Iran Vs. Israel: Unpacking Decades Of Conflict & Escalation

Prof. Waino Jacobi PhD 18 Jun 2025

The Middle East has long been a crucible of geopolitical tension, and few rivalries are as deeply entrenched or as potentially volatile as the ongoing struggle between Iran and Israel. This isn't a new phenomenon; the roots of this aggression can be traced decades back, starting from 1979, evolving from a cold standoff into a series of overt and covert confrontations that now threaten to ignite a wider regional war. Understanding why is Iran fighting with Israel requires a deep dive into historical grievances, ideological clashes, and strategic imperatives that have shaped their fraught relationship.

What began as a cold standoff rooted in nuclear ambitions and ideological rivalry now threatens to ignite the Middle East — and the world is watching. Tensions between Iran and Israel have erupted into open conflict, marked by airstrikes, drone attacks, and fears of a wider regional war. This article aims to shed light on the complex layers of this conflict, drawing on key events and declarations that define their enmity.

The Deep Historical Roots of Enmity
The Nuclear Standoff: Israel's Existential Fear
- Iran's Perceived Nuclear Acceleration
- US Negotiations and Israeli Strikes
Proxy Conflicts: The Battle for Regional Influence
- Hezbollah's Role and the 2006 War
- Iran's Broader Network of Allies
Escalation to Direct Confrontations
Israel's Stated Goals and Defensive Posture
Iran's Ideological Stance and Retaliation
The United States: Ally, Mediator, and Threat
The Current State of Escalation and Future Fears

The Deep Historical Roots of Enmity

The relationship between Iran and Israel was not always one of animosity. Prior to the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, the two nations maintained diplomatic and economic ties. However, the revolution fundamentally reshaped Iran's foreign policy, transforming it into an Islamic republic with a strong anti-Zionist ideology. Since then, Iran and Israel have been enemies for the past few decades, with Iran saying it wants to wipe Israel off the map. This declaration is not merely rhetorical; it underpins much of Iran's regional strategy and its justification for supporting various militant groups. The ideological chasm that opened up post-1979 laid the groundwork for the persistent animosity we observe today, defining the core of why is Iran fighting with Israel.

While in recent weeks, the fraught relations between Israel, Iran and militant group Hezbollah have come to a head, the roots of this aggression can be traced decades back, starting from 1979. This historical context is crucial for understanding the deep-seated mistrust and animosity that fuels the ongoing conflict. It’s not just about recent events, but a culmination of decades of ideological divergence and strategic competition for regional dominance. This long-standing enmity means that every action by one side is viewed through a lens of historical grievance and perceived existential threat by the other.

The Nuclear Standoff: Israel's Existential Fear

At the very core of the current conflict lies Iran's nuclear program. Israel views a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat, a sentiment that has driven much of its military and diplomatic strategy. Israel's declared goals are to dismantle Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities, which are seen as existential dangers for Israel. This fear is not unfounded from Israel's perspective, given Iran's stated intentions and its ongoing development of nuclear technology. The pursuit of nuclear capabilities by Iran has been a consistent flashpoint, leading to a series of covert operations and overt threats from Israel, intensifying the question of why is Iran fighting with Israel.

The development of long-range ballistic missiles by Iran, capable of carrying various payloads, further exacerbates Israel's concerns. These capabilities, combined with Iran's stated ideological opposition to Israel, create a perceived direct threat that Israel feels compelled to neutralize. This has led to a proactive stance, where Israel is willing to take preemptive action to prevent what it considers an unacceptable level of risk. The nuclear issue, therefore, isn't just about proliferation; it's about survival for Israel.

Iran's Perceived Nuclear Acceleration

Israel's position on this is that it has no choice, that it believes in the last few months Iran was accelerating towards building a nuclear weapon, and that talks aimed at curbing Iran's nuclear program were insufficient. This perception of accelerated progress has often been cited by Israeli officials as a primary justification for their preemptive actions. The urgency conveyed by Israel suggests a belief that diplomatic solutions alone cannot contain what they perceive as an imminent threat. This belief often translates into direct military actions, such as airstrikes on suspected nuclear facilities or related infrastructure, which further escalate tensions and contribute to the cycle of conflict. The race against what Israel perceives as a ticking nuclear clock is a major driver of its aggressive posture.

