Iran Maintains Principle of Neighborly Relations Amidst Regional Tensions

According to the International Desk of Webangah News Agency, Iran‘s foreign policy toward Arab nations has been shaped over decades by consistent principles: emphasizing neighborliness, Islamic brotherhood, mutual respect, and striving for peaceful coexistence. This approach is part of a long-term strategy that has manifested at various regional junctures. Even when regional tensions reached their peak and Iran itself faced direct attacks, the overarching framework of this policy has not fundamentally changed.

In the current context, with Iran confronting direct aggression from the United States and Israel, Tehran’s conduct towards Arab nations is analyzable within this same framework. Iran has repeatedly stated its disinterest in extending conflict into neighboring territories. However, a clear principle guides Iran’s defense policy: ‘response to the source of the threat.’ In other words, if a point within an Arab country becomes a base for launching attacks against Iran, that point will be considered part of the conflict equation. From this perspective, Iran’s action is defined not against the host country, but against the origin of the attack.

This distinction, though sometimes overlooked in the complex regional media landscape, is key to understanding Iran’s behavior. Iran has endeavored to clearly convey that the security of regional countries, particularly its Arab neighbors, is important to it. Any unintended tension, it argues, results from the involvement of extra-regional actors and the utilization of these countries’ territories against Iran.

Among Arab nations, Oman holds a special place in its relations with Iran. Relations between Tehran and Muscat have consistently been built on mutual trust and respect for each other’s interests over the years. Oman has not only abstained from becoming a theater for tension-generating rivalries but has also played a mediating and facilitating role in dialogue during sensitive periods. Recognizing regional sensitivities, the country has prevented its territory from being used for hostile actions against Iran, a stance that has strengthened friendly relations between the two nations. Oman has practically demonstrated that one can maintain decision-making independence while preserving relationships with various actors and contributing to regional stability.

Qatar is another example of an Arab player that has pursued a balanced policy based on mediation. Despite some ups and downs, Iran-Qatar relations have generally been positive and based on cooperation. During the crisis of the Qatar blockade in 2017, it was Iran that played a significant role in alleviating pressure on Doha by opening air and sea routes. This experience, in a way, illustrates the potential for cooperation between the two countries in times of crisis.

Naturally, criticisms have been raised and continue to be voiced regarding Qatar. One such concern is that Doha should be more vigilant to ensure its territory does not become a platform for military actions against Iran. However, in an overall assessment, Iran regards Qatar as a friendly nation in the region and emphasizes the continuation of positive relations. Qatar’s mediating approach, provided it maintains its independence, can contribute to de-escalating tensions in the region.

Regarding other Arab countries in the region, Iran’s position remains clear. Tehran has consistently declared that it has no inherent conflict with Arab nations and is prepared to expand relations based on mutual respect and common interests. What causes tension are not fundamental differences between peoples, but rather policies adopted by some governments in full alignment with the United States and Israel. This alignment, when it leads to the concession of infrastructure and territory for military actions against Iran, effectively draws them into a costly equation.

Iran believes that regional security should be ensured by the countries of the region themselves. The experience of recent decades has shown that the presence of extra-regional powers has not only failed to bring stability but has also exacerbated crises. From prolonged wars to chronic instability, all point to the reality that foreign actors are more concerned with securing their strategic interests than with the security and welfare of the region’s people.

Within this framework, neither the United States nor Israel can be considered actors genuinely seeking security in the region. Their policies are primarily based on managing tensions, arms sales, and maintaining strategic superiority. The outcome of such approaches is the continuation of insecurity and mistrust in the region, a situation that imposes the greatest cost on regional countries and their populations.

In contrast, Iran has repeatedly emphasized the idea of establishing collective security arrangements in the Persian Gulf. This concept is based on the participation of all Arab countries in the region, without the interference of external actors. The objective of such an arrangement is to create mechanisms for dialogue, dispute resolution, and the prevention of security misunderstandings. The realization of this idea, of course, requires political will and a distancing from external dependencies.

Overall, Iran’s approach towards Arab nations in the region is based on interaction, respect, and cooperation, conditional upon these countries refraining from being used as instruments of pressure against Iran. Tehran has demonstrated its readiness to expand relations in various fields if mutual willingness exists. Regional security, more than ever, necessitates endogenous cooperation and a departure from foreign interference—a path that, although difficult, is the only sustainable option for a stable future in the Persian Gulf and beyond.