September 24, 2025
Since taking power, the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic has been shaped not on the basis of national interests and global occasions, but on the basis of ideology, and in practice has exposed the country to isolation, heavy sanctions, and military conflict. The unchangeable ruling structure has turned Iran's foreign policy into a series of zigzag and costly reactions, the main burden of which has fallen on the shoulders of the people and has had disastrous consequences for our country.
1- The Foundations of the Foreign Policy of the Islamic Republic
The Islamic Republic began its foreign policy with the slogan "Neither East nor West," but in practice it established the foundation of this policy with permanent hostility to America and the West and denial of the existence of Israel, which is the formation and strengthening of the "axis of resistance" against Israel.
This view has trapped the regime in a vortex that will only lead to the destruction of the country’s infrastructure and the destruction of its people. This policy has no relation to the changing realities of the world and the changing conditions in Iran. The “Look East” of the regime’s leaders is the basis for decision-making in the country in a situation where the world has not been bipolar for decades. The Cold War is over, and emerging economic and technological powers in the East, such as China, have established multilateral relations and mutual dependencies with the West, changing the scene, moving away from the militaristic competition that prevailed between the East and the West during the Cold War, and entering a new type of international competition. Our country has also experienced profound economic, social, and demographic changes in these four decades. Nevertheless, the Islamic Republic insists on its same foundations and mentality. The regime's tactical changes and maneuvers have always been made not out of an understanding of global developments or securing national interests, but under the pressure of sanctions, external threats, and internal crises. Basically, based on this approach to the world, a force has emerged within the regime whose economic interests are tied to this policy. For this reason, the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic is influenced on the one hand by forces that want to change this policy for their own interests, and on the other hand, a force has emerged in power that sees its interests in maintaining this confrontational policy. The continuation of this policy has trapped the regime in a paralyzed state of "neither war nor peace" and its heavy costs have fallen on the shoulders of the Iranian people, which will only end by ending this system and replacing its foreign policy with a realistic, popular, and democratic foreign policy.
2- The Role of America and Israel
Like previous American governments, the Trump administration has focused its strategic priorities on containing China and competing with this emerging power globally. Although the Middle East is economically important, it does not have the same status as before in American foreign policy. This does not mean that America is withdrawing from the region, but rather that direct intervention has been replaced by a limited military presence, reliance on local allies, especially its main ally in the region, Israel, and the use of sanctions and diplomatic pressure. War imposes a very heavy cost on America. Therefore, America is trying to advance the policy of "crisis management" as much as possible. That is, preventing a full-scale war, containing the nuclear ambitions of the Islamic Republic, and maintaining Israel's superiority in the balance of power.
In the meantime, Israel has taken on a more prominent role, especially after the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad in Syria and the heavy military strikes it has inflicted on Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and Iran. Israel is seeking to exploit the Islamic Republic’s current fragile situation and transform itself into the undisputed power in the region. Netanyahu’s strategy is based on intensifying pressure on Iran, using the crisis to pressure Arab countries, seeking territorial expansion, and consolidating its military and technological position. The strategic alliance between the United States and Israel also means that they will not allow Iran to become a decisive power in the region and a nuclear power that threatens Israel. Such a situation has placed the Islamic Republic in an even more geopolitical dilemma and has pushed the future outlook not towards openness and peace, but towards increased isolation, threats, and war.
Israel’s efforts to advance its expansionist and aggressive agenda in the region have been hampered by two very important factors. First, the catastrophic dimensions of the continuous and brutal attack on Gaza and the killing of women, children, and civilians, which many powers and civil institutions condemn as "genocide," and second, the recent airstrike on the headquarters of the Hamas movement in Doha, which aroused the anger and dissatisfaction of even Israel-friendly governments and united the ranks of Arab governments against Israel. These two issues have caused the suspension or slowdown of many of the steps foreseen in the normalization project. However, these gaps do not change the policy of the United States and the West in dealing with the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.
3- Unilateral Reliance on China and Russia
Along with the role of the US and Israel, the formation of different poles in the world and the change in the balance of power also affect the future of the Islamic Republic's relations with others. The pressure of US customs and trade tariffs and Trump's unpredictable behavior have pushed many countries towards China. China demonstrated its power against the US and the West by bringing together the heads of twenty countries at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit. The Islamic Republic has also moved closer to this bloc and has placed its eggs in the balance of relations with China and Russia. However, the reality is that this reliance is unilateral and China and Russia, despite their serious competition with the US, have their own national interests, and they regulate their relations accordingly and will not enter into confrontation with the US for the sake of the Islamic Republic.
