Iran, Israel, and the United States: A Re-reading of the Roots of Enmity

The animosity between Iran and Israel, and sometimes the United States, is often presented in political discourse as a deep and entrenched conflict in the region. However, a careful reading of history reveals that this relationship is not as static as it seems, but rather has been shaped by complex political and ideological transformations, starting from Iran's cooperation with Israel before the Islamic Revolution, to the current conflict after the establishment of the Islamic Republic.

Before the Islamic Revolution, Iran was not hostile towards Israel. Under the rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, it maintained undeclared cooperative relations with Israel that included economic and security spheres, while the United States considered Iran a strategic ally in confronting Soviet influence and balancing power in the Middle East. This relationship was part of a shared pragmatic vision, transcending religious or ideological considerations, and focused on common strategic interests.

However, the scene changed dramatically with the victory of the Islamic Revolution and the rise of Ruhollah Khomeini's leadership. The Islamic Republic redefined the identity of the Iranian state on a Shiite religious basis, making the ideological dimension the core of domestic and foreign policy, and linking the conflict with Israel and sometimes the United States to the Iranian revolutionary project. The Palestinian issue became a symbolic and political tool to enhance the regime's legitimacy, and enmity towards Israel and the United States became part of the Islamic Republic's identity, as they are viewed as colonial powers targeting the Islamic nation and its balances.

Iran's identity, fundamentally built on Shiite religion, made the Palestinian issue a central tool in achieving the goals of its ideological project. The new Iranian regime, established under the umbrella of the Supreme Leader, links regional policies to the religious dimension, and invests in Palestine to enhance the legitimacy of its revolutionary and Shiite project. From the perspective of the Iranian leadership, this path is not merely a political choice, but a religious duty, derived from beliefs related to the fulfillment of divine promises, including the anticipation of the appearance of the awaited Mahdi.

This ideological dimension has driven Iran to pursue policies that transcend the limits of its traditional interests, including supporting Shiite forces in the region, and expanding influence in holy Islamic sites, which puts it in constant conflict with some traditional Sunni states, and makes its stance on Israel more severe. Thus, the Palestinian issue transforms into a dual tool: a symbol of religious justice and ideological conflict, and at the same time a political and strategic tool to enhance regional influence.

In the context of this project, Iran has worked to build a network of regional alliances with various forces. The alliance of Palestinian Islamic movements is one of the most prominent examples of Iran's endeavor to market its religious project beyond state borders. Support for factions such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad is not merely a political or military alliance, but a means to promote Iran's Shiite religious project in the region, and to give it political and religious capital in the Islamic world, while highlighting the Palestinian issue as both a symbol and a strategic tool.

However, a part of the political discussion puts forward a different hypothesis, which is that the enmity between Iran on the one hand, and Israel and the United States on the other, is not inherently inevitable. Recent history provides an example of the possibility of different relations between the two sides, as happened during the Shah's rule. From this perspective, some analysts believe that the religious ideological dimension of the Iranian regime played a decisive role in transforming the relationship with Israel and the United States into an open conflict. If Iran were a state acting according to purely pragmatic logic, far from the revolutionary religious dimension, relations with Israel and the United States could have developed in the pattern of the pre-Shah relations, and religious doctrine has become a fundamental element in the current conflict.

February 28, 2026, marks a new turning point, as a war on Iran began with the assassination of Supreme Leader Khamenei, opening up files of internal and regional conflict. Some suggest that the military and political strategy towards Iran carries implicit messages that go beyond mere traditional military conflict. The failure to directly target the Iranian president, while focusing on senior religious figures such as the Supreme Leader, may reflect an attempt to weaken the religious dimension in the structure of the Iranian regime, without affecting the executive structure of the state. From this perspective, it can be understood that the goal is not only to confront Iran as a state, but to confront the religious ideological project that has been formed since the Islamic Revolution, and to try to limit its influence internally and externally, including in its policies towards the region and the Palestinian issue.

In light of this, some observers raise a broader question regarding the future of this relationship: Can the nature of the conflict between Iran on the one hand, and Israel and the United States on the other, change if Iran undergoes political transformations that redefine the state's role and its ideological identity? Some believe that any deep transformation in the structure of the Iranian political system could open the door to a reformulation of regional relations, including the relationship with Israel and the United States.

However, such scenarios remain within the framework of political assumptions, because the reality of the Middle East shows that conflicts there are rarely explained by only one factor. Ideology, strategic interests, and regional balances all intertwine in shaping state policies.

Therefore, understanding the relationship between Iran, Israel, and the United States requires going beyond simplistic interpretations that reduce the conflict to a single religious or political dimension. The more likely truth is that this enmity was formed through a complex interaction between ideology and interest, between the revolutionary nature of the Iranian regime, and regional and international power balances.

At the heart of this equation, the Palestinian issue remains strongly present, as a liberation issue for many, and a political and strategic tool for the Iranian regime to enhance its regional legitimacy, making it an inseparable center from reading the roots of enmity between Iran on the one hand, and Israel and the United States on the other.