As the violence between Israel and Hezbollah intensifies, Iran finds itself walking a strategic tightrope, supporting its key ally Hezbollah without being dragged into a full-scale war. The conflict has already led to significant loss of life and threatens to engulf the broader region, further complicating Iran’s efforts to ease its international isolation and revive its battered economy.
Amid rising tensions, Tehran’s leadership appears intent on avoiding direct confrontation, recognizing that a full-blown conflict could derail critical diplomatic and economic efforts, particularly around securing relief from crippling international sanctions.
Hezbollah-Israel Conflict
The renewed clashes between Israel and Hezbollah were triggered by the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, which reignited cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). This has led to an escalation, marked by Israeli airstrikes targeting Hezbollah strongholds in southern Lebanon and Hezbollah’s retaliatory rocket fire into northern Israel.
One of the most significant incidents occurred when an attack on Hezbollah’s communications network left 39 people dead. This act of sabotage led to a series of Israeli airstrikes on Hezbollah positions, resulting in hundreds of casualties. Hezbollah, in turn, launched multiple rocket barrages across the Israeli border. Despite the increased hostilities, Iran, Hezbollah’s primary backer, has been careful not to allow the situation to spiral into a regional war that could pull Tehran into a direct conflict with Israel and its Western allies, notably the United States.
Iran’s Strategy: Supporting Hezbollah Without Direct Engagement
“Iran is not going to be pulled into war,” says Hamid Gholamzadeh, an Iran-based political expert. Tehran’s leadership seems committed to bolstering Hezbollah’s capabilities while avoiding direct military engagement with Israel. This cautious approach reflects Iran’s broader geopolitical calculations, as any significant escalation could provide Israel with an excuse to drag the U.S. into the conflict—a scenario Iran is keen to avoid.
Iran’s reluctance to enter the fray directly can be seen in its response to Israel’s airstrikes earlier this year. Despite Israeli strikes on Iranian-linked targets in Syria, including one on Tehran’s embassy annex in Damascus in April, which killed several Iranian officials, Tehran’s retaliation was measured. Iran launched missiles at Israeli positions, but most were intercepted by Israel’s advanced air defense systems or its allies. This incident underscores Iran’s careful approach to projecting power without provoking a larger military confrontation.
Ali Vaez, an expert with the International Crisis Group, echoes this sentiment, explaining that Iran’s strategic priority remains securing sanctions relief and stabilizing its economy. “Iran does not want to play into its arch-enemy’s hands,” says Vaez, highlighting the risks of further escalation. A regional war could not only weaken Iran’s standing but also embolden its adversaries, especially Israel, and undermine Iran’s attempts to reach a diplomatic solution with Western powers.
Economic Pressures and Sanctions Relief: Iran’s Focus
One of Iran’s central concerns is the impact that a protracted conflict would have on its already struggling economy. Since the United States, under the Trump administration, withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018, Iran has been subject to a slew of economic sanctions that have crippled its economy. These sanctions, particularly targeting Iran’s energy sector and financial systems, have isolated the country from global markets, leading to inflation, unemployment, and widespread economic discontent.
European nations have also imposed additional sanctions on Iran, accusing Tehran of supplying ballistic missiles to Russia in support of the war in Ukraine—a claim that Iran denies. Iranian officials, including President Masoud Pezeshkian, have repeatedly called for a return to negotiations with both European and American counterparts, seeking relief from these sanctions to revive the country’s economy.
In a speech at the United Nations in New York, Pezeshkian underscored the importance of dialogue. “Iran is willing to sit down with the Europeans and the Americans to have a dialogue and negotiations,” he said. However, any escalation in the Hezbollah-Israel conflict could jeopardize these diplomatic efforts, further isolating Iran and complicating its path toward economic recovery.
Iran’s Cautious Rhetoric and Diplomatic Maneuvers
Iran’s measured approach has also been evident in its political rhetoric. In New York, President Pezeshkian accused Israel of “warmongering” while portraying Iran as a responsible actor seeking peace. He cited the killing of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran in July as an example of Iran exercising restraint. Despite the assassination of Haniyeh, Iran chose not to retaliate, fearing that a strong military response could derail ongoing U.S. efforts to broker a ceasefire in Gaza.
“We tried to not respond. They kept telling us we were within reach of peace, perhaps in a week or so,” Pezeshkian said, lamenting that peace remained elusive. His remarks illustrate Tehran’s balancing act—avoiding direct confrontation with Israel while maintaining its position as a regional power and protector of Palestinian and Lebanese armed groups.
This strategy of restraint mirrors Iran’s response to other recent escalations with Israel. For instance, after Israel targeted Iranian interests in Syria earlier this year, Iran launched hundreds of missiles and drones, but most were intercepted by Israeli defenses. By limiting its military engagement, Iran seeks to demonstrate its regional strength while avoiding the risks of a direct, destabilizing conflict with Israel that could invite a U.S. or broader international military intervention.
Hezbollah: A Strategic Asset for Iran
Hezbollah remains one of Iran’s most important assets in the region. The Lebanese militant group, founded in the 1980s with Iranian support, serves as a key proxy in Iran’s efforts to extend its influence across the Middle East. Hezbollah has been instrumental in helping Iran achieve its regional objectives, from countering Israeli military operations to supporting the Assad regime in Syria during the country’s civil war.
Despite its strategic importance, Iran is mindful of Hezbollah’s limitations. In recent weeks, Israeli airstrikes have targeted senior Hezbollah commanders, significantly weakening the group’s leadership. However, analysts agree that Hezbollah’s extensive resources and battle-hardened fighters make it a formidable force that would not be easily defeated.
Afifeh Abedi, a political researcher, notes that Hezbollah’s “significant human resources” ensure its continued resilience, even in the face of sustained Israeli attacks. Nevertheless, the sabotage of Hezbollah’s communications infrastructure and the loss of key commanders have exposed vulnerabilities within the organization. Vaez points out that while Hezbollah may have been weakened, it remains operational. “The group would not be paralyzed even if the first two tiers of its leadership were eliminated,” he said.
Iran recognizes these vulnerabilities and has taken steps to ensure Hezbollah remains capable of withstanding Israeli attacks. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned that Tehran would “not remain indifferent” to Israeli strikes, signaling continued support for Hezbollah without committing to direct military involvement.
Iran’s leadership is acutely aware that any major escalation in the conflict could have far-reaching implications, both regionally and internationally. An all-out war between Hezbollah and Israel could draw in other regional actors, including Syria, and destabilize an already volatile Middle East. This would not only undermine Iran’s strategic interests but could also provoke a response from the United States, which maintains a military presence in the region.
Moreover, heightened tensions could influence the U.S. presidential election. Vaez notes that an escalation could strengthen Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s position and potentially aid Donald Trump’s chances of returning to the White House—a scenario that Tehran views with trepidation. Trump’s policies toward Iran were marked by extreme hostility, including the withdrawal from the nuclear deal and the imposition of severe sanctions. A second Trump term would likely bring renewed pressure on Iran and complicate any future negotiations.
Iran seems determined to avoid such an outcome. By supporting Hezbollah without engaging directly, Tehran is trying to maintain its regional influence while avoiding actions that could strengthen its adversaries or lead to further isolation on the world stage.
