International Relations
Mohammad Hadi Raji; اصغر Eftekhari
Abstract
One of the frameworks for the integrated analysis of the components of Western pressure and war against the Islamic Republic of Iran is the hybrid war framework. In this regard, examining how to deal with this type of war can have theoretical applications and operational applications for elites and relevant ...
Read More
One of the frameworks for the integrated analysis of the components of Western pressure and war against the Islamic Republic of Iran is the hybrid war framework. In this regard, examining how to deal with this type of war can have theoretical applications and operational applications for elites and relevant officials. The main question of this research is: What are the strategies to deal with the hybrid war of the West against the Islamic Republic of Iran? This research is important from two aspects of approach and operation, in terms of approach and theory that focuses on the integration of coping strategies, and in terms of operations that can be useful for officials related to hybrid warfare. This research is exploratory and not hypothesis testing. The future research is developmental and practical in terms of type, because it explains the necessity of applying a systematic and systematic approach to the problem of hybrid war and the solutions to deal with this type of war, and it also has operational implications for field officials in this field...
International Relations
Marjan Badiee Azandahi; Farzin Zandi; Kyomars Yazdanpanah
Abstract
Introduction In today’s geopolitical competitions, the intricate and innovative concept of gray zone represents a military approach based on geopolitical advantages. Within this strategy, the primary objective is to secure control over desired territories and advance security interests in the conflict. ...
Read More
Introduction In today’s geopolitical competitions, the intricate and innovative concept of gray zone represents a military approach based on geopolitical advantages. Within this strategy, the primary objective is to secure control over desired territories and advance security interests in the conflict. Scholars in this field believe that countries such as Russia, China, and Iran have successfully employed tools and tactics within this concept, enabling them to pursue their security and political interests without triggering major power sensitivities. In this regard, the escalating intensification of geopolitical rivalries in Southwestern Asia, especially between Iran and regional and extra-regional countries, has become a significant challenge when it comes to ensuring security in this area. Adopting the security-for-all-or-no-one approach, Iran aims to establish superiority in its geopolitical rivalry with the United States, the most prominent external actor in this field. Since 2003 and the aftermath of the Iraq war, Iran has introduced a novel strategy in its geopolitical approach. In this respect, the present study aimed to elaborate on the concept of gray zone and highlight its key components as influential variables in Iran’s geopolitical strategy. Materials and MethodsAs an applied study, the present research employed a comparative descriptive–analytical approach. The data collection method involved a combination of library research and computer-assisted techniques.Results and DiscussionAs containment measures against Iran intensify due to the US unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), there have been increasing efforts to neutralize Iran’s strategies and weaken its regional activities, particularly in the realm of geopolitics of resistance. These developments pose a potential threat to Iran’s national security. It is thus necessary to identify and examine the components of Iran’s geopolitical strategy while considering alternative interpretations. Iran’s geopolitical expansion in the region have prompted the West and its allies to impede Iran’s geopolitical influence by scrutinizing its geopolitical territorialization approach marked by the formation and organization of as well as support for proxy forces, manifested in shaping the political dynamics of Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, and even in direct confrontations with the West on the Syrian battlefield. In this context, leveraging its historical, geographical, and cultural unity, Iran has successfully mobilized communities throughout Southwest Asia by relying on small non-state groups, and emphasizing commonalities while overlooking divergences. This mobilization effort is gradually expanding its reach from the southern Arabian Peninsula to the shores of the Mediterranean.By examining the interpretations of gray zone and geopolitics of resistance as two key strategies, this research aimed to address the question of how Iran seeks to achieve its desired security and implement its geopolitical strategy in Southwest Asia. The term axis of resistance refers to geographical regions that pursue both ideological and geopolitical objectives. On the other hand, gray zone is not necessarily a geographical representation of a strategy, but rather a number of tactics that employ specific tools to advance geopolitical interests in strategically significant geographical areas.The findings of this study reveal that Iran’s geopolitical rivalry in Southwest Asia, particularly with the United States, has led Iran to develop a distinct geopolitical strategy known as axis of resistance, or according to American scholarship, gray zone. In this strategy, Iran aims to achieve its security objectives by focusing on five key areas (i.e., military, political, economic, informational–narrative, and cultural or religious) and relying on cooperation and support of non-state armed groups in specific countries in the region. In this way, Iran has successfully achieved its objectives by establishing geopolitical corridors and attaining the desired geographical integration in Southwest Asia. This has enabled Iran to gain access to the Mediterranean Sea and establish proximity to Israel. However, unless subnational and national requirements are seriously taken into account, the mentioned security achievements will prove ineffective and temporary. In other words, despite Iran’s expansion of geopolitical territorialization, the erosion of internal capabilities, particularly in the political sphere, coupled with the disruption of Iran’s economic lifelines, will gradually lead to increased challenges in sustaining support for its geopolitical arms.ConclusionWhen examining the objectives, methods, and tools employed by the United States to counter Iran’s gray zone geopolitical strategy, it becomes evident that the US, rather than solely relying on its own capabilities and geopolitical confrontation, has prioritized targeting Iran’s vulnerable points. While countering Iran’s gray zone strategy, the United States has adopted a hybrid approach that encompasses all four primary domains: political, economic, military, and informational. However, America has specifically recognized the political and economic domains as the Achilles heel of Iran’s security, and by extension, of the gray zone strategy. At the same time, the United States is diligently uncovering Iran’s vulnerabilities by restructuring its decision-making processes within the government and military, as well as streamlining bureaucracy to facilitate prompt responsive measures in the gray zone. Through exerting influence and applying pressure on Iran in the aforementioned domains, the United States aims to achieve a goal that surpasses mere neutralization of the gray zone strategy, that is, undermining Iran’s national and territorial security. As a result, America has successfully identified Iran’s vulnerabilities in key military, political, economic, and informational domains. It has thus devised and carried out tactics appropriate for each domain, both within the framework of the US gray zone strategy and through conventional means.
