Iraq-Iran War: Unpacking The Victor & Lasting Impact

Aditya Considine 21 Jun 2025

The question of "who won the Iraq-Iran War" is far more complex than a simple declaration of victory. Lasting eight brutal years from 1980 to 1988, this conflict, often dubbed the First Persian Gulf War, was one of the 20th century's longest and deadliest conventional wars. It reshaped the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East, leaving millions dead or wounded, and its reverberations continue to be felt today.

Understanding the true victor requires looking beyond military outcomes to the long-term strategic, political, and economic consequences for both nations and the broader region. While neither side achieved a decisive military victory, the war's aftermath significantly altered the balance of power, influencing regional dynamics for decades to come.

Table of Contents

The Seeds of Conflict: Why the Iraq-Iran War Began
The Initial Blitz: Iraq's Early Gains
Iran's Unyielding Resolve: The Tide Turns
A Grueling Stalemate: Five Years of Attrition
The Elusive Victory: Who Truly Won the Iraq-Iran War?
- Military Standstill, Political Gains
- The Cost of Conflict: A Pyrrhic Outcome
The Aftermath: Reshaping the Persian Gulf
- Iran's Regional Ascendancy
- Iraq's Internal Struggles
From Adversaries to Uneasy Neighbors: Iraq-Iran Relations Today
Lessons Learned and Unlearned

The Seeds of Conflict: Why the Iraq-Iran War Began

The roots of the Iraq-Iran War were deeply embedded in a complex tapestry of historical grievances, territorial disputes, and ideological clashes. For decades, the two nations had a contentious relationship, marked by disagreements over the Shatt al-Arab waterway, a vital artery for oil exports and trade. However, the immediate catalyst for the war was the Iranian Revolution of 1979, which fundamentally altered the regional balance of power and introduced a potent ideological dimension to the rivalry. **The war began when Iraq, under dictator Saddam Hussein, invaded Iran under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.** This invasion, launched on September 22, 1980, was not a sudden impulse but the culmination of escalating tensions. Saddam Hussein, driven by ambitions to establish Iraq as the dominant power in the Persian Gulf, viewed the newly revolutionary Iran as vulnerable and chaotic. He sought to reclaim disputed territories, particularly the entire Shatt al-Arab, and to prevent the spread of Iran's revolutionary Shi'ite ideology to Iraq's own Shi'ite majority population. **It began when Iraq invaded Iran on 22 September 1980, after a long history of border disputes and after Iran demanded the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime.** The demand for regime change from Tehran was a direct challenge to Baghdad's sovereignty, providing Saddam with a pretext for military action. He miscalculated Iran's resilience and the unifying power of its revolutionary fervor, believing a swift victory was achievable.

The Initial Blitz: Iraq's Early Gains

Saddam Hussein's strategy relied heavily on the element of surprise and the perceived disarray within Iran's military following the revolution. Many of Iran's experienced officers had been purged, and its armed forces were weakened by sanctions and internal strife. **Iraq invaded Iran by surprise in September 1980**, launching a full-scale ground and air assault across the shared border. The initial thrust was rapid and effective. **Iraq won a few early victories**, quickly capturing key border towns and strategic areas in the oil-rich Khuzestan province. Iraqi forces advanced deep into Iranian territory, seizing cities like Khorramshahr and besieging Abadan. Saddam's objective was to inflict a decisive blow, force Iran to negotiate a favorable peace treaty, and solidify Iraq's position as the regional hegemon. The world watched, many expecting a quick Iraqi triumph, given Iran's internal turmoil and the international isolation it faced. However, this early success masked a deeper reality: Iran, despite its internal struggles, was far from defeated.

Iran's Unyielding Resolve: The Tide Turns

The initial Iraqi invasion, rather than fracturing Iran, served to galvanize its population and strengthen the revolutionary government's resolve. The call to defend the homeland against an external aggressor resonated deeply, unifying disparate factions under the banner of national and religious duty. **However, Iran did not give up as Saddam Hussein had expected.** The revolutionary guards (Pasdaran) and Basij volunteer forces, though initially poorly equipped, demonstrated fierce determination and an unwavering commitment to martyrdom. Under the spiritual and political leadership of Ayatollah Khomeini, Iran mobilized its population for a protracted struggle. **Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa declaring that the war must be won by March**, a clear signal of Iran's absolute commitment to victory, regardless of the cost. This religious decree transformed the conflict into a holy war (jihad) for many Iranians, inspiring immense sacrifices. Slowly but surely, Iran began to push back. Utilizing human wave attacks, guerrilla tactics, and a renewed sense of purpose, Iranian forces began to reclaim lost territory. **Then Iranian forces pushed into Iraq**, crossing the international border in 1982, signaling a dramatic shift in the war's trajectory. This counter-offensive not only recaptured Iranian soil but also took the fight directly to Iraqi territory, turning Saddam's invasion into a defensive struggle for his own regime.

