Iran showcases its reach with attacks across the region

Tehran’s strategy to arm, finance network pays off

BEIRUT — The Israel-Hamas war has given Iran the opportunity to showcase the capacity of its newly restructured network of allied militias, demonstrating Tehran’s strategic reach while allowing it to keep a distance from the fight, according to members of the groups and military analysts.

On any given day since the Oct. 7 Hamas assault on Israel, one of these militias has carried out an attack somewhere in the Middle East — and on some days several in different places. The Houthis in Yemen are targeting ships in the Red Sea; Kataib Hezbollah and other Iraqi groups are hitting US bases in Iraq and Syria; and Lebanon’s Hezbollah is engaged in daily exchanges of fire with Israeli forces across the Israel-Lebanon border.

The attacks can seem random, but they are the fruit of a carefully calibrated strategy forged after the 2020 killing of Qasem Soleimani, leader of Iran’s elite Quds Force, to bring cohesion to the loosely formed alliance of militias — designated by Tehran as the “axis of resistance.”

Although the groups seem unrelated — a rebel organization in Yemen; a guerrilla movement in Lebanon; and militias formed to fight US troops in Iraq — they all have one thing in common: their loyalty to Iran, which arms, finances, and inspires them, the members of the groups and analysts said. Together with Hamas, they constitute the main components of the “resistance” axis.

“What these different elements have done, moving forward with these attacks, shows the strength of this proxy network Iran has established throughout the region and how much of a concern it is,” said Joseph Votel, the former Centcom commander who oversaw US troops in the region at the time of the American drone strike in Baghdad that killed Soleimani.

In interviews, officials associated with three of the main groups described a level of coordination previously unmatched in the nearly two decades since Iran began cultivating local allies as a way of extending its regional influence. Representatives of the militias collaborate and consult through a joint operations room that meets regularly, typically but not always, in Beirut, they said.

No one group is in control, the officials said, and each has a degree of autonomy over what attacks to carry out in their area and when, according to their capabilities and local agendas. The Houthis, for example, have taken on the task of attacking shipping, with a view to pressuring the international community to demand Israel adopt a cease-fire in Gaza. The Iraqi groups are targeting the US bases in response to the Biden administration’s support for Israel. Hezbollah is firing at Israel to draw Israeli troops away from the Gaza front. At the same time, officials with the groups said, all of the actions are calibrated to avoid a wider regional war — suggesting that while the militias have autonomy on individual operations, their actions are designed not to conflict with Iran’s strategic objectives.

Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah has played a leading role in cementing the alliance, as the most senior figure commanding the oldest, most successful, and battle-hardened group, the officials say.

Soleimani’s death had left the axis leadership in disarray. As commander of the international wing of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Soleimani almost single-handedly cultivated the militias, and in the process achieved a mythical stature that far exceeded his formal rank.

Nasrallah stepped in to mediate and began implementing a new strategy, which he called “unity of fronts,” and all the groups pledged to go into action in their respective areas should any one of them be attacked. The war in the Gaza Strip is the first time the strategy has been put into practice.

Soleimani’s replacement, Ismail Qaani, has adopted a far lower profile than his predecessor, lacking Soleimani’s charisma and his history of personal relationships with the groups.

Iran, as a result, has changed the posture of the Quds Force, to allow greater autonomy to local groups, while remaining their benefactor.