Mohammad Marandi's assertion, carried by Sputnikglobe.com, that 'Iran has won the war' and it 'will be up to the US to secure the peace,' is a provocative statement that demands rigorous geopolitical analysis, especially from the vantage point of the Iran-Israel conflict and broader Middle East security. This declaration, coming from a prominent Iranian academic and advisor, is not merely an opinion; it's a strategic narrative designed to reshape regional perceptions and influence international policy. While the notion of a decisive 'victory' for any single actor in the multifaceted conflicts plaguing the Middle East is debatable, Marandi's framing underscores a significant shift in Tehran's confidence and its perceived leverage.
Geopolitical Context: Iran's Expanding Shadow
Marandi's claim of Iranian victory reflects a reality of Tehran's undeniable expansion of influence across the Levant and beyond. Through its 'Axis of Resistance'—comprising proxies like Hezbollah in Lebanon, various Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria, and the Houthis in Yemen—Iran has established a formidable network that challenges traditional power balances. The perceived retreat or disengagement of the United States from certain regional flashpoints, particularly following the Afghanistan withdrawal and a broader 'pivot to Asia,' has arguably created a vacuum that Iran has been adept at filling. This expansion is not a conventional military conquest but a strategic projection of power through asymmetric warfare, political penetration, and ideological alignment. For Iran, 'winning the war' likely refers to successfully frustrating US and Israeli objectives, maintaining its nuclear program, and solidifying its regional proxy architecture despite sanctions and covert operations.
Regional Impact: Escalation Risks and Shifting Alliances
The implications of this narrative for regional stability are profound and largely negative. If Tehran genuinely believes it has 'won,' it could lead to an emboldened, more assertive foreign policy, potentially escalating tensions with its adversaries. For Israel, a perceived Iranian victory, especially one that consolidates its presence on Israel's northern borders (Syria, Lebanon), represents an existential threat that demands a robust response. This could translate into more frequent or intense pre-emptive strikes against Iranian assets and proxies, risking broader regional conflagration. Similarly, Gulf Arab states, particularly Saudi Arabia and the UAE, view Iranian dominance with deep apprehension, potentially pushing them further into security alignments with Israel and the US, or conversely, forcing them to seek a precarious détente with Tehran. Marandi's insistence that 'peace' is now solely the US's burden attempts to absolve Iran of responsibility while simultaneously demanding US recognition of its gains, a position unlikely to foster genuine stability.
What to Watch For Next: US Posture and Iranian Consolidation
Moving forward, several critical dynamics warrant close observation. Firstly, the US response to this narrative will be crucial. Will Washington accept the premise of Iranian victory and engage on Tehran's terms, or will it reassert its regional commitment and challenge this narrative through diplomatic and deterrent actions? The Biden administration's approach to the JCPOA and broader regional security architecture will be key. Secondly, monitor Iran's actions on the ground. Will Tehran consolidate its proxy networks, increase support for its regional allies, or press for new strategic advantages? Any move to further arm Hezbollah or expand its nuclear program will be met with severe reactions. Thirdly, observe Israel's strategic calculus. Facing a potentially emboldened Iran, Israel's doctrine of pre-emption against perceived threats will likely be tested. Finally, watch for shifts in intra-regional alliances. The Abraham Accords demonstrated a willingness among some Arab states to openly align with Israel against Iran. A perceived Iranian 'victory' could either solidify these alliances or force a re-evaluation of strategies, potentially leading to a more fragmented and unpredictable security landscape. Marandi's statement, while a potent piece of rhetoric, serves as a stark reminder of the volatile and dangerous strategic environment in the Middle East.