The Nature of Iran-Israel Relations and the Future of Their Conflict
By: Zainab Abdullah Shaheen
The Nature of the Relationship Between Iran and Israel
The relationship between Iran and Israel is among the most complex and tense issues in both regional and international politics. It is shaped by ideological, geopolitical, and military factors. Since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, relations between the two have shifted from covert cooperation under the Shah to open hostility, with Tehran adopting slogans such as “Death to Israel” and declaring support for the Palestinian cause. Both sides have since sought to shift the regional balance of power in their favor, each aspiring to leadership in the Middle East. Their rivalry has taken many forms, including mutual threats, proxy wars, and power struggles from Lebanon to Yemen.
Ideology or Interests?
The Roots of the Conflict While ideological factors play a prominent role in explaining the animosity, it is ultimately national interests that drive the conflict, according to the realist theory of international relations. Iran seeks to expand its regional influence by supporting allies such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, armed groups in Syria and Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen, and Hamas in Gaza—forces Israel perceives as direct threats to its national security.
On the other hand, Israel views Iran’s nuclear program as an existential danger and strongly opposes any international deal that might allow Tehran to develop nuclear capabilities, even for civilian use. Israel has taken concrete action, including launching ballistic missile attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities on Friday, June 12, 2025, and allegedly assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has publicly stated his intention to change Iran's regime and has appealed to the Iranian people to rise against it—a difficult task, given the Iranian people's history of unity during times of national crisis. Iran, in turn, sees the Abraham Accords and the U.S.-brokered normalization between Israel and Gulf countries like the UAE and Bahrain—as well as ongoing attempts to normalize ties with Saudi Arabia and possibly Syria—as threatening regional developments. These dynamics have likely pushed Iran to accelerate its nuclear program to establish a deterrence balance. According to John Mearsheimer, the prominent American political scientist and theorist of offensive realism, it is logically justifiable for Iran to possess nuclear weapons under such conditions.
The Future of the Iran-Israel Conflict
Two main scenarios could shape the future of the Iran-Israel conflict:
1. Military Escalation Between Iran and Israel
1. Under this scenario, escalation would intensify through the exchange of missile and counter-missile attacks, with increasing threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, which would severely impact the global economy. However, such a move would also hurt Iran, especially its key economic partner, China, making it unlikely unless in extreme circumstances. Still, it remains a pressure card in Iran's hands. Escalation could drag in other actors, including the U.S., Arab states, and major powers like Russia and China, potentially igniting a regional earthquake. While U.S. President Donald Trump has declared his desire to end foreign wars, his current policies suggest a preference for prolonged conflicts followed by intervention.
2. Diplomacy and Mediation – A More Likely Scenario This scenario is more probable, as prolonged conflict does not serve U.S. or Western interests, especially due to its impact on global oil prices, from which Russia benefits to fund its war in Ukraine. It also destabilizes the region and undermines global economic recovery. Thus, both parties may return to negotiations—especially as Israel has already delayed Iran’s nuclear progress, and is unlikely to sustain multi-front military campaigns simultaneously against Hamas, Hezbollah, Syrian actors, Houthi rebels, and under intense international pressure regarding Gaza. Iran has proven itself a formidable state with vast retaliatory capabilities and leverage, strong enough to bring both Israel and the U.S. back to the negotiation table. Shaheen