The collapse of the Bashar al-Assad regime has plunged Iran’s Shiite Crescent strategy, established since the 1979 Islamic Revolution to consolidate regional influence, into a deep crisis. This strategy aimed to create a sphere of influence stretching from Iraq to the Mediterranean, exert pressure on Sunni states, and solidify Iran’s position as a regional power.
The term “Shiite Crescent” was reportedly first coined by King Abdullah II of Jordan in 2004, describing a region from Iran through Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, where Shiite Muslim political and military influence, particularly from Iran, was becoming increasingly prominent. King Abdullah was concerned that Iran was expanding its influence through support for Shiite factions and militias, effectively creating a geopolitical axis of Shiite power in the Middle East, exacerbating the sectarian divide in the region, and contributing to broader Sunni-Shiite tensions.
Fast forward two decades, and the events of 2024, particularly the decapitation of Hezbollah’s top leadership and the fall of the Assad regime, have sparked speculation about whether Iran’s Shiite Crescent strategy is coming to an end. This situation raises a crucial question: Is the collapse of this strategy the beginning of a fundamental shift in the region’s geopolitical landscape, or is it simply another temporary regional upheaval?
Assassinations of Top Figures
The 2020 U.S. assassination of Qassem Soleimani was a major blow to Iran’s regional influence. Soleimani was the founder and maverick behind Iran’s proxy networks across the Middle East, and his death seriously weakened Tehran’sreach. His successor, Ismail Qaani, was nowhere near his predecessors’ capabilities, and many accused him of deliberately weakening the Quds Force and reducing Iran’s influence over its proxy forces. Things were further destabilised by the sudden and mysterious death of former President Ebrahim Raisi in a helicopter crash. Raisi had been a strong advocate for the Shiite Crescent strategy, and his death threw the country’s political future into uncertainty.
The situation got even worse for Iran with the assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in an Israeli strike. The killing of Hassan Nasrallah dealt a severe blow to the Iranian-backed Axis of Resistance, comparable to the impact of Qasem Soleimani’s assassination four years ago. Nasrallah’s leadership was central to Hezbollah’s military and political strength, and his absence weakened the group’s ability to operate effectively in Lebanon and the broader region. Just as Soleimani’s death disrupted Iran’s master plan and the coordination of proxy forces, Nasrallah’s removal exposes the vulnerability of Hezbollah’s infrastructure and threatens to unravel the so-called “axis of resistance” that Iran has worked for decades to consolidate. This loss further complicates Iran’s position in the Middle East and diminishes its influence across the Levant.
On top of that, Israeli operations against Hezbollah’s senior leaders, combined with escalating attacks on the group, have made Hezbollah weaker than ever. On January 9, 2025, Lebanon elected Army Chief Joseph Aoun as president, ending a two-year leadership vacuum and signalling a shift in the country’s foreign policy amid a six-year financial crisis. This election followed Hezbollah’s political and military setbacks, including the death of its leader Hassan Nasrallah and the loss of its ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. According to experts, Aoun’s election, without Iran and Syria’s prior approval, marks a significant moment in Lebanon’s political evolution, showing that Hezbollah no longer dictates the political agenda.
The fall of the Assad regime has effectively cut Hezbollah’s supply routes, further diminishing Iran’s influence in Lebanon. The end of Tehran’s presence in Syria has severed its land connection to Lebanon, removing a key link for maintaining its regional power and influence.
Despite having tens of thousands of fighters in Syria, Iranian-backed Shiite militias did not resist the collapse of the Assad regime. They withdrew without engaging in battle, raising serious questions about the motivation and morale of these troops. Additionally, allegations that some intelligence leaks leading to the assassinations of Hezbollah leaders originated from Iranian officials add complexity to the situation, suggesting that some quarters in the top Iranian echelons may have been involved in undermining Hezbollah’s leadership.
Economic Strains
The weakening of Iran’s Shiite Crescent strategy also stems from its mounting economic challenges. U.S. sanctions, plummeting oil revenues, and internal economic troubles have made it more difficult for Tehran to fund its regional proxies. The decrease in financial support, especially to groups like Hezbollah, has severely affected their capabilities and diminished Iran’s influence in the region.
Iran is grappling with severe economic challenges, exacerbated by years of international sanctions, internal mismanagement, and ageing infrastructure. The country’s energy crisis has reached critical levels, with widespread power outages and fuel shortages disrupting daily life and industrial output. Despite having vast natural gas and oil reserves, Iran’s energy sector struggles due to limited investment and inefficiencies. The re-election of Donald Trump, who is likely to reintroduce stringent sanctions, will further strain the economy. With inflation soaring and the rial devalued, Iran’s economy faces significant turmoil, raising the risk of escalating unrest and political instability.
These circumstances could motivate some circles in power to change their current foreign policy approach. By reconsidering its current foreign policy and moving away from exporting violence and sectarianism to neighbouring countries, Tehran would embark on a new journey of redemption that helps reduce existing sanctions and unlocks new opportunities for trade and investment.
Looming Leadership Change
The health of 85-year-old Ayatollah Ali Khamenei suggests that a significant leadership change in Iran is approaching. Such a shift could have significant implications, not just for Iran’s domestic politics but also for its foreign policy. The post-Khamenei era might mark the end of the Shiite Crescent strategy, with Iran embracing a more pragmatic, globally integrated approach.
Mujtaba Khamenei, often considered the likely successor, could reshape Iran’s internal political dynamics and regional policies. If this transition mirrors the one in Saudi Arabia with Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, it could push Iran toward redefining its strategic priorities, aiming for more economic integration rather than confrontation, which would end the current isolation and heavy economic pressures.
A Geopolitical Shift?
The collapse of Iran’s Shiite Crescent strategy represents a significant turning point in the country’s regional ambitions. With the deaths of key figures like Soleimani and Nasrallah, the fall of the Assad regime, and the escalating economic challenges, Iran finds itself at a crossroads. The traditional ideological foreign policy that has shaped Iran’s approach for decades is increasingly difficult to sustain.
Iran is at a critical junction: either it will continue its current path and face the prospects of being squeezed until the pips squeak, with possible military operations against its strategic installations and ‘maximum pressure’ policies applied against its economy or choose a different path.
If it opts for the second course of action, Iran could redefine its role. The new leadership—likely to be led by Mujtaba Khamenei—would then focus on fixing the economy, reducing the regime’s isolation, and embracing international cooperation.
The future of Iran’s Shiite Crescent strategy remains uncertain: Is it truly dead, or will it be revived in a new form? Only time will reveal whether this collapse marks the end of Iran’s regional ambitions or if this strategy would be recalibrated in a different way. However, if the lessons from this episode are drawn effectively, it would be best for Tehran’s top power echelons to temper their hubris and reflect on a different course of action; one that will positively shape Iran’s future, bringing economic dividends, international integration, and stability to the wider Middle East.
