The ongoing conflict between the Islamic Republic of Iran and its regional proxies, particularly their aggressive posture against Israel, is a significant dimension of Tehran’s broader campaign against the West. Understanding this multifaceted conflict is essential for American diplomats, particularly in light of its implications for U.S. interests. Unfortunately, the Biden administration has seemingly fallen short in grasping the ideologies that underpin the actions of Iran and its affiliated groups. The recent public address by Iranian Supreme Leader Imam Ali Khamenei during Friday prayers in Tehran exemplifies the enduring revolutionary beliefs that were established during the 1979 Iranian Revolution. Khamenei framed Israel as an existential threat not only to the Palestinians but also to the entire Islamic world, advocating for a collective effort to dismantle the “Zionist regime,” which he described as inherently illegitimate.
Khamenei’s remarks resonate with the historical narratives promulgated by other Iranian proxies, such as Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which share a commitment to the destruction of Israel. Hezbollah’s declaration in the 1980s identified the U.S. as the root cause of regional calamities, while espousing the goal of liberating Jerusalem from Israeli “occupation.” Similarly, Hamas’ founding charter underscores its Islamic obligation to reclaim all of Palestine and views jihad as a path toward achieving this objective. For decades, these factions have articulated a doctrine that identifies the United States and its support for Israel as adversaries, a narrative that has seemingly not penetrated the diplomatic mindset of the current U.S. leadership. Critics contend that even in light of the recent escalation of violence, the Biden administration’s understanding of these ideological undercurrents remains superficial.
The Biden administration’s attempts to navigate the Israel-Hamas conflict have been depicted as a combination of earnest yet ultimately ineffective diplomacy. Notably, a recent article recounts internal discussions among high-ranking U.S. officials, shedding light on their perceived shortcomings in the face of escalating violence. The administration’s attempts to mediate the conflict, secure hostages, and lay the groundwork for a more stable Middle East have generally been deemed unsuccessful. American officials, including Biden himself, have publicly supported Israel’s right to self-defense; however, this support has not translated into effective diplomatic outcomes. The inability to achieve long-term objectives—such as a ceasefire, hostages’ release, or a renewed push for a two-state solution—indicates a disconnect between American diplomatic strategies and the realities shaped by Iranian aggression and regional Islamist ambitions.
Instead of shaping a cohesive strategy that acknowledges the existential threat posed by Iran and its proxies, the Biden administration appears to operate under an outdated premise of negotiating with actors who have openly declared their intentions to destroy Israel. In an internal assessment following the Oct. 7 attacks, Biden officials found themselves grappling with existential questions about their effectiveness, concluding that no diplomatic breakthrough had been forthcoming despite their numerous efforts. Many of the U.S. strategies thus far have inadvertently blurred moral distinctions between Israel—a democracy forced to defend itself—and Islamist groups whose agendas are defined by hatred and terror. The clear delineation between defensive actions necessitated by Israel and the offensive strategies employed by Hamas remains crucial to framing an effective response.
The ramifications of the insufficient understanding of the Iranian threat are compounded by misconceptions surrounding U.S. sanctions and relief measures. By offering sanctions relief, ostensibly to encourage dialogue, the administration has allowed Iran to bolster its financing and military capabilities, augmenting its ability to manipulate regional dynamics. Rather than holding Hamas and other terrorist organizations accountable for their actions, U.S. diplomacy has focused on the humanitarian implications of conflict and attempted to promote a narrative of balance between victimhood and aggression. This approach often undermines Israel’s position and inadvertently legitimizes the harmful narratives propagated by Hamas and its allies, making it difficult for Israel to negotiate from a position of strength.
Moving forward, it is imperative that U.S. diplomacy undergoes a significant recalibration that centers on a thorough understanding of the ideologies driving Iran’s actions. The first step is recognizing the long-term commitment articulated by Iran in its campaign against not just Israel but the West as a whole. The sobering reality is that the aggressive and calculated nature of Iran’s foreign policy poses a persistent and unyielding threat to stability not only within the Palestinian territories but also throughout the Middle East and beyond. A robust American diplomatic strategy must confront this challenge head-on, promoting a clear-eyed view that prioritizes long-term security interests while supporting Israel’s right to exist and defend itself.
In conclusion, the U.S. must adopt a strategy grounded in the realities of Middle Eastern politics rather than wishful thinking or misguided attempts at moral equivalency. Acknowledging the nature of the threats posed by Iran and its proxies requires a frank assessment of their ideologies and objectives. Only through a comprehensive understanding of these dimensions can the U.S. craft a coherent and effective foreign policy aimed at restoring stability in the region while safeguarding its strategic interests. The path forward necessitates a critical re-evaluation of existing policies and a renewed commitment to confronting the existential challenges posed by those who seek to undermine both Israel and the broader framework of Western values.
