From Allies to Adversaries: The current escalation between Iran and Israel cannot be understood without tracing its historical foundations. Contrary to popular belief, the two states were not always enemies. In fact, before 1979, Iran and Israel maintained cooperative diplomatic and economic relations under the rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. This alliance was largely shaped by shared strategic interests and mutual alignment with the United States during the Cold War era (Cleveland & Bunton, 2016).
This relationship fundamentally changed with the Iranian Revolution of 1979, a pivotal moment that reshaped not only Iran’s domestic political structure but also its foreign policy orientation. Led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the revolution replaced a pro-Western monarchy with an Islamic Republic grounded in anti-imperialist and anti-Zionist ideology (Abrahamian, 2008). Israel, once a partner, became redefined as an illegitimate state, and opposition to it became a central tenet of Iran’s foreign policy.
The ideological shift was not merely rhetorical. Iran began actively supporting groups opposed to Israel, including Hezbollah in Lebanon and later Hamas in Gaza. This support—financial, military, and logistical—transformed the Iran–Israel conflict into a broader regional struggle characterized by proxy warfare (Byman, 2011). These indirect confrontations allowed both sides to avoid full-scale war while maintaining persistent hostility.
Another critical dimension of this rivalry is Iran’s nuclear program. While Iran insists its nuclear ambitions are peaceful, aimed at energy production and scientific advancement, Israel views them as an existential threat. This concern has driven Israeli military doctrine for decades, leading to covert operations, cyberattacks, and targeted strikes aimed at delaying Iran’s nuclear capabilities (Kahl et al., 2012). The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015 temporarily eased tensions, but its fragility underscored the deep mistrust between the parties.
The recent escalation, including high-level assassinations and direct strikes, marks a dangerous shift from proxy conflict to overt confrontation. Such actions signal a breakdown in the unwritten rules that previously governed their engagement. Scholars warn that when rival states move from indirect to direct conflict, the risks of rapid escalation increase significantly (Walt, 1987).
Importantly, the Iran–Israel conflict cannot be viewed in isolation. It is deeply embedded in a broader geopolitical framework involving the United States, regional Arab powers, and non-state actors. The U.S., as Israel’s primary ally, has consistently provided military and diplomatic support, further complicating the conflict dynamics (Mearsheimer & Walt, 2007).
In conclusion, the hostility between Iran and Israel is the product of historical transformations, ideological divergence, and strategic competition. The events unfolding today are not sudden anomalies but rather the culmination of decades-long tensions. Understanding this history is essential for any meaningful discussion about peace or further escalation.
A practical solution to the conflict between Iran and Israel lies in restoring controlled diplomacy and reducing confrontation. Reviving a strengthened version of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, supported by the United States and neutral mediators, could help rebuild trust through nuclear transparency, reduced proxy involvement, and gradual de-escalation measures. Ultimately, both sides need to shift from ideological conflict toward pragmatic coexistence, recognizing that long-term security depends on dialogue and restraint rather than continued escalation.
Dr. Djuwari is a scholar who received an Award of Peace and Humanity from the World United Humanitarian Organization (UHO), based in the UK, in 2026. The President of the International Association of Scholarly Publishers, Editors, and Reviewers (IASPER) lives in Surabaya, Indonesia
###
