Iran-Israel Relations: From Covert Allies To Open Adversaries
Table of Contents
- The Unlikely Alliance: Early Years (1948-1979)
- The Turning Point: The 1979 Iranian Revolution
- The Axis of Resistance: Iran's Strategic Construct
- The Nuclear Question: A Persistent Threat
- Escalation and Retaliation: The Shadow War Intensifies
- Diplomacy and De-escalation: A Faint Hope?
- The Road Ahead: Navigating a Volatile Future
The Unlikely Alliance: Early Years (1948-1979)
The current state of animosity between Iran and Israel belies a historical period of surprising collaboration. For decades, particularly from the 1950s onwards, these two nations shared a strategic understanding, albeit one often kept under wraps. **From the establishment of the state of Israel in May 1948 to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s arrival in Tehran from his French exile in February 1979, relations between Israel and Iran were characterized by multifaceted cooperation.** This cooperation, though mostly covert and often denied, was viewed by both states as highly conducive to their national interests. Under the reign of Iran’s last monarch, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Israel and Iran were allies, a partnership forged out of shared geopolitical concerns. Both nations aimed to counter Arab unity, especially the influence of countries like Egypt under Gamal Abdel Nasser, who championed pan-Arab nationalism and posed a significant threat to regional stability from their perspective. The relationship was cordial for most of the Cold War, driven by mutual strategic imperatives. It was always Israel that was the proactive party in seeking this cooperation, but the Shah also wanted a way to improve Iran’s relations with the US, and at the time, Israel was seen as a good way to achieve that aim. This pragmatic alliance involved economic ties, military cooperation, and intelligence sharing, forming a crucial, if quiet, bulwark against common adversaries in the region. Before the 1979 Iranian Revolution, Iran was indeed a crucial ally of Israel, demonstrating a historical precedent for cooperation that is now almost unimaginable.The Turning Point: The 1979 Iranian Revolution
The abrupt end to this unlikely friendship came with the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979. This pivotal event fundamentally reshaped Iran's domestic and foreign policy, replacing the pro-Western monarchy with an anti-Western, anti-Zionist Islamic Republic. The revolution not only severed ties with Israel but transformed the relationship into one of open hostility. Iran's current government does not recognize Israel's legitimacy as a state, viewing it as an illegitimate entity occupying Muslim lands. This ideological shift marked a dramatic transformation, moving from collaboration to implacable enmity. The animosity deepened significantly following the Iranian Revolution and has been openly hostile since the end of the Gulf War in 1991. The new Iranian regime, led by Ayatollah Khomeini, adopted a foreign policy rooted in revolutionary ideals, prioritizing the liberation of Palestine and the confrontation of what it termed "global arrogance" (referring to the United States and Israel). This ideological commitment became a cornerstone of Iran's regional strategy, transforming Israel from a quiet partner into a primary adversary. The revolution ushered in an era where the very existence of Israel became a central point of contention for Iran, setting the stage for decades of proxy conflicts, rhetorical clashes, and a dangerous shadow war that continues to this day.The Axis of Resistance: Iran's Strategic Construct
A cornerstone of Iran’s foreign policy and its confrontational stance against Israel is the concept of the "Axis of Resistance." Part seven of our analysis considers this axis, which Iran views as its main strategic construct to fight a “war without a war.” This network comprises a diverse array of state and non-state actors across the Middle East, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, various Iraqi Shiite militias, the Houthi movement in Yemen, and Palestinian groups like Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Iran provides these groups with financial support, training, and weaponry, enabling them to exert influence and project power without direct military engagement from Tehran. This strategy allows Iran to challenge Israeli and Western interests indirectly, creating multiple fronts of pressure while maintaining a degree of plausible deniability. The Axis of Resistance serves as a forward defense, a means to deter potential attacks on Iranian soil, and a tool to advance Iran’s revolutionary ideology. Through these proxies, Iran can launch missile and drone attacks, conduct intelligence operations, and wage information warfare, effectively engaging in a protracted shadow conflict. The existence and expansion of this axis amplify regional instability, as any escalation involving one of its members carries the risk of drawing in the broader network, and potentially, Iran itself, into a wider conflict with Israel.The Nuclear Question: A Persistent Threat
