Iran’s clerical regime once considered Syria the keystone of its regional strategy, vital for projecting power across the Middle East. However, what Tehran viewed as “strategic depth” has crumbled into a profound strategic defeat, laying bare the fragility of its expansionist policies.
Syria: The Heart of Iran’s Strategy
Following the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, Iran capitalized on a power vacuum to establish a corridor stretching from Tehran to the Mediterranean via Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. This pathway bolstered Hezbollah, transforming it into a formidable proxy capable of destabilizing the region and countering adversaries like Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Syria, in particular, was a linchpin in Iran’s efforts to dominate the Eastern Mediterranean. Between 2011 and 2020, Tehran funneled an estimated $50 billion into propping up Bashar al-Assad’s regime—resources diverted from domestic needs, deepening economic hardship for ordinary Iranians. This costly investment underpinned Iran’s support for Hezbollah’s operations and extended its geopolitical reach.
The 7 October Attack: A Desperate Diversion
Iran’s involvement in the October 7 attack reflects its desperation to deflect attention from growing domestic unrest. By escalating external conflicts, Tehran aimed to distract a discontented population and forestall uprisings at home. Maryam Rajavi, president-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), has long identified Tehran as the epicenter of regional terrorism, calling it the “head of the snake.”
Although Tehran initially denied any role in the attacks, its involvement became evident. This gamble, however, triggered a backlash that exposed the regime’s vulnerabilities and drew its proxies deeper into conflict.
Strategic Collapse and Proxy Weakening
The repercussions of Iran’s actions have been catastrophic for its regional strategy. Hezbollah, one of its most powerful proxies, has faced severe setbacks, while the collapse of Assad’s regime in Syria signals the unraveling of decades-long investments. Iran’s influence in Iraq and Lebanon is also at risk, as Tehran’s proxies in these nations grapple with diminishing support and increasing resistance.
Within Iran, the repercussions are equally dire. The regime’s strength abroad has historically emboldened the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to suppress dissent without fear of repercussions. However, the loss of strategic depth has shaken the IRGC’s confidence, undermining its ability to enforce internal stability.
Rising Resistance and Calls for Action
The regime’s weakening grip on the region has energized domestic opposition. The Iranian Resistance units, has escalated acts of defiance, leveraging Tehran’s vulnerabilities to galvanize public dissent. These efforts, coupled with a population hungry for change, pose an existential threat to the regime.
Iran’s crumbling regional dominance also presents a critical opportunity for decisive international action. Designating the IRGC as a terrorist organization and supporting the NCRI as a democratic alternative are essential steps in countering Tehran’s destabilizing influence and advancing peace in the region.
As Maryam Rajavi aptly stated, the collapse of Tehran’s strategic depth marks a turning point. Expelling Iran’s influence from neighboring countries is not just a blow to its ambitions but a prelude to liberating the Iranian people from decades of oppression.