On the other hand, activating the snapback mechanism by the three European countries puts Iran’s case on the verge of returning to the Security Council and under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. In such a case, the US government’s hand will be more open to sanctions and even military threats. The path that the Islamic Republic has taken, namely unilateral reliance on Russia and China, while being incompatible with the West and Europe and unable to create a balanced diplomacy, has made the deadlock in foreign policy more obvious. If a serious and fundamental change is not made in this policy, which the regime has shown to lack such capacity, it will expose the country to the risk of war and escalation of military tension more than ever.
4- Foreign Policy Deadlock and Consequences
It is now quite clear that the Islamic Republic has reached a complete deadlock in its foreign policy. Successive failures in the region and failures in warmongering adventures, along with intensified sanctions and international isolation and increasing rifts within the regime in the face of this situation, have revealed its helpless and crisis-ridden face more than ever. The emergence of severe disagreements that have arisen these days over the agreement between the president and the parliament and the National Security Council and their followers is a reflection of this situation. The nuclear project, which has had no other result than harm for the country, has today become a factor for external pressure and military threats to the country and its infrastructure. The continuation of these policies, along with structural corruption and costly adventures, has pushed the country's economy to the brink of collapse and has trapped the lives of millions of citizens in misery and poverty. The regime led by Khamenei and the supreme leadership apparatus has neither a serious desire to retreat nor the ability to advance and has practically become paralyzed. In such a situation, social and protest movements of workers, teachers, women, youth, and other segments of the population could become more widespread every day and make the conditions for the regime's continuation more difficult. At the same time, the risk of war and foreign intervention is a serious threat to these popular movements, and the only way out of the current impasse will be the transition to a secular and democratic system based on the will and free choice of the people.
5- The Risk of War
In the current situation, the possibility of the conflict escalating into a direct war between Israel and the Islamic Republic has increased. One of the main factors in this critical situation is the inability of the regime's leaders to make decisions. Internal pressures, economic and social crises and concerns about the possibility of war have caused decisions to be postponed or, if they are made, there is no unified will to implement them. This procrastination slows down the possibility of diplomatic negotiations and reduces their success.
On the other hand, the Islamic Republic’s move to rebuild its military power, increase its missile capabilities, and resume strengthening the resistance axis forces, which was accompanied by the visit of political and security representatives to Lebanon and Iraq, sends a message to Israel that the Islamic Republic is not willing to put an end to its hostility towards Israel. If the Iranian nuclear case goes under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, sanctions will be globalized and pressure on the Iranian people will increase. The Islamic Republic’s nuclear program will be presented as a threat to world peace, and a preemptive or retaliatory military attack will become justifiable for Israel.
At the same time, Iran’s contradictory messages in the field of nuclear diplomacy, from the signing of the agreement with the IAEA and Grossi in Cairo to the setting of conditions and ambiguities that followed, and the continuation of slogans and threats against Israel, have increased the level of distrust on the other side, activating the snapback mechanism and turning to the military option. Therefore, the combination of domestic suspense, confusion, and indecision, military reconstruction, diplomatic ambivalence, and Israeli concerns increases the likelihood of a preemptive strike and direct conflict.
6- What Can Be Done?
By implementing their destructive policies, the leaders of the Islamic Republic have destroyed the opportunity and possibility of preventing the return of further sanctions and dialogue on differences, and along with them, have brought the country and the people of Iran into one of the most critical situations in recent decades. This regime will not back down from its destructive foreign policy without strong public pressure. All means must be used to oppose the continuation of these policies, the escalation of sanctions, and the continuation of the current war atmosphere. Coordinating the political activities of the left, republican and democratic organizations, specifically creating a center for the coordination and cooperation of democratic forces, is the most important way to confront war and sanctions. Without such an approach, the left, democratic and republican opposition will neither be able to effectively help the Iranian people to confront the autocracy of the Islamic Republic, nor will its voice find the necessary echo in the world. Our country needs a secular democratic republic whose foreign policy is based on normalizing relations with all countries of the world and adhering to international law. A system that can protect the national interests of Iran and its people; put coexistence with other nations and defending public peace and security at the forefront of its policy; avoid war, conflict, and hostility with other countries; and ensure the country's sustainable economic and political development. The opposition must show from today that the power of such a change in the country's foreign policy is based on the will and free choice of the Iranian people.
Political-Executive Board of the Left Party of Iran
September 24, 2025
Add new comment