The Hamas attack on Israel reshaped the regional security landscape and forced renewed focus on Iran’s strategic influence in the Middle East.
October 7, 2023 fundamentally reshaped the political and security landscape of the Middle East. Hamas’s surprise attacks against Israel did not simply trigger a war in Gaza. They exposed the deeper regional architecture of conflict built around Iran and its network of proxies.
The Israeli military campaign against Iran’s proxies, Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis, was never going to eradicate the existential threat facing the State of Israel and its people since its establishment in 1948.
Israel has long maintained that Iran harbours intentions to annihilate it. This belief is not based solely on the chanting of “Death to America” or “Death to Israel”, but is also reflected in Iran’s position on the Israel–Palestine question, which has historically shaped Middle Eastern politics. Iran has positioned itself as a support base for those seeking to attack Israel and its people, advancing its strategic objectives by sponsoring and backing militant activities against Israel.
Since the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the emergence of the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Islamic Republic of Iran has sought to position itself as a dominant regional security and military power. This ambition has fuelled enduring rivalry and deep-seated tensions with Israel. Iran’s nuclear aspirations have further intensified friction not only with Israel but also with Western powers concerned about regional proliferation and strategic stability. The prospect of Iran expanding its nuclear and missile capabilities would significantly alter the political and security balance of power in the Middle East. Within this context of entrenched rivalry, Israel views the possibility of a militarily strengthened Iran as an existential threat, fearing that such capabilities could ultimately be directed against its sovereignty and national security.
As Israel’s principal ally, the United States has consistently placed Iran’s nuclear programme at the centre of its Middle East policy, as it runs counter to American strategic interests in the region. For that reason, almost every US administration has engaged in talks and negotiations with Iran in an attempt to persuade it to scale back its nuclear ambitions. On the other hand, Iran remains determined to continue building its nuclear facilities, which many believe could ultimately be used against its perceived enemies both in the region and beyond.
Will the death of Ali Khamenei bring freedom to the Iranian people?
There were mixed reactions around the world following the elimination of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. As expected, images emerged from Tehran of those mourning him. Yet outside Iran, particularly in countries such as the United States and Britain, some celebrated the news, seeing it as the end of a tyrant and a potential turning point that might bring new hope to exiled Iranians who dream of one day returning home to reunite with their people and rebuild the country they love.
It is now up to the people of Iran to take advantage of the prevailing political conditions to advance their interests and free themselves from 47 years of authoritarian rule. The United States and Israel may believe they are helping to create conditions that could encourage the Iranian people to rise against dictatorship and institutionalised corruption, which critics say has turned a once beautiful country into a personal fiefdom.
Iran, like South Africa, faces skyrocketing levels of unemployment, persistent water and electricity shortages, and growing inequality. These challenges are further exacerbated by high levels of corruption.
It is also true that isolation and international sanctions have not only affected the country’s economic growth but have also hindered its modernisation, particularly in science and technology. This has come at a significant cost to the country’s long term development. At the same time, critics argue that the current regime remains corrupt and unaccountable, contributing to the deteriorating conditions faced by ordinary citizens. This dissatisfaction is increasingly visible through waves of social unrest from people who have become deeply disillusioned with their leadership.
Is the ongoing war influenced by the electoral calculations of Trump and Netanyahu?
There is a battle underway to control the United States Congress towards the end of this year. Historically, it is common in American politics for the sitting president’s party to lose seats during such contests. Domestically, Donald Trump has been running an increasingly aggressive campaign, even in swing states where he does not enjoy strong support. He has successfully centred much of the campaign narrative around himself. The election results will ultimately determine whether Trump’s popularity matches what the polls suggest. This war cannot be ignored, as it may play a role in shaping political dynamics and influencing who controls Congress.
Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party will undoubtedly want to extend its national mandate and continue its campaign to neutralise the security threats facing Israel. Many Israelis were unhappy with Netanyahu’s proposed judicial reforms in 2023, months before the October 7 attacks took place. He is also likely to face continued scrutiny over the Hamas attack of October 7, 2023.
Former prime minister Naftali Bennett, with his political movement “Bennett 2026”, could potentially emerge as a strong contender to lead Israel again, given his growing political support.