US Negotiations and Israeli Strikes

The strikes took place despite negotiations between Iran and Israel’s principal ally, the United States, over the future of Tehran’s nuclear programme, leading many to suspect that the threat was more immediate or that Israel felt compelled to act independently. This highlights a complex dynamic where Israel, while relying on US support, is also willing to undertake unilateral actions when it perceives its core security interests are at stake. The timing of these strikes, often coinciding with diplomatic efforts, underscores the deep distrust and the differing approaches to managing the Iranian nuclear file between allies. It also suggests Israel's lack of faith in the effectiveness of diplomatic solutions alone, pushing it towards military options even when international talks are underway. This divergence in strategy between allies adds another layer of complexity to the conflict.

Proxy Conflicts: The Battle for Regional Influence

Beyond the nuclear issue, the rivalry between Iran and Israel plays out extensively through proxy conflicts across the Middle East. Iran has strategically cultivated a "Shiite Crescent" of influence, supporting various non-state actors and governments that align with its regional agenda. These proxies often serve as a means for Iran to project power and pressure Israel without engaging in direct, all-out warfare, though the lines are increasingly blurring. This network of alliances and support is a critical component of why is Iran fighting with Israel indirectly, allowing Tehran to extend its reach and challenge Israeli security without direct military confrontation, at least historically.

Iran's strategy involves leveraging these proxies to create multiple fronts of pressure against Israel, from Lebanon in the north to Gaza in the south, and potentially through Syria and Iraq. This allows Iran to maintain a degree of deniability while still achieving its strategic objectives of containing Israeli influence and challenging its security. For Israel, these proxies represent a direct threat to its borders and civilian populations, necessitating a constant state of vigilance and frequent military interventions to degrade their capabilities.

Hezbollah's Role and the 2006 War

Hezbollah, a Lebanese militant group and political party backed by Iran, Israel’s chief regional rival, rose to regional prominence after fighting a devastating month-long war with Israel in 2006. This conflict demonstrated Hezbollah's significant military capabilities, largely augmented by Iranian funding, training, and weaponry. Hezbollah acts as a formidable deterrent on Israel's northern border, possessing a vast arsenal of rockets and missiles capable of striking deep into Israeli territory. The ongoing tension with Hezbollah is a constant reminder of Iran's reach and its capacity to threaten Israel through its proxies. The 2006 war, in particular, solidified Hezbollah's image as a formidable non-state actor and a key component of Iran's regional strategy, showcasing the effectiveness of proxy warfare in challenging a superior military force.

Iran's Broader Network of Allies

While Hezbollah is perhaps the most prominent, Iran's network extends to other groups in Gaza (like Hamas and Islamic Jihad), Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. These groups receive varying degrees of support from Tehran, enabling Iran to exert influence and challenge Israeli security across multiple fronts. Israel, in turn, conducts frequent airstrikes in Syria and other areas to prevent the transfer of advanced weaponry to these groups and to degrade their capabilities, further fueling the regional conflict. This complex web of alliances and interventions means that a conflict in one part of the Middle East can quickly ripple through the entire region, pulling in various actors and escalating tensions. The constant battle against Iran's "axis of resistance" is a daily reality for Israeli defense forces.

Escalation to Direct Confrontations

What began as a "cold standoff" or "shadow war" has increasingly escalated into direct military confrontations. Tensions between Iran and Israel have erupted into open conflict, marked by airstrikes, drone attacks, and fears of a wider regional war. This shift from indirect skirmishes to direct exchanges of fire represents a dangerous new phase in their rivalry. Israel and Iran had also exchanged missile, drone, and air strikes twice last year, in their first direct confrontation ever. And prior to that, they had been engaged in what many observers called a "war between the wars," involving cyberattacks, assassinations, and sabotage.

The recent intensification has seen Israel initiated an air campaign against Iran's nuclear and military facilities. The conflict escalated with Iran retaliating against Israeli targets. These direct exchanges, though limited in scope compared to a full-scale war, signal a dangerous erosion of the traditional boundaries of engagement. Israel strikes Iran's nuclear sites and military leadership, while Trump warns of 'even more brutal' attacks. This cycle of action and reaction elevates the risk of miscalculation and broader conflict, pushing the region closer to an all-out confrontation. The shift to direct attacks signifies a heightened level of risk and a willingness to cross previously observed red lines.

Israel's Stated Goals and Defensive Posture

Israel's actions are consistently framed as defensive, aimed at neutralizing what it perceives as immediate and long-term threats to its security. As mentioned, Israel's declared goals are to dismantle Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities, which are seen as existential dangers for Israel. This includes not only preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons but also degrading its ability to deliver them via advanced missiles. Furthermore, Israel seeks to curb Iran's regional entrenchment and its support for hostile proxies on Israel's borders, viewing these as direct threats to its sovereignty and the safety of its citizens.