A Grueling Stalemate: Five Years of Attrition

After Iran's successful counter-offensives and the push into Iraqi territory, the nature of the Iraq-Iran War fundamentally changed. What began as a swift invasion morphed into a brutal, prolonged war of attrition. **For the next five years, the two sides were evenly matched**, locked in a deadly stalemate that resembled the trench warfare of World War I. Both armies dug in along fortified lines, engaging in costly frontal assaults, artillery duels, and chemical weapon attacks. The war became a test of endurance, with both nations pouring immense resources and human lives into the conflict. Iran, with its larger population, relied on human wave assaults, often involving young, ideologically motivated volunteers, to overwhelm Iraqi defenses. Iraq, in turn, utilized its superior firepower, including chemical weapons (like mustard gas and nerve agents, often supplied by international partners), to repel these attacks and inflict heavy casualties. Cities on both sides, particularly Basra in Iraq and Abadan in Iran, became targets in the "War of the Cities," subjected to missile attacks and aerial bombardments. The economic lifelines of both nations were also targeted in the "Tanker War," as each side attempted to disrupt the other's oil exports in the Persian Gulf. This phase of the conflict was characterized by immense suffering, with millions of casualties and widespread destruction, pushing both economies to the brink. Despite the horrific toll, neither side could achieve a decisive breakthrough, leading to a prolonged and agonizing deadlock.

The Elusive Victory: Who Truly Won the Iraq-Iran War?

The question of "who won the Iraq-Iran War" is contentious precisely because there was no clear-cut military victory for either side. The war ended in August 1988 with a UN-brokered ceasefire (UN Security Council Resolution 598), which was accepted by both parties, effectively reverting to the pre-war borders. This outcome, after eight years of bloodshed, suggests a military stalemate. However, to truly understand **how Iran won the Iraq War** in a broader sense, one must analyze the strategic and geopolitical outcomes that emerged from the ashes of the conflict.

Military Standstill, Political Gains

Militarily, the war concluded with a draw. Neither Iraq nor Iran managed to achieve their primary war aims. Iraq failed to annex the Shatt al-Arab or overthrow the Iranian revolutionary government, and Iran failed to depose Saddam Hussein's regime or export its revolution to Iraq. The lines of control at the time of the ceasefire were largely the same as they were before the invasion, indicating a tactical deadlock. However, the political and strategic consequences painted a different picture. For Iran, merely surviving the invasion and pushing back Iraqi forces, despite being isolated and facing a well-armed adversary supported by numerous international powers, was a significant political victory. It solidified the legitimacy of the revolutionary government and demonstrated its resilience against external threats. The war, though devastating, arguably strengthened the bond between the Iranian people and the ruling clerical establishment, forging a national identity rooted in resistance.

The Cost of Conflict: A Pyrrhic Outcome

Regardless of who "won" in a geopolitical sense, the human and economic costs for both nations were catastrophic. Estimates vary, but the war resulted in an estimated 1 to 2 million casualties, including hundreds of thousands dead, on both sides. Millions more were displaced or injured. Both economies were devastated, with infrastructure destroyed and development severely set back. The war left a legacy of trauma, unexploded ordnance, and a generation marked by conflict. For Iraq, the war plunged the nation into massive debt, primarily to Gulf Arab states. This financial burden, coupled with Saddam Hussein's unyielding ambition, directly contributed to his subsequent decision to invade Kuwait in 1990, setting the stage for the First Gulf War (1990-1991) and the subsequent interventions that would ultimately lead to his downfall. In this regard, the Iraq-Iran War was a precursor to further instability in the region, rather than a definitive resolution.

The Aftermath: Reshaping the Persian Gulf

The true long-term answer to **who won the Iraq-Iran War** lies in the profound geopolitical shifts that occurred in its wake. The conflict did not bring stability or democracy to the region; instead, it exacerbated existing tensions and created new ones.

Iran's Regional Ascendancy

**Instead, the Iraq War has unleashed a new wave of sectarian hatred and upset the Persian Gulf’s strategic balance, helping Iran consolidate its role as the dominant regional power.** This is perhaps the most significant outcome that points towards Iran's long-term strategic "win." While militarily exhausted, Iran emerged from the war with its revolutionary government intact and its ideological commitment undiminished. The subsequent collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime in 2003, largely due to external intervention, removed Iran's primary regional rival. This created a power vacuum that Iran skillfully exploited, extending its influence across the Levant and into Iraq itself, largely through proxy groups and political alliances. The sectarian hatred unleashed by the war, particularly the Sunni-Shi'ite divide, played into Iran's hands, allowing it to cultivate alliances with Shi'ite communities and movements across the region.

