Strategy or ideology? Why Iran sees Israel as an enemy without sharing a border

By Hemantkumar Shah*

At a time when tensions in repeatedly escalate into open confrontation, the often appears puzzling at first glance. Unlike many enduring conflicts in the region, this is not a dispute rooted in shared borders or direct territorial claims. Instead, it is shaped by ideology, geopolitics, and competing visions of regional influence. Understanding why Iran positions itself so sharply against Israel requires revisiting history, geography, and the political choices that have defined their relationship over the decades.

Until 1979, Iran maintained cordial relations with Israel. It was only after the brought the Ayatollahs to power that Israel came to be viewed as an adversary. Geographically, Iran does not even share a border with Israel; the two are separated by countries including Jordan, which itself signed a peace agreement with Israel in 1994 under King Hussein. Likewise, Egypt, which does border Israel, entered into a peace agreement as early as 1979 between and Menachem Begin.

The role of the United States, particularly under Bill Clinton, was crucial in facilitating peace efforts between Israel and its Arab neighbors, although recognition through the did not extend to all involved. The tragic assassinations of leaders such as and Anwar Sadat underscore the deep divisions within their own societies over reconciliation with Israel.

Despite having no direct territorial dispute, Iran considers Israel an enemy largely on ideological grounds, positioning itself as a defender of Palestinians. In this pursuit, it has supported groups like and Hezbollah with funding and weapons—organizations that actively confront Israel. This policy is not merely strategic but also rhetorical. Former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad notoriously questioned Israel’s right to exist and made controversial statements denying aspects of the .

The hostility is not limited to individuals but is embedded within Iran’s political establishment, including its supreme leadership, which has consistently rejected the legitimacy of Israel as a state. This stance contrasts sharply with the trajectory of the Palestine Liberation Organization under Yasser Arafat, who accepted Israel’s existence and entered into the with Yitzhak Rabin. Alongside Shimon Peres, they were jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize—an acknowledgment that even long-standing adversaries could find common ground.

Today, concerns about further heighten tensions. Israel perceives Iran’s potential acquisition of nuclear weapons as an existential threat, and this fear underpins the strong backing Israel receives from the United States. The strategic closeness between the two countries often leads to the characterization of Israel as America’s “51st state,” reflecting the depth of their alliance. Whether under Donald Trump or any other American leader, support for Israel’s security remains a consistent pillar of U.S. foreign policy, particularly in the aftermath of conflicts such as the Gaza war triggered by Hamas attacks.

Iran’s posture suggests that it has assumed, unilaterally, the role of championing the Palestinian cause in the name of Islamic solidarity. Yet this claim to leadership is contested, especially when even —long considered a center of Islamic influence—has shown willingness to normalize relations with Israel, a process disrupted by major escalations like Hamas’s attacks. Iran’s association with such groups has, in effect, contributed to its own strategic isolation and escalating conflicts.

A final distinction is worth noting. In both the United States and Israel, public opposition to war is visible and vocal. The question remains whether similar dissent can be openly expressed within Iran.

---

*Senior acedamic based in Ahmedabad

Neville Cardus: The man who turned cricket writing into poetry

By Harsh Thakor* Neville Cardus was one of the most remarkable literary figures of the twentieth century. A prolific English writer and critic, he achieved distinction in two vastly different fields: cricket and classical music. Entirely self-taught, Cardus rose from humble beginnings to become both the cricket correspondent and chief music critic of The Manchester Guardian . His achievements in these contrasting disciplines earned him widespread acclaim and established him as one of the foremost critics of his generation. In February 2025, the cricketing and literary world marked the fiftieth anniversary of his death, which occurred in February 1975.

Counterview

Search This Blog