In an international context marked by the intensification of geopolitical rivalries and the reshaping of Eurasian balances, how can we propose an ambitious analysis of the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic and the instruments of power mobilized by Tehran? This analysis aims to move beyond strictly Western-centric interpretations of the “Iranian question” and to restore the strategic rationality of an actor often reduced in political and media discourses to an ideological or irrational power. This rationality is based on a foreign policy combining strategic pragmatism, revolutionary heritage, and adaptation to the structural constraints of the international system.
The Islamic Republic, heir to a millennia-old imperial civilization and located at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, remains a central player in the Eurasian geopolitics “great game”. Endowed with vast energy resources and a strategic position between the Caspian Sea, the Gulf, and Central Asia, Iran holds a pivotal position in the energy and commercial dynamics of the Eurasian continent. It is essential to examine the contemporary modalities of Iranian power. This involves analyzing the “gray zone” strategy, the cornerstone of Iran’s modus operandi. Tehran exploits military, political, and temporal asymmetries with its adversaries to pursue its strategic objectives. This strategy is based on the use of proxy networks, operational ambiguity, and a gradual escalation of actions, allowing it to keep the conflict below the threshold of open war.
This asymmetrical logic is also reflected in the cyber and informational capabilities of the regime, with the increasing importance of the Iranian cyber army in cognitive warfare and digital influence operations. The use of fake accounts, disinformation campaigns, and influence operations illustrate the regime’s adaptation to new forms of hybrid conflict. Additionally, Iran is now exploring the potential of artificial intelligence in information warfare and internal control of the digital space. The classic military dimension of Iranian power is also noteworthy, with its ballistic program and nuclear dossier highlighting the articulation between strategic deterrence and structural constraints.
Furthermore, since the end of 2025, the country has been immersed in a major political and social crisis marked by massive protests triggered by the deterioration of the economic situation and the devaluation of the rial. These protests, among the largest since the 1979 revolution, have been violently suppressed by the authorities, resulting in several thousand deaths according to some estimates.
It is crucial to broaden the perspective by analyzing Iran’s international relations from a regional and global standpoint. In the Middle East, these relations highlight the multiplicity of Tehran’s actions. The analysis of Iranian-Saudi relations reveals the paradoxical coexistence of ideological rivalries and geopolitical pragmatism. Iran’s strategy towards Israel emphasizes the importance of indirect warfare logic and strategic delegation.
Relations with major powers also deserve attention. The Russo-Iranian and Sino-Iranian partnerships show that these rapprochements should not be interpreted as the formation of a homogeneous anti-Western bloc. They are more about a strategic pragmatism based on the convergence of specific interests, especially in the context of Western sanctions and the reshaping of Eurasian trade routes. In this regard, there is a focus on the “Eastward gaze” strategy adopted by Tehran since the tightening of Western sanctions. The gradual integration of Iran into structures like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization or BRICS reflects the regime’s desire to participate in an emerging multipolar international order.
Moreover, internal instability is now compounded by a regional geopolitical escalation. Military tensions between Iran, Israel, and the United States have escalated in early 2026, leading to a significant destabilization of the Iranian political system. The death of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in Israeli-American strikes has ushered in a period of uncertainty regarding succession and the future of the regime, revealing the fragility of a system that was supposed to function without its founder.
