The question of whether Iran poses a danger to Middle Eastern peace is a critical and polarising issue, particularly in light of recent events, including Israel’s pre-emptive strikes on Iranian nuclear and military targets on June 12, 2025. Iran’s foreign policy, characterised by a blend of ideological zeal, strategic survival and regional ambition, plays a significant role in the ongoing volatility of the Middle East. Its support for proxy groups, advancements in ballistic missile technology and nuclear ambitions, evidenced by advanced uranium enrichment, contribute to conflicts in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Iraq and beyond, ultimately threatening regional stability.
However, it is essential to recognise that Iran’s actions are influenced by historical traumas, economic pressures and perceived external threats, including Western sanctions, covert operations and Israel’s military escalation. This analysis delves into Iran’s role in Middle Eastern instability, examining its nuclear program, support for proxy groups and other destabilising actions, while also considering the broader regional context. While Iran’s policies undoubtedly undermine peace, it is crucial to acknowledge that the region’s instability is a collective failure, with various actors, including Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United States, sharing responsibility. Achieving stability necessitates addressing both Iran’s actions and the structural dynamics that perpetuate conflict.
Historical Context: Iran’s Evolution as a Regional Power
Iran’s current role in the Middle East is deeply rooted in its historical trajectory, which has significantly shaped its strategic outlook and regional ambitions. Under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iran was a pro-Western ally, benefiting from US military and economic support, including the initiation of its nuclear program in the 1950s under the Atoms for Peace initiative. The 1979 Islamic Revolution, led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, fundamentally altered this trajectory, establishing a theocratic republic with an ideology that combined Shia Islamism and anti-imperialism. The revolution’s call to export its model and resist US and Israeli influence alienated Sunni Arab monarchies, particularly Saudi Arabia, setting Iran on a collision course with the West.
The Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988), initiated by Saddam Hussein with support from Gulf states and the US, was a formative trauma for Iran. The war resulted in the deaths of over a million people, including 200,000 Iranians and devastated Iran’s economy, with GDP plummeting by 30% by 1988, according to World Bank estimates. Iraq’s use of chemical weapons, tacitly ignored by Western powers and the US downing of an Iranian airliner in 1988, which killed 290 civilians, entrenched Iran’s sense of isolation and betrayal. This experience drove Iran toward self-reliance, emphasising asymmetric strategies – proxy groups, ballistic missiles and nuclear development – to deter future invasions and counter regional rivals.
In the post-war period, Iran cultivated the “Axis of Resistance,” a network of allied militias including Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Palestine and later the Houthis in Yemen, to project power without direct confrontation. The 2003 US invasion of Iraq, which toppled Saddam, inadvertently empowered Iran by creating a Shia-dominated government in Baghdad, extending its influence across the “Shia Crescent” from Iran to Lebanon. This development intensified rivalries with Sunni powers and heightened Western concerns about Iran’s nuclear program, which gained strategic importance following the revolution. The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) temporarily curtailed Iran’s nuclear activities, unlocking $100 billion in frozen assets. However, the US withdrawal in 2018 and the implementation of “maximum pressure” sanctions – reducing Iran’s oil exports from 2.5 million barrels per day in 2017 to under 1 million by 2020 – prompted an escalation of tensions, culminating in the 2025 Israel-Iran crisis.
Iran’s Destabilising Actions
Iran’s policies are central to arguments regarding its threat to Middle Eastern peace. Below are key dimensions of its actions, with detailed analyses of its nuclear program and support for proxy groups.
1. Nuclear Program
• Iran’s nuclear program: Consistently the region’s most contentious issue, raising fears of weaponisation, regional proliferation and military escalation. Launched in the 1950s with US support for civilian energy, it was revived in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq War, driven by Iraq’s nuclear ambitions and Iran’s need for deterrence. Covert assistance from Pakistan’s AQ Khan network provided centrifuge technology, enabling uranium enrichment. In 2002, an opposition group revealed secret facilities at Natanz and a heavy-water reactor at Arak, undisclosed to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), violating Iran’s Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) obligations. This revelation triggered UN sanctions and escalated tensions.
