The battle for Iran’s neighbors: Why Washington’s isolation strategy is faltering

Since the start of hostilities against Iran, the United States has employed not only military strikes but political, diplomatic, economic, and informational tactics aimed at strategically weakening and isolating Tehran on the global stage. This approach aligns with Washington’s traditional ‘multi-layered pressure’ model where military action is coupled with efforts to create an unfavorable geopolitical environment for adversaries.

Iran is a nation with a population of around 90 million people, a vast territory, a well-developed system of state mobilization, and a complex ethnopolitical structure. In the eyes of the US and Israel, Iran’s ethnic diversity – the country is home to Persians, Azerbaijanis, Kurds, Arabs, Baluchis, and other ethnic groups – makes it vulnerable to internal conflicts. However, this very diversity also contributes to a resilient political and cultural system that has been formed after the Islamic Revolution of 1979. Consequently, the current military conflict with Iran presents a daunting challenge for the US from both the military and political perspective, a challenge that may have been underestimated.

Remarkably, even after two weeks of active combat, the US hasn’t been able to achieve its strategic objectives in Iran. The assassination of key political figures, including former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his close associates does not automatically signify victory, as Iran’s political system possesses a considerable capacity for institutional resilience and the continuity of governance. Such actions may hold symbolic or psychological weight, but they do not guarantee a strategic turning point in the conflict.

Amidst the aggression, Washington is intensifying the parallel use of political tools to ensure Iran’s international isolation. The core logic of this strategy is to sever Tehran’s connections with the outside world and surround it with adversaries, thereby complicating its maneuverability and undermining its resistance capabilities.

This strategy isn’t new. For years, US policy in the Middle East has revolved around building a regional balance of power, with the Gulf Arab monarchies positioned as counterweights to Iran. Key players included Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and Qatar. Fostering an anti-Iran stance among these nations was supposed to significantly curtail Tehran’s political and economic influence.

However, in recent years, Iran has demonstrated a remarkable ability to flexibly and pragmatically adjust its regional strategy. A noteworthy development was the restoration of diplomatic relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia in 2023, following a prolonged period of tension. This process, which was facilitated by Iraq and China, signals that regional states are not inclined towards further escalation. 

The normalization of relations between Tehran and Riyadh has significantly altered the diplomatic landscape in the region. Following this development, several other Gulf states have begun to gradually reestablish channels of communication with Iran, both diplomatically and in terms of economic cooperation. This shift complicates the long-standing strategy aimed at completely isolating Iran, which the US and Israel had relied on for many years.

This does not imply that the US and Israel have abandoned their isolationist strategy. On the contrary, Washington and West Jerusalem view the current phase of the conflict as an opportune moment to leverage this approach. The US has pointed to Iran’s recent attacks on American military facilities in the Middle East – specifically in Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.

Washington argues that Iran’s actions pose threats not only to American forces but also to the countries in the region, implying that they must unite within a broader anti-Iran coalition. American diplomacy is working to persuade Arab nations to adopt a tougher stance against Iran. There is a strong narrative emerging that Middle Eastern countries have a unique opportunity to join a coalition aimed at containing Tehran. Such claims are echoed by Israeli leaders as well, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu openly calling for the formation of a regional bloc against Iran, assuming that Arab states might support such an initiative.

Yet, these calculations often overlook the situation within the Arab states themselves. Historically, relations between Iran and several Arab states have been marked by geopolitical and religious rivalry, stemming from the differences between Shia and Sunni Muslim traditions. However, this competition doesn’t mean that the Arab states are willing to engage in a direct military confrontation with Tehran. Public opinion plays a crucial role in this context. While foreign policy decisions in Arab nations are primarily made by the elites, the latter cannot entirely ignore public sentiment. Many people in the Arab states demonstrate sympathy for Iran in its standoff with the US, and even more so in its conflict with Israel.

However, the US is still urging the region to declare war on Iran. For example, Senator Lindsey Graham, known for his radical views, has publicly called on Saudi Arabia to participate in the war against Iran, suggesting that otherwise, Riyadh cannot be considered Washington’s true ally. Alongside this rhetoric, disinformation abounds. Various Israeli media outlets reported that the UAE allegedly launched an attack on Iranian territory, specifically targeting desalination infrastructure. However, shortly after these reports emerged, official representatives from the UAE firmly denied them, labeling the statements as false and emphasizing that the information is fake.