Through its early history — but not for the last four decades and more — the main threats to Israel’s security came from its Arab neighbours. That resulted in several wars against Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq. But except for Jordan, Israel’s Arab enemies were in effect proxies for a far more potent threat: the Soviet Union. To displace American power in the Middle East, Moscow supplied thousands of tanks and hundreds of jets to Cairo, Damascus and Baghdad. Thousands of Soviet technicians and training officers came too, even as Arab officers were trained in Soviet academies.
This was a formidable threat to Israel’s survival in its first decades. But nobody there even considered the possibility of striking directly at the Soviet Union itself. Aside from the certainty of a massive retaliatory response, there were simply no relevant targets that Israel could strike, even if its small airforce managed to penetrate Soviet airspace. These days, however, everything is different. The Shi’a militias that have been targeting Israel for years, which greatly escalated their attacks after October 7, are entirely armed and directed by Iran. That’s true right across the Middle East, from Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen to a pair of militias in Iraq. But unlike the Soviet Union, Tehran enjoys no immunity from Israeli action.
The crucial vulnerability is the money from Iran that sustains the militias. Iraq’s Shi’a fighters can extort some cash from the country’s oil revenues. Hezbollah, for its part, receives some funding from Shi’a diamond buyers in Sierra Leone and smugglers in South America. Yet over the years, it and its cousins elsewhere in the region have become increasingly reliant on the funding they receive from their paymasters in Tehran. Cut the cash off, then, and they will quickly wither because even the most committed must receive their pay to feed their families.
That is most obviously the case in Yemen, one of the world’s least productive countries, where the Houthis are funded by monthly payments from Iran. But Hezbollah too has become more reliant on its Iranian ally, not least because its extortion of airport and customs receipts has yielded less and less with Lebanon’s descent into poverty.
This all means that Iran’s export revenues must now pay for a bewildering range of military expenditures abroad, in US dollars rather than home-made rials. Beyond the upkeep of foreign allies starting with Hezbollah, there are the imported components and supplies consumed by the domestic Revolutionary Guards, with its 125,000 troops and a naval force. This includes the imports of Chinese and North Korean missile and rocket components, as well as the foreign-currency costs of the entire nuclear programme which proceeds at a very large scale.
In practice, most of this cash comes from a single source: oil. It’s true that Iranian farmers grow pistachio nuts and other exportable crops, and that there are some manufacturing exports, even if Tabriz’s famous carpets are out of fashion. Yet at the last count, in 2023, oil accounted for 83% of Iran’s exports. For their part, the merchants who export Iran’s agricultural and craft exports tend not to repatriate the foreign currency they earn, using it instead for the imports they bring in. While much celebrated in regime propaganda, meanwhile, state-controlled industrial exports remain slight.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThe election of Trump next month will solve a lot of problems.
If the alternative is for Israel to sit on its hands while Iran develops nuclear weapons, continues to improve its delivery systems, and augments its client base, then perhaps now is the best time to meaningfully deter Israel’s greatest threat, Iran. Keep in mind that Israel was on the cusp of realizing a dazzling breakthrough diplomatic agreement with multiple significant Middle Eastern Islamic Countries (and had already done so with others in the Abraham Accords) when Gaza invaded. Many analysts believe the attack by Gaza on Israel was Iran’s deliberate strategy to derail the process of Israeli rapproachment with the wider Middle East. Iran realized that Islamic geopolitics was moving in a direction counter to Iranian priorities and toward marginalization of an Iranian regime the Sunni states did not trust. The only card Iran could play was to force Israel to become the bad guy again in the eyes of the Moslem world (at the expense of Gaza). Iran is weak. It must use proxy organizations like Hezbollah because its own restive Iranian population would overthrow Iran’s leaders in a heartbeat if they were asked to suffer and die in an invasion of Israel.
Interesting take on things. Let’s see what happens.
Perhaps an easier solution is the re-election of Donald Trump as US President and his reimposition of maximum sanctions on Iran.
Why attack Iran’s oil export facilities and gift the Iranian regime a propaganda coup at home and rile the Iranian sympathisers in Washington? Don’t interrupt the enemy when they’re making a mistake. The Iranian government syphoning off precious oil income for overseas paramilitaries is making the government very unpopular at home and diverting money from investment in its oil production, which has fallen from over 4mbpd to just over 3mbpd in just 8 years. As the gap between potential and actual oil output widens, the power-hungry outsiders in Tehran will increasingly agitate for change and offer the unrealised oil output as collateral to anyone that will fund their agitation. All Israel needs to do for now is stop Iran becoming a nuclear power, salt Iranian bids for foreign investment, and continue to lay waste to Iranian investments in its overseas paramilitaries.
As an aside, I note everyone seems OK to call Iran’s overseas paramilitaries what they are, “Shia militias”. But the media seems less keen to spell out what that actually means in plain English: Islamic, sectarian armies harassing, taking hostage and killing people who do not share their faith wherever they find them, be it Lebanon or Europe or Israel.
Why attack Iran’s oil export facilities and gift the Iranian regime a propaganda coup
I guess the possibility of Harris winning the election and the Obama mob digging their heels in, a strike earlier than later is probably viewed as the best course of action, before the US begins to strangle Israel.
How about the West just leaves the Middle East alone?
Wasn’t it overthrowing Mosadeq that started the whole Iranian chaos? Another brilliant move by those who are supposedly the best and the brightest…
Does that mean no arms supply to Israel? And if Israel did bomb the oil supply should the West stay out if it? In fact should, therefore, the West cease its judgement and bashing of Israel at the UN?
What exactly do we gain by supplying them with weapons? They have a nuclear arsenal. No actor in the region poses an existential threat to them.
How do you fight local conflicts with a nuclear arsenal? The point is leaving the Middle East to itself. Does that mean abandoning Israel? If so that means no more judgements, no more condemnation.
My recollection is that Mosaddegh nationalised Western (in those days mostly British) oil interests. He should have been bright enough to realise that “being overthrown” would be the inevitable result of that.
Excellent policy. I hope Ukraine applies a broadly similar one to Russia.
Why am I constantly being put through the captcha challenge over and over as a paid up subscriber?
Somehow more than 40,000 dead isn’t enough for Edward here.
Unintended consequences…
Suppose Iran retaliated by closing the Straits of Hormuz. No more Saudi oil. No more Qatari gas. There would be a full-blown global energy crisis.
What then?
And the (Sunni) Saudis–who are even more dependent on selling oil and who despise Iran and had no qualms about bombing the bejesus out of (Shite) Iran’s Houti clients in Yemen for years–would be OK with none of their oil going through the strait of Hormuz and their economy cratering?
The Saudis totally failed in Yemen.
Sane people ask questions like that
Neocons are not sane people, they have an unquenchable thirst for blood
Sane people don’t think it’s a good idea to allow enemies to attack you constantly when you can stop them.
The Europeans should embrace fracking (like many of do in the USA) and reopen their nuclear plants.
Although, if there was no more Saudi oil, no more Qatari gas and a full-blown global energy crisis, the Greens would be happy. Isn’t that what they want?
No problem. Just need a pipeline from alberta to the coast.
Turn on the windmills.