Why Iran’s threat keeps haunting the Middle East - and how to finally break the cycle - opinion
Stop viewing Iran as a hostile player and start seeing the pattern that nurtures the destructive path its people keep finding themselves on, and change that
For over half a century, the international community has grappled with Iran's threat under the belief that the primary danger stems from the theocratic regime established after the 1979 revolution. Efforts to manage this threat have taken various forms, such as containment, regime change, weakening capabilities, or waiting for internal collapse. However, these strategies have proven ineffective, prompting the question of why Iran's threat resurfaces each time its adversaries believe they have contained it.
The issue extends beyond Iran's nuclear program, missile arsenal, and proxy networks. The core problem lies in the structure of the Iranian state, which possesses a significant population, abundant energy resources, scientific and industrial foundations, extensive geographic reach, and a well-trained military. These assets enable Iran to rebuild its power even after losing facilities, leaders, or munitions.
While targeted attacks can damage capabilities, they fail to address the fundamental question of how to prevent a large, centralized state from regaining its strength once conditions improve.
The 2015 nuclear deal restricted Iran's nuclear activities but did not alter its perception of regional power. Similarly, the assassination of Major General Qasem Soleimani in January 2020 only temporarily disrupted the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). While military strikes can inflict damage and disrupt operations, they cannot ensure permanent disablement. Containment measures have amounted to managing cycles of buildup, strike, and rearmament.
A temporary solution might involve a more pragmatic and economy-focused government, but even this could lead to the resurgence of Iran's expansionist ideology once power structures remain intact. Iran's regional ambitions are likely to resurface under a new leadership, framed in nationalist rather than revolutionary terms.
However, viewing Iran as inherently hostile is a misconception. Many nations adjust their behavior when their institutions, military doctrine, and the balance between rulers and ruled evolve. The objective is not indefinite weakening of Iran, but rather preventing the convergence of unchecked central power, expansionist ideology, and exclusive control over military decisions.
Attempting to bring about a chaotic breakdown of the Iranian state carries severe risks, including internal diversity, widespread weapons, and the potential for civil conflict, foreign meddling, and significant disruption to energy flows and shipping lanes. The most durable solution starts within Iran, focusing on the premise that Iranians alone should determine their governing system and its structure.
Implementing broad decentralization or federalism, potentially through confederal arrangements, can limit the central government's monopoly on wealth and decisions, empower regions with greater control over resources and fiscal matters, and establish institutional limits on the use of national capacities for foreign ventures.
While decentralization alone does not guarantee a peaceful Iran, constitutional arrangements can contribute to raising the price of decision monopolization, spreading oversight of resources, and making long-term foreign ventures more difficult to pursue without broad consent and accountability. These rules constrain impulsive action while falling short of providing an ironclad guarantee of responsible behavior.
From a global perspective, there is no requirement for a permanent Iranian adversary to justify alliances and defense budgets. Eliminating the regime without a plan for what follows could lead to an even more dangerous crisis. Instead, the international community should focus on ending the threat's ability to regenerate through four parallel steps: capping offensive capabilities, advancing institutional reform that disperses power within Iran, upholding regional deterrence to prevent coercion, and pursuing diplomacy that links economic and political integration to revised conduct.
In summary, the Iranian threat persists due to the structural weaknesses within the Iranian state, which continue to enable the country to rebuild its power after each attempt to contain or weaken it. A more effective approach involves addressing the root causes of the problem by promoting decentralization and institutional reform within Iran, upholding regional deterrence, and pursuing diplomacy that integrates economic and political reforms.
Only by transforming Iran's strength into a force bounded by institutions and directed by societal interests can the root problem be resolved, ultimately breaking the cycle of buildup, strike, and resurgence.
Written by urgent.news from Jerusalem Post's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