• Technical Scope: Iran operates over 8,000 centrifuges at Natanz and Fordow, including advanced IR-6 models that enrich uranium ten times faster than older IR-1s. By June 2024, Iran amassed 5,500 kg of enriched uranium, including 120 kg at 60% purity, perilously close to weapons-grade (90%), according to IAEA reports. This stockpile exceeds JCPOA limits (3.67% enrichment, 300 kg stockpile) by over 20 times, with enough material for 10–15 nuclear bombs if further enriched. The breakout time – defined as the time required to produce one bomb’s worth of fissile material – is estimated at 1–2 weeks, according to US intelligence in 2023. The Arak reactor, capable of producing plutonium, was redesigned under the JCPOA to reduce output, but resumed heavy-water production after the US withdrawal in 2018. An IAEA report from 2011 cited pre-2003 weaponisation research, including warhead design, with recent findings suggesting undeclared activities at sites like Turquzabad.
• Strategic Motivations: Iran insists its program is intended for civilian energy and scientific prestige, but it serves multiple strategic goals. It acts as a deterrent against regional rivals – Israel’s estimated 80-200 nuclear warheads, Saudi Arabia’s ambitions and the presence of 30,000 US troops in the region. The economic pressures resulting from sanctions, which drove 40% inflation and 9% unemployment in 2024, make the program a bargaining chip for relief, as evidenced by the JCPOA. Ideologically, it symbolises resistance to Western dominance, supported by Ayatollah Khamenei’s fatwa against nuclear weapons, though this claim remains unverifiable.
• Impact on Peace: The nuclear program risks igniting a regional arms race, with Saudi Arabia vowing to develop nuclear capabilities if Iran does. It emboldens Iran’s proxies by signalling resilience and disrupts global markets, as evidenced by the 12% spike in oil prices following Israel’s 2025 strikes. Israel’s Operation “Rising Lion” on June 12, 2025, targeted Natanz, Fordow and Arak, destroying 30% of centrifuge capacity and killing scientists, according to Israeli estimates, delaying Iran’s breakout by 6–12 months. Iran’s retaliation – over 100 drones and hundreds of ballistic missiles targeting Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa’s oil refinery – escalated tensions, derailing nuclear talks scheduled for June 15 in Oman and risking a broader war.
2. Support for Proxy Groups
Iran’s backing of non-state actors is a cornerstone of its foreign policy, enabling it to wage asymmetric warfare while maintaining plausible deniability. The “Axis of Resistance” includes Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis and Iraqi militias, each amplifying Iran’s influence but destabilising the region through prolonged conflicts and provocations.
• Hezbollah (Lebanon): Founded in 1982 with support from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Hezbollah is Iran’s most potent proxy, receiving approximately $700 million annually, including 150,000 rockets and precision-guided missiles, according to US intelligence. Its 2006 war with Israel resulted in the deaths of 121 Israeli soldiers and 1,200 Lebanese civilians, displacing 300,000, according to UN data. In Syria, Hezbollah deployed 10,000 fighters to support Bashar al-Assad, prolonging a war that has killed 500,000 and displaced 13 million. Domestically, Hezbollah’s political dominance – holding 13 parliamentary seats in 2022 – undermines Lebanon’s sovereignty, fuelling sectarian tensions and contributing to economic collapse (GDP contracted by 20% by 2022, according to World Bank estimates). Its arsenal poses a direct threat to Israel’s northern border, increasing the risk of escalation, particularly following the 2025 strikes.
• Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (Palestine): Iran provides Hamas with $100–300 million annually, including rockets, drones and tunnelling technology, according to Israeli estimates. Hamas’s attack on Israel in October 2023, which resulted in the deaths of 1,200 Israelis and triggered Gaza operations that killed 40,000 Palestinians by 2024, was partly enabled by Iranian support. Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a smaller ally, conducts rocket attacks, further escalating the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Iran’s funding aligns with its anti-Israel ideology but perpetuates violence, provoking devastating Israeli responses.
• Houthis (Yemen): Iran’s support for the Houthis, costing approximately $100 million annually, includes ballistic missiles, drones and maritime attack capabilities. The Houthis’ 2019 attack on Saudi Arabia’s Abqaiq facility, utilising Iranian-supplied drones, disrupted 5% of global oil supply. Their attacks in the Red Sea, targeting 80 ships by 2024, according to US Navy data, threaten global trade through the Bab al-Mandeb Strait. The Yemen war, which has resulted in the deaths of 377,000 by 2022, according to UN estimates, is prolonged by Iran’s arms, escalating Saudi-Iran tensions despite the 2023 China-mediated deal.
