack would have made Iran look weaker and significantly weakened its standing among its allies and proxy groups.

However, Iranian leaders sought to minimize the damage and reduce the risk of escalation by warning Israel of the attack in advance through intermediaries. That way, Iran could save face without getting drawn into an all-out war.

Iran’s second objective was to demonstrate to the world that it had the drone and missile technology to strike back against Israel if it wished.

For more than a decade, Iran has shown off missiles at annual military parades to support its claims that it can attack Israel if threatened. More than 300 drones and missiles were used in last month’s attack. Despite the fact that the damage was minimal, this attack proved that Iran is capable of inflicting pain on Israel.

Israel’s limited response to Iran suggests that war has been averted, much to the relief of its neighbors. But the long-term implications are more favorable to Iran. This show of strength is thought to have helped its rejectionist foreign policy gain acceptance in the Islamic world and beyond.

For example, when Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi visited Pakistan on April 23, he was welcomed like a celebrity. This was ironic given that Iran and Pakistan had carried out retaliatory airstrikes earlier this year.

The two countries agreed to expand bilateral trade to US$10 billion (A$15 billion) a year, about five times the current level. The two countries also issued a joint statement calling on the United Nations Security Council to take action against Israel, accusing it of “unlawfully” targeting neighboring countries and foreign diplomatic facilities.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi also sent a message of support to Iran:

China took note of Iran’s statement that its actions were restrained and an act of self-defense in response to the attack on the embassy.

What this means for the region

The impact of Iran’s further emboldening on the region is profound. Iranian authorities feel vindicated by events of the past seven months. This means their anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric will remain as robust as ever.

Iran’s drone and missile research and development programs are also likely to be strengthened. And Iranian support for its network of proxies and allies will remain strong. This would allow Iran’s leadership to project power beyond its borders and maintain deterrence.

None of this bodes well for Iran’s neighbors. The ideologically energized Islamic regime in Iran has been linked to regional concerns, particularly those of governments that have already normalized relations with Israel (such as the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain), or are thought to be moving in that direction. It will likely be less accommodating to the concerns expressed by the current government (Saudi Arabia). ).

Moreover, the political credibility of many Arab leaders has been damaged in the public’s eyes by their perceived ineffectiveness in supporting the Palestinians in Gaza.

Iranian leaders did not plan the chain of events that began with the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel. In fact, they were as surprised by Hamas’ actions as Israeli intelligence. But they are clearly benefiting from the turnaround.

The United States and Israel give Iran and its message of defiance far greater appeal than Iranian authorities imagined.