Iraq's Internal Struggles

In stark contrast, Iraq's post-war trajectory was one of continuous decline and instability. **Iraq did not become a beacon of democracy, nor did it create a domino effect that toppled other dictatorial regimes in the Arab world.** Saddam Hussein remained in power, but his regime was weakened by debt, international isolation, and the immense human cost of the war. His subsequent invasion of Kuwait led to devastating sanctions and military defeats, culminating in the 2003 invasion that ended his rule. The removal of Saddam, while initially welcomed by some, ultimately plunged Iraq into a prolonged period of sectarian violence, insurgency, and political fragmentation. The dream of a democratic Iraq replacing dictatorial regimes never materialized; instead, the country became a battleground for internal and external forces, struggling to maintain its sovereignty and stability. The legacy of the Iraq-Iran War, coupled with subsequent conflicts, left Iraq deeply scarred and vulnerable, allowing its former adversary, Iran, to gain significant leverage within its borders.

From Adversaries to Uneasy Neighbors: Iraq-Iran Relations Today

More than four decades after the beginning of a dreadful war that shaped the lives and worldview of a generation, Iraq and Iran seem to have put the past behind them and moved to a new relationship. This is a remarkable transformation, given the depth of animosity and the scale of destruction wrought by the eight-year conflict. Today, the two nations share significant economic ties, cultural exchanges, and, crucially, a shared Shi'ite religious heritage that often transcends historical grievances. Pilgrimages between the two countries are common, and trade flourishes. However, this newfound relationship is not without its complexities and underlying tensions. **But the road ahead is not without landmines.** The balance of power is too lopsided in Iran’s favor to allow for a healthy alliance. Iran's significant influence within Iraq's political and security structures, often through allied Shi'ite militias and political parties, is a source of concern for many Iraqis who fear a loss of sovereignty. Furthermore, **Iran's continued estrangement from the US makes Baghdad's** position precarious, as Iraq attempts to balance its crucial relationship with its powerful neighbor against its desire for stability and international cooperation, particularly with Western powers. Iraq often finds itself caught between the competing interests of Tehran and Washington, making its foreign policy a delicate balancing act. While the overt hostilities of the 1980s are long past, the shadow of the war and the current power dynamics ensure that the relationship remains complex and fraught with potential challenges.

Lessons Learned and Unlearned

The Iraq-Iran War stands as a stark reminder of the devastating consequences of unresolved disputes, ideological clashes, and unchecked ambition. It demonstrated the futility of military solutions in achieving lasting political objectives when met with fierce national resolve. The war also highlighted the dangers of international indifference or opportunistic support for belligerents, which often prolongs conflict and exacerbates suffering. For the international community, the war underscored the urgent need for effective diplomacy and conflict resolution mechanisms. For the region, it taught a bitter lesson about the destructive power of sectarianism and the enduring impact of geopolitical imbalances. While Iraq and Iran have moved towards a new, albeit complex, relationship, the scars of the war remain. The question of "who won the Iraq-Iran War" ultimately reveals a tragedy where both sides paid an unimaginable price, and the only clear victor was the enduring instability and shifting power dynamics that continue to define the Middle East.

Conclusion

The Iraq-Iran War, a conflict of immense scale and suffering, defies a simple answer to the question of "who won." Militarily, it was largely a stalemate, ending with a return to pre-war borders. However, in the long game of regional power and influence, the aftermath of the war, coupled with subsequent events, undeniably allowed Iran to consolidate its role as a dominant regional power, while Iraq descended into prolonged instability. The war's legacy is not one of triumph for either side, but rather a tragic testament to the devastating human and economic costs of conflict and the unpredictable ways in which wars can reshape geopolitical landscapes for generations. We hope this deep dive into the Iraq-Iran War has provided you with a clearer understanding of its complexities and lasting impact. What are your thoughts on who truly "won" this protracted conflict? Share your perspectives in the comments below, and don't forget to share this article with others interested in understanding the intricate history of the Middle East. For more insights into regional conflicts and their historical contexts, explore our other articles on international relations and geopolitical analysis.

History of Syria | Britannica

Iraq - United States Department of State

Travel to Iraq in 2025: Federal Iraq + Kurdistan

HeadlineSphere