• Iraqi Militias: Iran backs Shia militias like Kata’ib Hezbollah within Iraq’s Popular Mobilisation Units (PMU), which comprise approximately 50,000 fighters. These groups fought ISIS, but have also attacked US bases (over 100 strikes since 2020, according to the Pentagon) and clashed with Sunni communities, undermining Iraq’s post-ISIS recovery. Their political wing, holding 50 parliamentary seats in 2021, complicates governance and fuels sectarianism.
• Strategic Motivations: Proxies enable Iran to project power cost-effectively, deterring Israel, Saudi Arabia and the US without direct conflict. Economically constrained by sanctions, Iran relies on proxies over conventional forces, with military spending at $18 billion in 2023, according to SIPRI. Ideologically, proxies advance Iran’s anti-imperialist narrative, rallying Arab publics against Israel. They extend the “Shia Crescent,” countering Sunni dominance and buffering Iran against regional threats.
• Impact on Peace: Proxies destabilise states and prolong conflicts. Hezbollah’s dominance weakens Lebanon, Hamas escalates violence in Gaza, Houthi attacks disrupt trade and Iraqi militias fuel sectarianism. The 2025 strikes, which killed IRGC leaders like Hossein Salami, may disrupt proxy coordination, but Iran’s missile retaliation signals continued support, risking further escalation through Hezbollah or Houthi attacks, thereby threatening peace.
3. Ballistic Missile Program
Iran’s arsenal of over 3,000 missiles, including the Shahab-3 (with a range of 1,200 km) and Khorramshahr (with a range of 2,000 km), poses a threat to Israel, Saudi Arabia and US bases, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies. The missiles have been used in attacks against US bases in Iraq, serving as a deterrent against adversaries while prompting Saudi Arabia to invest in Patriot missile defence systems and Israel to conduct covert operations, such as cyberattacks on missile facilities. The dual-use potential of these missiles, which complements Iran’s nuclear ambitions, heightens risks. Israel’s 2025 strikes targeted missile sites, but Iran’s retaliatory barrage demonstrated resilience, further escalating tensions.
4. Sectarian Rivalries
Iran’s rivalry with Saudi Arabia, rooted in Shia-Sunni divides, drives proxy conflicts in Syria, Yemen and Iraq. Its support for Assad in Syria, involving IRGC advisors and Hezbollah, has prolonged a war that displaced 13 million people. In Iraq, Shia militias exacerbate sectarian tensions, undermining national unity. The 2016 Saudi execution of Shia cleric Nimr al-Nimr, followed by Iran’s attack on the Saudi embassy in Tehran, illustrates the potential for regional spillover. Although the 2023 China-mediated Saudi-Iran deal has reduced direct tensions, proxy conflicts persist, perpetuating instability.
Israel’s Pre-emptive Strikes: Escalation and Implications
Israel’s Operation “Rising Lion” on June 12, 2025, targeted Iran’s nuclear facilities (Natanz, Fordow, Arak), missile sites and key figures, including IRGC Commander Hossein Salami and General Mohammad Bagheri. Citing Iran’s 5,500 kg uranium stockpile as an “existential threat,” Israel damaged 30% of centrifuge capacity and reportedly killed 78 individuals. In retaliation, Iran launched over 100 drones and hundreds of missiles at Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa’s oil refinery, causing significant damage. Ayatollah Khamenei vowed to “bring Israel to ruin,” raising fears of proxy escalation through groups like Hezbollah or the Houthis.
The strikes have a dual impact on Iran’s threat to peace:
• Temporary Setback: The damage inflicted on nuclear and missile sites delays Iran’s breakout by 6–12 months and weakens proxy coordination, reducing immediate risks. The loss of Salami disrupts IRGC operations, which are critical for maintaining proxy networks.
• Escalation Risks: Iran’s missile barrage and threats from proxies risk igniting a multi-front war. The strikes derailed US-Iran nuclear talks, pushing Iran toward covert nuclear efforts or asymmetric attacks. Regional polarisation – where Iraq and Syria condemned Israel while Saudi Arabia remained silent – complicates diplomacy and oil prices spiked by 12% on June 13, reflecting the economic stakes involved.
