Iran and Israel: From Strategic Partners to Bitter Rivals

Kazi Abul Monsur#

Today, Iran finds itself confronting Israel—a country that was once among its closest strategic partners in the Middle East. While some support comes from groups and allies in Yemen and Lebanon, many powerful Arab states are largely silent, watching carefully to see how the situation unfolds.

This apparent silence has deep historical and geopolitical roots. During the 1970s, when many Arab countries were taking increasingly hostile positions toward Israel, one Muslim country in the region maintained a cooperative relationship with the Israeli state: Iran.

In 1950, Iran under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi granted Israel de facto recognition. At the time, this was an extraordinary move in the Muslim world. Iran and Israel developed close strategic ties, often bypassing the broader Arab political stance against Israel.

As a result, several Arab countries viewed Iran with suspicion, considering it a state willing to pursue its own geopolitical path rather than aligning with Arab regional positions.

In the 1940s and 1950s, Iran was a strongly pro-Western state. The Shah sought to build close ties with Western powers to protect Iran from the influence of the Soviet Union. The Cold War was shaping global alliances, with the United States leading the Western bloc. Israel, a newly established state at the time, was also growing under the strategic umbrella of the United States. This convergence of interests created a natural partnership between Iran and Israel.

The relationship was not limited to diplomacy. There was significant cooperation in intelligence and security. Iran’s notorious intelligence agency SAVAK was developed with assistance from the Central Intelligence Agency and Israel’s intelligence service Mossad. Cooperation also extended to technology, agriculture, and security infrastructure.

Another important factor was identity. Although Iran is a Muslim-majority country, it is not Arab. It is a Persian state with a distinct historical and cultural identity. This difference often created distance between Iran and many Arab governments. At that time Iran did not take as strong a stance on the Palestinian issue as countries such as Egypt or Saudi Arabia. The Iranian state was monarchic, pro-Western, and politically distinct from the Arab nationalist movements of the region.

Everything changed in 1979. That year, the Iranian Revolution overthrew the Shah’s monarchy and established an Islamic Republic under the leadership of Ruhollah Khomeini. This revolution did not simply change the government; it transformed the ideological foundation of the Iranian state.

For Israel, it was a strategic shock. Not only did it lose a key regional partner, but the new Iranian government openly declared Israel an enemy state. The Israeli embassy in Tehran was closed and later handed over to the Palestinians. Israel attempted to preserve some form of influence during the revolutionary period. Through Mossad channels, efforts were made to maintain contacts within Iran and even with some religious figures around Khomeini in exile in France. The hope was that the future government might not adopt an entirely hostile stance toward Israel.

These efforts ultimately failed. Another crucial factor was the position of the United States. At that moment Washington was unwilling or unable to fully support the Shah’s regime. Without American backing, Israel was not in a position to intervene on its own.

The Iranian Revolution therefore transformed the regional landscape. Israel not only lost a strategic partner but gained a powerful ideological adversary. From that point onward, the conflict largely took the form of a proxy war.When two states avoid direct confrontation but instead attack each other through allied groups, militias, or regional actors, the conflict becomes a proxy war.

From 1980 to 2000, Iran and Israel rarely confronted each other directly. Instead, their rivalry played out across multiple arenas including Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Iraq, and even Sudan.

One particularly complex episode occurred during the Iran-Iraq War. While Iran was fighting forces led by Saddam Hussein, Israel secretly supplied weapons to Iran. This controversial arrangement later became known as the Iran–Contra Affair.

At the time Iraq was considered a major threat to Israel. This situation illustrated a classic principle of geopolitics: sometimes the enemy of your enemy becomes a temporary partner.

However, this cooperation was purely strategic. Ideologically, Iran continued to view Israel as an adversary.

In 1982, when Israel launched a full-scale military operation in Lebanon, tensions escalated further. In response, Iran supported the mobilization of Lebanese Shiite groups. With assistance from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the powerful Lebanese organization Hezbollah emerged. From Iran’s perspective, this was part of a broader policy of supporting what it described as oppressed Muslim communities.

Later, Iran also developed relations with the Palestinian organization Hamas. Israel, meanwhile, has continued efforts to counter Iran through intelligence operations, cyber warfare, and covert actions targeting Iran’s strategic capabilities, including its nuclear program.

Today Iran stands at a complex crossroads. On one side is its long-standing confrontation with Israel; on the other are internal pressures and security challenges. The central question remains: can Iran manage its regional confrontation with Israel while also maintaining stability at home?

The Iran–Israel confrontation in 2026 remains primarily a proxy war. While both nations avoid direct military engagement, Iran continues to exert regional influence through Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Palestine, and the Houthi militias in Yemen. These groups receive military, financial, and political support, strengthening Iran’s strategic posture against Israel.

Israel, on the other hand, remains proactive. It employs cyberattacks, covert operations, targeted strikes on Iranian scientists, and advanced defense technologies to limit Iran’s nuclear and military capabilities. The asymmetrical nature of this conflict ensures both sides remain constantly engaged, even without a conventional war.

The United States continues to play a central role. In 2026, Washington maintains its position as Israel’s primary ally, supporting regional security frameworks and applying military, diplomatic, and economic pressure to curb Iran’s regional ambitions. Containing Iran’s nuclear program and aggressive policies remains a top priority for U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.

Meanwhile, several Arab states have shifted their approach. Since the 2020 Abraham Accords, countries such as the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan have normalized relations with Israel. This realignment limits Iran’s regional support and forces it to reconsider its strategic options.

Internally, Iran faces significant economic and political pressures. International sanctions, inflation, unemployment, and public dissent threaten domestic stability. Consequently, Iran is navigating a dual challenge:

External threats from Israel and its allies in the region

Internal economic and political constraints

The ongoing cyber conflict and proxy engagements underscore that the Iran–Israel confrontation in 2026 is a major destabilizing factor in the Middle East. The repercussions extend beyond military dynamics to influence energy security, global oil and gas supply, international policy, and the balance of regional power.

In summary, the Middle East conflict in 2026 is more than a bilateral dispute. It represents a complex geopolitical struggle where Iran, Israel, the United States, emerging Arab coalitions, and regional militias collectively shape the regional and international balance of power.##