L’Iran et ses “proxys” au Moyen-Orient. Les défis de la guerre par procuration
If Iran is a key player in the Middle East, it is in no small part because of its extensive network of armed militia, which it uses as proxies.
This strategy is based on a political, material and sometimes operational support to non-state actors, some of which may have been created by Iran, while others are occasional partners. Since its creation in the 1980’s, the main architect of this strategy is the Quds force, whose task is to coordinate and support those militia’s actions. Moreover, some particularly advanced groups, such as the Lebanese Hezbollah or the Iraqi Badr organization, took an active role in the structuration of the Iranian paramilitary network in the Middle East. After meeting undeniable success in against the Syrian insurgency, in Iraq against the Islamic State, and even in Yemen against the Saudi-led intervention, the “Axis of Resistance” is now facing major challenges: the confrontation with the United States of Donald Trump, but also the threat of a growing political and social unrest, challenging the militia system, in Iran, as well as in countries where these networks are dominant, such as Iraq and Lebanon.
This content is only available in French: L’Iran et ses “proxys” au Moyen-Orient. Les défis de la guerre par procuration.
Available in:
Regions and themes
Share
Morgan PAGLIA
Former Research Fellow, Security Studies Center
Security Studies Center
Heir to a tradition dating back to the founding of Ifri, the Security Studies Center provides public and private decision-makers as well as the general public with the keys to understanding power relations and contemporary modes of conflict as well as those to come. Through its positioning at the juncture of politics and operations, the credibility of its civil-military team and the wide distribution of its publications in French and English, the Center for Security Studies constitutes in the French landscape of think tanks a unique center of research and influence on the national and international defense debate.
Observatory on Future Conflicts
The Observatory of Future Conflicts is a research program carried out by the French Institute of International Relations and the Foundation for Strategic Research on behalf of the three army headquarters aimed at studying developments in tensions and armaments at the horizon 2040 in a transversal perspective, taking into account the issues of each army.
From Corsairs to Private Military Contractors. Nonmilitary Maritime Actors and the Historical Continuities of Naval Warfare
Since late 2023, several Houthi attacks on commercial shipping have involved privately contracted armed teams conducting defensive engagements and coordinating immediate response efforts, often in the relative absence of regular naval forces during the immediate hostilities at sea. These cases highlight a strategic tension that increasingly confronts modern navies. On the one hand, they are expected to conduct persistent, low-intensity maritime security tasks such as counterpiracy, maritime policing, and the protection of commercial shipping. On the other hand, they face renewed pressure to prepare for high-intensity conflict against peer and near-peer adversaries amid the return of great power competition.
Framework Nation: A European Challenge and French Ambition
First appearing in the early 2000s, the framework nation concept follows several distinct rationales, whether it refers to a country assuming the leadership of a military operation, directing a multinational capability project, or commanding a permanent force structure. In every case, the country that takes on this role fully intends to derive from it additional politico-military influence.
The Nuanced Relationship Between Public Opinion and Foreign Policy
Public sentiment is something decision-makers must contend with, especially in democratic states. However, the extent to which public opinion shapes foreign policy varies. Three Council of Councils experts in France, India, and Nigeria reflect on how public opinion does—and sometimes does not—affect foreign policy decisions.
Taking the Pulse: Enough with the Annual NATO Summits, Already?
Over the past ten years, NATO has held almost as many summits as it did during the entirety of the Cold War. Are they still useful, or is it time to stop holding annual meetings?