Iran’s Perspective: Defensive Strategy or Regional Ambition?
Iran argues that its actions are defensive, shaped by historical traumas and ongoing threats. The Iran-Iraq War, Western sanctions and covert operations – such as Israel’s assassinations of nuclear scientists and the 2020 killing of Qasem Soleimani by the US – reinforce its siege mentality. Sanctions have crippled Iran’s economy, reducing GDP growth to 3.8% in 2024, with 40% inflation and 20% youth unemployment, according to World Bank data, limiting conventional military options. The nuclear program serves as a deterrent against Israel’s nuclear monopoly and US intervention, while proxies like Hezbollah and the Houthis provide a buffer against regional rivals. Iran’s role in defeating ISIS in Iraq and its 2023 deal with Saudi Arabia demonstrate its pragmatic potential. However, its ideological commitment to resisting US-Israeli dominance, evident in its 2025 missile retaliation, often prioritises confrontation over de-escalation.
The Broader Regional Context: Shared Responsibility
Iran operates within a complex web of rivalries that share responsibility for the region’s instability. Saudi Arabia’s military campaign in Yemen, backed by US and UK arms, has resulted in a humanitarian crisis, with 24 million Yemenis requiring aid by 2023, according to the UN. Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories and its 2025 strikes provoke retaliatory cycles, drawing condemnation from the UN for unilateralism. The United States, with 30,000 troops in the region and a history of regime change, is perceived by Iran as the primary destabiliser, with its sanctions pushing Tehran toward escalation. Additionally, Turkey’s interventions in Syria, Qatar’s support for Islamist movements and Russia’s involvement in Syria further complicate the landscape. The Abraham Accords (2020), which normalised Israel’s ties with the UAE and Bahrain, sidelined the Palestinian issue, fuelling resentment that Iran exploits. The absence of a regional security framework, akin to NATO or the EU, perpetuates power vacuums, with Iran filling gaps left by Western missteps, such as the chaos following Iraq’s post-2003 invasion.
Economic and Social Drivers of Iran’s Policies
Iran’s economic challenges exacerbate its destabilising behaviour. Sanctions have reduced oil revenues by 60% since 2018, with GDP growth stagnating at 3.8% in 2024, according to IMF estimates. Inflation, hovering at 40% and youth unemployment, reaching 20%, according to World Bank data, have fuelled domestic unrest, as evidenced by the 2022 protests following Mahsa Amini’s death, which resulted in over 500 fatalities, according to human rights groups. Iran’s military spending, estimated at $18 billion in 2023, according to SIPRI, prioritises cost-effective strategies – such as nuclear development and proxy support – over conventional forces, enabling regional disruption despite economic constraints.
Socially, Iran’s promotion of Shia identity alienates Sunni populations across the region, exacerbating sectarian divides that fuel conflicts in Iraq, Syria and Yemen. Its anti-Israel rhetoric, which calls for the “liberation of Jerusalem,” resonates with some Arab publics, particularly in Palestine and Lebanon, but alarms Sunni governments, complicating diplomatic efforts. The regime’s domestic repression, including internet shutdowns and arrests during protests, mirrors its regional assertiveness, linking internal and external instability.
Assessing Iran’s Threat to Middle Eastern Peace
Iran’s nuclear program and support for proxy groups significantly undermine Middle Eastern peace. Its 60% uranium enrichment and 5,500 kg stockpile, capable of producing multiple nuclear bombs, fuel fears of weaponisation, provoking Israel’s 2025 strikes and risking a regional arms race. The program’s economic leverage and ideological symbolism embolden Iran’s regional posture, amplifying its destabilising impact. Similarly, Iran’s proxy network – Hezbollah’s dominance in Lebanon, Hamas’s escalation in Gaza, Houthi attacks on global trade and Iraqi militias’ sectarian violence – prolongs conflicts, weakens state sovereignty and provokes adversaries. The 2025 escalation, marked by Iran’s missile retaliation following Israel’s strikes, underscores these risks, raising the spectre of a multi-front war involving proxies like Hezbollah or the Houthis.
