Iran has stepped down as a major player — Evan X

Iran’s geopolitical standing has just undergone a seismic shift in Middle East.

For decades, it has wielded outsized influence in the region, projecting power through the axis of resistance, arguably the most powerful proxies in recent existence.

This network of proxies, costing Iran an estimated $10 billion annually, delivered soft power through ideological narratives and hard power through militia operations, positioning Iran as a de facto hegemon.

And the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20% of global oil flows, amplified this leverage, as Iran’s threats to seal the chokepoint deterred direct aggression.

___

Abandoning the Axis was a pragmatic bet. BRICS summits and GCC diplomacy offered Iran an exit strategy.

These options meant Iran’s integration into a multipolar order, allowing it to deviate off the collision course it was destined to play out against Israel,

which would have fulfilled the entirety of the neocon chapter in the Middle East.

But instead, BRICS & the GCC indicated to Iran that the cost of its proxies- both financially and diplomatically,

outweighed their returns, as regional convergence favored de-escalation over proxy wars.

This pivot from Iran completely reshaped its geopolitical standing, trading proxy-power influence for pragmatic survival.

The loss of proxies has reduced Iran’s regional clout, but alignment with China and the GCC has unlocked economic lifelines.

In other words, Iran has stepped down as a major player.

Its new position comes at a cost.

A compromised autonomy.

Caught between TPS containment and hegemon vassalization by China, Russia and the GCC.

This downgrade is evident in Iran’s reduced leverage in the region. Its proxy decline has led to a heavy retraction of influence across the levant.

—-

In saying that, I think Iran played the correct dominant strategy. It has very effectively deviated off a destructive path and deepened relations with the GCC and BRICS alignment.

Positive-sum moves in a multipolar world.

In my estimation, Iran’s future is a tightrope walk between integration and risk of vassalization. I think in the short-term, over 1–2 years, China’s $15 billion FDI will counter TPS grip.

But over the mid to long term, say >10 years, China will secure influence with the GCC stabilizing its role, effectively pressuring Iran to sacrifice autonomy to these major players.

If you look at Khamenei’s current strategy, he balances rhetoric of anti-Israel speeches with pragmatism that spearheads diplomatic relations. In effect, he is maintaining legitimacy among hardliners while enabling deals.

This exactly mirrors historical leaders when they’ve needed to navigate a decline. This is a clear indication that Khamenei retains strategic influence but faces a narrowing window as Iran’s autonomy begins to feel the pressure.

The state’s theocratic system vests the supreme leader with control over military, judiciary, and foreign policy, and nothing suggests a transition to be on the horizon.

But I think domestic pressures and his age will raise succession questions that will naturally lead to an internal regime change, relegating the Supreme Leader’s role to symbolic oversight as Iran’s economy stabilizes via BRICS.

link