Channels
Self-reliance. Ahmadinejad
Photo: AFP

Iran will not achieve hegemonic status

Analysis: Islamic Republic cannot match its goals with realities on the ground

Since 1979, Iran developed a form of government based on an explicit intent to export its brand of Islamic revolutionary doctrines. Since the first days of Khomenei’s rule over Persia, Tehran’s foreign policy has been devoted to increase the political, military and economic attributes of a revolutionary state which considers itself chosen to redeem the Muslim world by freeing it from any "oppressor."

 

Under President Ahmadinejad the regime raison d’être has swiftly evolved into an effective drive to regional hegemony. Iran's expanding nuclear program must be read along with a wider policy of expanding the state’s political and military capabilities by forging international alliances and gaining a relative degree of self-reliance. Not only does Iran try to position itself as a core actor in the Middle East, it also entered into an active struggle to be recognized as the key to all regional issues. From Iraq to Lebanon and from Syria to Afghanistan, Tehran is investing highly in all regional proxy wars.

 

The regime's first goal of expanding its revolutionary doctrines, through cultural hegemony, is now coupled with the more conventional objectives of military and political hegemony. These aims do nevertheless create the fertile ground for a potential rift between aspirations and reality, which is at the base of possibly irrational political and military decisions.

 

A precise set of reasons can be highlighted to determine why Iran will not achieve the hegemonic status it aspires to in the region.

 

The Near East and the Gulf regions have a tendency not to accept a single power ruling the whole area, and this since the fall of the Ottoman Empire. The 20th century has seen four main contenders for this role: the Arab Nationalist camp – mainly Syria and Egypt, the religious conservatives – financed and armed by Saudi Arabia, the United States and the USSR. The present turbulent period does see a number of players unwilling to give up their regional ambitions. Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey are, all with their own rationale, deeply devoted in gaining unparalleled regional power, while none of them is truly sympathetic of Iran.

 

Along with that first point, Iran does not have the ability to market itself as a viable cultural hegemony. Its radical brand of militant shi’ism may have a foothold in Lebanon and Iraq but does not represent a model for the rest of the region. In other words, few Arabs are actually looking up to Iran as the true social example they aspire for.

 

Desperate attempt

Economically, Tehran does not come close to having the capabilities to compete with the Gulf Monarchies. Its decade long aggressive policies and illegal actions are starting to block its government and its trading class. Sanctions are not effective in blocking its nuclear program but do nevertheless greatly diminish its possibilities of increasing its areas of influence beyond the natural shi’a hotbeds.

 

On the military side, all the muscle flexing and hard talking does not compensate the fact that Iran is developing its irregular warfare techniques simply because it knows that it cannot sustain a conventional confrontation against Israel or the United States. Illegal terrorist attacks through proxies, mine warfare and ballistic missiles, irregular forces and the weaponization of its nuclear program are all signs that Iran will not be able to obtain and/or maintain any kind of hegemonic status via conventional military means, which are a necessary part of all power plays.

 

Having assessed the impossibility for Tehran to match its goals with the realities on the ground, it is necessary to underline that this creates a high risk environment. The plausible scenario is that the gap between Iranian perception of power and its blocked position will lead Iran to further isolate itself and take increasingly irrational actions. The Islamic Republic has indeed the ability to wage a region-wide terrorist campaign. It has funded armed and trained radical groups in Yemen, Iraq, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Afghanistan.

 

In addition to that, it is developing an arsenal of ballistic missiles providing it with the possibility of striking at the heart of regional capitals and economic centers. Furthermore, recent international investigations show that Iran may be closer to the full militarization of its nuclear program than it was previously expected. Still, this does not mean it is actually going to strike its Arab neighbors since it has little or no direct interests in doing so.

 

Yet, Tehran is constructing its foreign policy’s legitimacy almost solely on its will to destroy Israel. For this, there is a tangible risk that as soon as the gap between hegemonic aspirations and real obstacles will be sensed by Iranian authorities, the ever present campaign against the Jewish State will only increase in tempo and nature. If history has already provided us a number of ‘wannabe’ regional powers starting wars in order to achieve their dream status, for the moment none of the example has been verified with a nuclear armed state.

 

The psychology behind Iranian nuclear program appears to be one based on a power play but is likely to soon transform itself in a desperate attempt to obtain something it cannot have. It’s essential to not arrive at this point as it may prove to be a far greater threat to Israel and the region than any other ever experienced.

 

Riccardo Dugulin holds a Master degree from the Paris School of International Affairs (Sciences Po) and is specialized in International Security. He is currently working in Paris for a Medical and Security Assistance company. He has worked for a number of leading think tanks in Washington DC, Dubai and Beirut.  Personal website: www.riccardodugulin.com  

 

 


פרסום ראשון: 09.05.12, 18:05
 new comment
Warning:
This will delete your current comment