One of the most persistent and alarming dimensions of Iran-Israel relations revolves around Iran's nuclear program. Talk of a potential strike by Israel on Iran's nuclear facilities has been around for years, decades even, fueled by Israel's unwavering stance that a nuclear-armed Iran poses an existential threat. There are a number of plausible reasons for Israel's deep concern, primarily its geographic vulnerability and the explicit anti-Israel rhetoric emanating from Tehran. The dilemma for both sides is stark: Iran cannot fully deter Israeli action because it lacks confirmed nuclear weapons, while Israel cannot rely on deterrence to prevent Iranian weaponization because Iran’s nuclear program continues advancing. This creates a dangerous security vacuum, where each side perceives the other as an immediate and escalating threat. The international community has repeatedly attempted to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions through diplomacy and sanctions, but progress remains elusive. In a dramatic escalation, Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, striking nuclear and military infrastructure deep within Iran, citing concerns over Iran's nuclear weapons program. Prime Minister Netanyahu declared it a necessary act for Israel's survival and regional defense, underscoring the gravity of the perceived threat. Such strikes have heightened tensions, raising fears of broader conflict and significant impacts across the Middle East. Ahead of new rounds of talks with the US, Iran has consistently warned Israel against attacking its nuclear sites, signaling the extreme sensitivity and potential for rapid escalation inherent in this issue. The nuclear question remains perhaps the most critical determinant of future Iran-Israel relations.Escalation and Retaliation: The Shadow War Intensifies
The long-standing animosity between Iran and Israel has frequently erupted into direct, albeit often undeclared, confrontations, particularly in recent years. This shadow war involves a complex interplay of cyberattacks, assassinations, maritime incidents, and, increasingly, direct military strikes. For instance, scenarios depicting a future escalation paint a vivid picture: Saturday, June 14, 2025, sees Israel expanding its airstrikes to include targets in Iran’s energy industry as Iranian missile and drone attacks continue on Israel. The very next day, Sunday, June 15, 2025, Israel unleashes airstrikes across Iran for a third day and threatens even greater force as some Iranian missiles evade Israeli air defenses to strike. These hypothetical yet plausible scenarios underscore the constant threat of direct engagement. In reality, Iran has retaliated with hundreds of ballistic missiles and drones in response to perceived Israeli aggressions, often targeting Israeli interests or assets in the region. Conversely, Israel has launched a surprise aerial campaign targeting sites across Iran, including military and nuclear facilities, as well as figures involved in Iran's regional operations. The tit-for-tat nature of these exchanges creates a precarious balance, where miscalculation or overreaction could quickly spiral into a full-scale regional war. After Israel launched what it described as “preventive” attacks on Iranian military and nuclear targets, the international community, including major powers like Russia, has often expressed concern, with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Moscow typically calling for de-escalation. The continuous cycle of strikes and counter-strikes highlights the inherent instability of the current state of Iran-Israel relations.The Impact of October 7th
The events of October 7th, 2023, and the subsequent war in Gaza, have profoundly reshaped the dynamics of Iran-Israel relations and the broader Middle East. Part eight of our analysis considers Iran’s own strategy in the aftermath of October 7th with reference to the Soviet technique of ‘reflexive control.’ This concept involves subtly influencing an adversary’s decision-making process by feeding them carefully crafted information or creating specific circumstances that lead them to make choices beneficial to the influencer. While Iran denies direct involvement in the October 7th attacks, its long-standing support for Hamas and other Palestinian factions places it squarely within the narrative of the conflict. The war has demonstrably escalated tensions across the region, drawing in Iranian-backed proxies in Lebanon, Yemen, and Iraq, who have launched attacks against Israel and its allies. This has brought the shadow war into sharper focus, increasing the risk of a direct confrontation between Iran and Israel. The events have also highlighted the interconnectedness of regional conflicts, demonstrating how a localized conflict can quickly reverberate across the entire Axis of Resistance, testing the limits of deterrence and pushing the region closer to a wider conflagration. Iran’s strategy appears to be one of calculated risk, aiming to pressure Israel and its allies without triggering a full-scale war on its own soil, a delicate balancing act that has become even more precarious since October 7th.Shifting Regional Alliances
The escalating tensions between Iran and Israel have also had a significant impact on regional alliances, leading to a complex realignment of interests and priorities among Arab states. Historically, many Arab nations viewed both Iran and Israel with suspicion, often aligning against one or the other based on immediate strategic concerns. However, the Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states, signaled a new era of cooperation, largely driven by a shared apprehension of Iran’s growing regional influence and nuclear ambitions. This shift became evident when Arab states that once opposed Iran now find themselves in a delicate position, reflecting shifting alliances and fears of regional escalation. For example, following Israeli strikes, some Arab states have condemned Israel’s actions, not necessarily out of support for Iran, but out of concern for broader regional instability and the potential for a conflict that could engulf their own territories. This dynamic underscores the fluidity of alliances in the Middle East, where pragmatic security concerns often outweigh historical grievances. The ongoing Iran-Israel confrontation forces regional actors to continuously reassess their positions, weighing the risks of alignment against the perceived threats, thereby creating a highly volatile and unpredictable geopolitical landscape.Diplomacy and De-escalation: A Faint Hope?
