TRENDS Research & Advisory, in partnership with the Gulf Forum for Security and Peace, organized a symposium – Post-War Iran: Domestic Transformations and the Future of External Relations – featuring an elite group of international experts and researchers. The symposium explored the security, political, economic, and social implications of the 12-day war, as well as its impact on Iran’s domestic affairs and on Gulf and regional security.
Anticipating Scenarios
The symposium opened with welcoming remarks by Dr. Mohammed Abdullah Al Ali, CEO of TRENDS Research & Advisory, who stressed that the first direct Israel-Iran war was an actual test of the Gulf security system, especially as its flames reached the sisterly State of Qatar. Dr. Al Ali emphasized that renewed tensions over Iran’s nuclear issue, the return of international sanctions, and Israel’s threats to block Tehran from rebuilding its nuclear capabilities all increase the possibility of escalation. This, he argued, calls for in-depth and forward-looking studies from research centers, with scenario-building and the provision of alternatives that strengthen Gulf security.
Delivering a keynote address, Dr. Fahad Al-Shelaimi, security and strategic expert and Chairman of the Gulf Forum for Security and Peace, noted that Gulf Arab states are keen on maintaining good diplomatic relations with Iran, their neighboring country. However, he cautioned that there are clear indicators of threat that demand vigilance.
Dr. Al-Shelaimi explained that the recent military confrontation between Iran and Israel exposed significant weaknesses in Iran’s defense capabilities. Israel conducted more than 1,200 airstrikes over twelve days without losing a single aircraft, revealing the fragility of Iran’s air defense systems. He added that Iran possesses long-range missiles and attack drones, capabilities that cannot be described as defensive, in addition to an obscure nuclear program that raises environmental and security concerns for neighboring countries.
Dr. Al-Shelaimi noted that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard employs a more escalatory discourse than the country’s Foreign Ministry. He highlighted Iran’s interventions across the region through its support for armed groups in Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Gaza. Meanwhile, Iran’s struggling economy – due to sanctions, inflation, a weak currency, and a brain drain – is pushing Tehran to seek regional pressure tools, such as threatening international navigation through the Strait of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandab. These risks, he warned, endanger many countries and global trade, causing direct economic losses; Egypt and others, for example, have lost billions of dollars due to Houthi attacks.
Dr. Al-Shelaimi explained that Iran’s strategy is built around creating “defensive belts” through local proxies such as Hezbollah and the Houthis. However, recent Israeli strikes have weakened these arms of influence and slowed down Iran’s nuclear program by targeting infrastructure and scientists. He concluded by stressing that what is needed is not hostility toward Iran, but balanced cooperation based on mutual understanding and a willingness to meet halfway.
Under the Spotlight
Mohammed Al-Salmi, Senior Researcher and Head of Research Sector at TRENDS, moderated the discussion. Dr. Imad Marzouki, Director of Studies and Research Department at the Middle East Center, discussed (via video link) the stability of the Iranian regime after the war. He noted its cohesion despite pressures and assassinations, and highlighted the decisive role of the Revolutionary Guard.
He explained that the Iranian system underwent a fundamental shift in its domestic priorities after the Israel-United States military strikes. These strikes came at a time when the regime was facing a crisis of confidence and rising demands for reform and economic change. But rather than weakening the system, the attack consolidated its internal front. Calls for reform gave way to concerns about security and defense, placing these issues at the forefront of discussion. This shift weakened the reformist movement, which had been gaining traction, while strengthening hardliners, particularly the Revolutionary Guard, which emerged as the true center of power. At the same time, the Supreme Leader’s symbolic authority increased.
Dr. Marzouki added that the strike did not lead to the collapse of the regime, thanks to its tightly interwoven institutional structure, which provided it with flexibility and the ability to absorb shocks and avoid internal rupture. As a result, the Iranian regime emerged more rigid and less pragmatic, increasingly reliant on military power and revolutionary-religious legitimacy for survival. Its discourse shifted to a security and military focus, while new existential threats made the succession of the Supreme Leader an even more pressing issue.