However, it is crucial to recognise that Iran’s actions are partly reactive to external pressures. The Iran-Iraq War, decades of sanctions, Israel’s covert operations and the US’s “maximum pressure” campaign have entrenched Iran’s defensive posture. Israel’s nuclear monopoly and Saudi Arabia’s regional ambitions further justify Iran’s pursuit of deterrence through nuclear and proxy strategies. The broader regional context – characterised by Saudi Arabia’s devastating Yemen campaign, Israel’s unilateral strikes and US military presence – highlights the shared responsibility for instability. The unresolved issues, including the Palestinian conflict, create conditions that Iran exploits, but these dynamics predate and transcend its actions.
Pathways to Stability
The 2025 Israel-Iran escalation demands urgent de-escalation to prevent a broader conflict. Short-term and long-term strategies include:
1. Ceasefire Mediation: Neutral mediators, such as Oman or Qatar, with a history of facilitating Gulf dialogues, could broker a ceasefire to halt missile exchanges and proxy attacks. Israel must pause further strikes and Iran must restrain groups like Hezbollah and the Houthis to prevent a multi-front war. Confidence-building measures, such as mutual commitments to avoid targeting civilian infrastructure, could stabilise the situation.
2. Revival of Nuclear Diplomacy: The US and EU should push for emergency nuclear talks, building on the stalled Vienna negotiations (2021–2023). Offering phased sanctions relief in exchange for Iran freezing enrichment at 20% and reducing its uranium stockpile could help rebuild trust. China, instrumental in the 2023 Saudi-Iran deal, could mediate, leveraging its economic ties with Tehran. Strengthening IAEA oversight, with unfettered access to Natanz and Fordow, would counter Israel’s rationale for preemption, addressing concerns about Iran’s 60% enrichment.
3. Regional Security Dialogue: A long-term regional security framework, including Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Turkey, could address nuclear proliferation, missile development and proxy conflicts. Modelled on the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), such a framework would require neutral facilitation, possibly by the UN or Oman, to negotiate arms control agreements and sectarian de-escalation. The 2023 Saudi-Iran deal provides a precedent for dialogue, although Israel’s inclusion remains a challenge due to its rejection of direct talks with Iran.
4. Economic and Social Incentives: Addressing Iran’s economic drivers is critical. Phased sanctions relief, tied to nuclear and proxy restraint, could alleviate Iran’s 40% inflation and 20% youth unemployment, reducing domestic pressures that fuel external aggression. Reintegrating Iran into global trade, such as restoring pre-2018 oil export levels, would incentives moderation. Socially, encouraging Iran to tone down sectarian rhetoric in exchange for regional confidence-building measures could mitigate Shia-Sunni tensions.
5. Strengthening International Norms: The UN Security Council should condemn unilateral actions, such as Israel’s 2025 strikes, while pressing Iran for full IAEA compliance. Enhancing the NPT regime, with stricter verification protocols, could address concerns about Iran’s nuclear intentions. Multilateral sanctions relief, coordinated by the P5+1 (US, UK, France, Russia, China, Germany), would balance pressure and incentives, avoiding the unilateralism that derailed the JCPOA.
These pathways face significant hurdles – mutual mistrust, domestic hardliners in Iran and Israel and competing US-China influences – but they offer a roadmap to de-escalate the current crisis and address the root causes of instability.
Conclusion
Iran’s nuclear program and support for proxy groups significantly threaten Middle Eastern peace, fuelling conflicts, escalating tensions and risking a regional arms race, as underscored by the 2025 Israel-Iran clash. Its 5,500 kg uranium stockpile and backing of Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis and Iraqi militias destabilise the region, provoking adversaries and undermining state sovereignty. Yet, it is essential to recognise that Iran’s actions are shaped by defensive imperatives – sanctions, covert attacks and Israel’s nuclear monopoly – within a volatile region where Saudi Arabia’s Yemen campaign, Israel’s unilateral strikes and US policies share responsibility for instability. The 2025 escalation, marked by Iran’s missile retaliation and the disruption of nuclear talks, highlights the urgency of de-escalation. Stability requires a multifaceted approach: ceasefire mediation, revived nuclear diplomacy, regional security dialogue, economic incentives and strengthened international norms. Without these efforts, the cycle of confrontation, driven by Iran and its rivals, will continue to erode the Middle East’s fragile prospects for peace.
Interesting take on the situation .