Despite the deep-seated animosity and frequent escalations, the possibility of diplomacy and de-escalation, however faint, occasionally surfaces in Iran-Israel relations. The international community, particularly major global powers, often attempts to mediate or facilitate dialogue, recognizing the immense risks posed by continued hostility. Statements from Iranian officials sometimes hint at a willingness to engage, albeit under specific conditions. For instance, the Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi once stated that Iran is ready to consider diplomacy if Israel's attacks stop, a sentiment echoed after a meeting with the E3 (France, Germany, UK) and the EU in Geneva. Such statements, while often conditional and quickly overshadowed by renewed hostilities, indicate that the door to negotiation is not entirely closed. Past attempts at dialogue, such as the nuclear talks with Iran announced by figures like former US President Trump, highlight the ongoing international effort to find a diplomatic resolution to the most pressing issues, particularly Iran’s nuclear program. However, the path to de-escalation is fraught with obstacles. The strikes have heightened tensions, raising fears of broader conflict and significant impacts, making any diplomatic breakthrough incredibly challenging. Both sides operate from positions of deep mistrust and perceived existential threats, making concessions difficult. Yet, the sheer destructive potential of a full-scale conflict ensures that international pressure for dialogue and de-escalation remains a constant, albeit often frustrating, endeavor.The Road Ahead: Navigating a Volatile Future
The trajectory of Iran-Israel relations remains one of the most critical and unpredictable factors in Middle Eastern geopolitics. This hostility can be traced through several phases, from the establishment of Israel in 1948, the Iranian Revolution in 1979, and the subsequent developments to the present day. The journey has been one of increasing polarization, marked by ideological clashes, proxy wars, and the ever-present specter of direct military confrontation. The core issues – Iran’s nuclear program, its regional influence through the Axis of Resistance, and Israel’s security imperatives – continue to fuel a dangerous cycle of action and reaction. As we look ahead, the future of Iran-Israel relations hinges on several key variables. The success or failure of international diplomatic efforts to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions will be paramount. The evolving dynamics of regional alliances, particularly the Abraham Accords and the responses of other Arab states to the ongoing conflict, will also play a crucial role. Furthermore, the internal political landscapes of both Iran and Israel, and the leadership decisions made in Tehran and Jerusalem, will dictate the immediate course of this volatile relationship. The potential for miscalculation, given the high stakes and the history of shadow warfare, remains alarmingly high. While the prospect of outright peace seems distant, the imperative for de-escalation and the prevention of a wider regional conflagration is universally recognized. Understanding how Iran is calculating its war with Israel, as explored by analysts like Azizi, is crucial for anticipating future moves and navigating this complex and dangerous landscape. The world watches, hoping that diplomacy can eventually prevail over the forces of escalation, ensuring that the next chapter in Iran-Israel relations does not lead to an even more devastating conflict. --- We hope this comprehensive analysis has provided valuable insights into the intricate and often perilous relationship between Iran and Israel. What are your thoughts on the future of this critical dynamic? Share your perspectives in the comments below, or explore our other articles on Middle Eastern geopolitics to deepen your understanding of the region's challenges.- Age Of Consent Iran
- American Hostages In Iran 1979
- Iran Attacks Us Base
- Temperature Iran
- Usa Vs Iran
Iran Wants To Negotiate After Crippling Israeli Strikes | The Daily Caller
Israel targets Iran's Defense Ministry headquarters as Tehran unleashes
Israel’s Operation To Destroy Iran’s Nuclear Program Enters New Phase