Iranian Diplomacy and Transformation
The symposium also featured Mohammed Khalfan Al-Sawafi, an Emirati writer and researcher in international relations, who focused on Iran’s diplomatic repositioning after the war, and its shift from military setbacks to leveraging symbolic narratives. He argued that Iran’s traditional diplomacy, which is based on patience and betting on its adversaries’ fatigue, failed to read regional shifts or to deal effectively with leaders such as President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu. This failure, he said, compounded the vulnerabilities before the strikes.
Al-Sawafi explained that the regime’s greatest mistake was clinging to ideological thinking rather than adopting political realism and flexibility. This cost it the opportunity to employ soft power, something it had previously used successfully in Europe. He noted that the regime’s rigidity, coupled with its indecision over acquiring nuclear weapons, risks further sanctions and external pressure. This, he argued, makes it imperative for Iran to reorder its priorities and focus on internal challenges, particularly given the significant losses incurred in its regional projects.
Consequences and Their Impact
Shamma Al-Qutba, a Researcher at TRENDS, highlighted the economic and social consequences of sanctions and war, as well as their impact on the stability of Iranian society and the erosion of its middle class. She noted that Iran is now the second most-sanctioned country in the world after Russia, with around 5,500 sanctions targeting mainly oil, banks, and financial institutions, which are the lifelines of the Iranian economy. These sanctions, she said, have had profound economic and social repercussions inside the country.
She added that despite this enormous economic pressure, sanctions have not fundamentally changed Iran’s behavior. It has continued its regional policies and nuclear program, while adopting the “resistance economy” doctrine and seeking alternative trade partners such as China and Russia. Al-Qutba observed that contrary to Western expectations, the Iranian public temporarily rallied behind the regime during its latest confrontation with Israel, despite dire economic conditions.
Shamma Al-Qutba predicted that the newly imposed sanctions would drive further economic decline. While temporary unity prevailed during the military escalation, public support is likely to wane over time as attention shifts back to pressing economic and livelihood challenges.
Declining Influence
Nicholas Lyall, a Senior Researcher at TRENDS, addressed Iran’s regional influence after the war, noting that the conflict exposed fundamental weaknesses in Tehran’s “forward defense” strategy through its so-called “axis of resistance.”
He outlined three key shifts: a worsening economic crisis driven by military escalation; the failure of deterrence, as Iran’s proxies proved unable to prevent or contain the conflict; and growing international isolation that left Iran facing its regional challenges essentially alone. Lyall also highlighted divergences among Iran’s allies: Hezbollah showed only limited engagement, amid internal debate over its dependence on Tehran; Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces maintained strong loyalty to Iran despite being increasingly absorbed into the Iraqi state; while the Houthis are moving toward greater independence by obtaining military support from China and Russia.
A More Defensive Approach
Dr. Serhat Çubukçuoğlu, Senior Researcher and Director of TRENDS’ Turkey Office, contributed remarks titled Transformations in Iran’s Post-War Foreign Policy. He argued that Tehran has shifted to a more defensive and pragmatic approach. However, it continues to rely on traditional deterrence tools such as threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz and supporting regional proxies.
He added that the war reshaped regional security discourse. Gulf states grew more concerned about the targeting of U.S. bases, prompting them to bolster missile defense systems, diversify energy routes, and sign new defense agreements, such as the Saudi-Pakistani pact. Dr. Serhat noted that Turkey capitalized on Iran’s waning influence in Iraq, Syria, and the Caucasus by strengthening its own defense capabilities and regional standing. Meanwhile, Iraq’s “Development Road” project became more viable in the absence of strong Iranian opposition.
He concluded that the 12-day war marked a turning point in Iran’s influence, where its ability to impose a traditional deterrence equation declined, forcing it to adopt a more cautious and pragmatic foreign policy in a changing strategic landscape. Researcher Maryam Salah Al-Junaibi introduced the speakers, underscoring the importance of the symposium in analyzing the current Iranian and international scene.