The development and deployment of advanced defensive systems like the Iron Dome are crucial to Israel's strategy. Israel’s Iron Dome is being severely tested by Iran’s missile barrages, but it has been able to lean on its principal ally, the United States, to provide assistance. This reliance on advanced technology and international support underscores the severe nature of the threats Israel faces and its determination to protect its citizens. This defensive posture is central to understanding why is Iran fighting with Israel from Israel's viewpoint; it is presented as a necessary response to ongoing and escalating threats rather than an act of aggression.

Iran's Ideological Stance and Retaliation

From Iran's perspective, its actions are rooted in revolutionary ideology, national sovereignty, and a desire to challenge what it views as Israeli aggression and Western dominance in the region. Iran's long-standing rhetoric of wanting to "wipe Israel off the map" is often interpreted as a fundamental ideological commitment, though some analysts argue it's also a strategic tool to rally support and deter Israeli actions. The targeted strikes by Israel have killed key generals and top nuclear scientists, in addition to dozens of reported civilian casualties, which Iran views as acts of state terrorism and violations of its sovereignty.

These attacks fuel Iran's resolve to retaliate and reinforce its narrative of being a victim of Israeli-American aggression. The conflict with Israel could be the last for Iran’s supreme leader, suggesting that the stakes are incredibly high for the Iranian regime, viewing this as a struggle for survival and legitimacy. Iran's retaliatory actions are often designed to demonstrate its capabilities and deter further Israeli strikes, even if they risk further escalation. For Iran, resisting Israel and its allies is a core tenet of its revolutionary identity and a means of asserting its regional leadership against perceived Western and Zionist hegemony.

The United States: Ally, Mediator, and Threat

The United States plays a multifaceted and often contradictory role in the Iran-Israel conflict. As Israel's principal ally, the US provides significant military and financial aid, including support for systems like the Iron Dome. This alliance is a cornerstone of Israeli security. However, the US also engages in direct negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program, sometimes to Israel's dismay. President Donald Trump threatened Iran's nuclear program, signaling a more aggressive stance from Washington, which at times aligned with Israel's hardline approach.

The US withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) under Trump and the subsequent "maximum pressure" campaign exacerbated tensions and arguably emboldened both Iran and Israel to take more assertive actions. While the US seeks to prevent a wider war, its deep involvement and differing policy approaches create a complex environment where its actions can both stabilize and destabilize the region. The big fear is Iran starts striking targets in the Persian Gulf, a region vital for global oil supplies, which would inevitably draw the US into a larger conflict, highlighting the immense global stakes. The US position is a delicate balancing act, trying to support its ally while avoiding a direct military confrontation with Iran that could have catastrophic global consequences.

The Current State of Escalation and Future Fears

In recent weeks, the fraught relations between Israel, Iran, and militant group Hezbollah have come to a head. This marks a significant intensification of a conflict whose roots can be traced decades back, starting from 1979. Iran and Israel in major conflict, with Israel attacking Iran and declaring emergency, and Iranian TV showing bomb damage, paints a grim picture of the current reality. The direct exchange of missile, drone, and air strikes, a relatively new phenomenon in this long-standing rivalry, signifies a dangerous shift from the "shadow war" to overt hostilities.

The immediate fear is a full-blown regional war that could draw in other global powers. The long-term implications include further destabilization of the Middle East, a potential nuclear arms race, and immense humanitarian costs. The question of why is Iran fighting with Israel is no longer just academic; it's a pressing concern for global security. The world is watching, hoping that diplomatic efforts can somehow de-escalate the situation before it spirals out of control, but the deep-seated ideological and strategic grievances make a swift resolution seem unlikely. The current environment is characterized by high alert, rapid retaliation, and the constant threat of a miscalculation triggering a wider, devastating conflict.

In conclusion, the conflict between Iran and Israel is a multifaceted struggle rooted in historical shifts, profound ideological differences, and clashing strategic ambitions, primarily centered around Iran's nuclear program and regional influence. From Israel's existential fears to Iran's revolutionary goals, and the complex interplay with international actors like the United States, every element contributes to a volatile dynamic. The escalation from a cold standoff to direct military exchanges underscores the urgency of understanding this rivalry.

What are your thoughts on the future of this conflict? Do you believe a diplomatic solution is still possible, or are we headed for a wider regional war? Share your perspectives in the comments below, and don't forget to share this article to spread awareness about this critical geopolitical issue. For more insights into Middle Eastern affairs, explore our other articles on regional security dynamics.

Why you should start with why

Why Text Question · Free image on Pixabay

UTILITY COMPANIES MAKE MISTAKES - WHY? - Pacific Utility Auditing

HeadlineSphere

Iran Vs. Israel: Unpacking Decades Of Conflict & Escalation

Table of Contents