What a Destabilized Iran Means for Regional Security Interests

Introduction

Recent US and Israeli airstrikes on Iran have triggered intense debate in Washington, with political pundits saying that US strategy is increasingly shaped by Israeli military decisions.

A bipartisan resolution aimed at limiting President Donald Trump’s ability to wage war against Iran failed in the US Senate as the military campaign continues. Lawmakers have criticized the president for launching strikes without congressional authorization, unlike former President George W. Bush, who sought approval from Congress before initiating the Iraq War.

Much of the debate in Washington has focused on whether the United States should have joined Israel’s campaign at all. This discussion largely neglects a more consequential question: what if external military pressure were to destabilize Iran itself?

Iran is not simply another Middle Eastern state at risk of political destabilization and chaos. It lies at the heart of several fragile regional flashpoints, ethnic insurgencies, drug-trafficking corridors, energy routes, migration routes, and jihadist networks. Should Iran’s internal security apparatus weaken, these pressures could intensify rapidly, fueling insurgencies, organized crime, and militant activity across the region. Such instability would not remain confined within Iran’s borders but could generate new security challenges for the United States and its allies in Europe, the Middle East, and South Asia.

Immediate Shift in Public Perception

The immediate outcome of Israeli and US strikes has produced an unexpected political effect inside Iran. The foreign military aggression has generated sympathy for Iran’s leadership, including the country’s 86-year-old Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who came to power in 1989,  was killed aged 86 in a large-scale joint US-Israeli strike. Khamenei had long faced severe domestic criticism and public resentment. He was lately under intense domestic pressure for killing an estimated 30,000 or more protesters, the largest death toll in modern Iranian history. However, his dramatic killing by Israeli and US air forces has changed public perceptions in Iran. This is a death Khamenei had always wanted, it turned him into a martyr and a symbol of resistance against so-called western hegemony for millions of Iranians, including among his harsh critics.

Nationalist sentiment is high in Iran, with Khamenei’s farewell being postponed multiple times amid massive requests to participate from across the country. Iranian authorities are expecting hundreds of thousands of participants at his farewell. A man who had long been criticized and remained controversial throughout his nearly four-decade tenure has now become a hero for millions of Iranians and a symbol of defiance.

These shifting perceptions could complicate Washington’s efforts to shape Iran’s political future. Installing a pro-American government would likely face legitimacy challenges similar to those encountered in Afghanistan and Iraq after the US invasion. Should America and Israel undermine Iran’s security apparatus through continued airstrikes, powerful institutions such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) could transform into a resistance or insurgent movement, much like the Taliban did after the US invasion of Afghanistan.

Ongoing Western hostilities could also draw the Taliban and IRGC into closer alignment.

The Taliban’s de facto government in neighboring Afghanistan is as hostile toward Israel as Iran’s regime. As a result, the IRGC and the Taliban could pragmatically align against Israel and seek to weaken American influence in South and Central Asia. Such developments could plunge Iran into deeper chaos, with instability from its peripheries spreading to neighboring states, where long-standing grievances and armed groups are rampant. These vulnerabilities are especially pronounced in Iran’s remote, restive southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchestan, where unrest could easily spill over into neighboring Pakistan.

Iran’s Fragile Borderlands

Iran’s southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchestan, bordering Pakistan, has long been a hotbed of a violent insurgency. Among the most active groups is Jaish ul-Adl (“Army of Justice”), designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by the US in 2010 under its former name, Jundallah. Building on this legacy, in December 2025, the group announced the creation of the “Popular Fighters Front” following the merger of several Baloch political movements in the region.

Since its formation in 2003, Jaish ul-Adl, formerly Jundullah, has carried out a series of deadly attacks, targeting both civilians and government officials. The group demands greater recognition of Baloch cultural, economic, and political rights. Next to Iran’s restive province lies Pakistan’s Balochistan province, where ethnic-Baloch nationalist insurgents are engaged in a deadly insurgency against Pakistan’s central government, demanding an independent Baloch homeland.

Iranian and Pakistani Baloch, closely related, have waged ideologically separate insurgencies against Pakistan and Iran. Tehran has accused Islamabad of harboring Jaish ul-Adl, an allegation Pakistan denies, and Pakistan accuses Iran of sheltering Baloch armed groups demanding a separate Baloch homeland from Pakistan. Tensions escalated in January 2024 after a series of missile exchanges, triggered by Iran’s alleged strike on a Jaish ul-Adl hideout inside Pakistan. The two countries share a 565-mile porous border, making it harder to contain the unrest.

These dynamics add further complexity. While some anti-Iran militant networks may temporarily align with Pakistan’s strategic interests, they still remain independent actors. Once settled in Iran, they could turn hostile toward Pakistan, much like the Afghan Taliban, who once were considered Pakistan’s strategic assets. Complicating the picture further, Pakistan has a massive Shiite population that sympathizes with the Iranian regime. Weak and chaotic borders and marginalization of Shiites in Iran could inflame Sunni-Shiite tensions inside Pakistan.

Amid these security concerns, Pakistan is also worried about the possibility of a pro-Israeli government in Tehran. Islamabad does not recognize Israel and fears that an Israeli-aligned Iran could exacerbate domestic instability.

Taken together, the vulnerabilities of Iran’s peripheries and ongoing insurgency create a volatile security environment. Any weakening of Tehran’s central authority could allow these border conflicts to expand, which could transform local insurgencies into a broader regional challenge.

Iran also sits at the  center of the so-called Balkan Route, serving as a major transit corridor for heroin, opiates, and methamphetamine destined for markets in Europe and the Middle East. Iranian authorities say they dismantled more than 1,700 drug-trafficking networks and seized around 250 tons of narcotics during the first nine months of 2025, much of it was bound for Europe.

If Iran’s borders were to become unstable or poorly controlled, trafficking flows could increase dramatically, creating serious challenges for Europe already struggling to manage narcotics smuggling networks.

Iran also serves as a key transit route for human trafficking and irregular migration from Afghanistan, Central Asia, and Pakistan towards Europe. Iranian authorities detained and deported more than 750,000 Afghan nationals in 2024, the majority of whom dreamed of going to Europe via Turkey.

A destabilized Iran, with weakened border control and law enforcement agencies, could open new migration corridors towards Turkey and Europe. Such a development could accelerate both refugee flows and organized crime networks moving people and drugs across the region.

Risk of Jihadist Spillover

Instability in Iran could also fuel the expansion of insurgent and jihadist networks. Recent history offers a warning. The Iraq War saw a dramatic surge in violence following the US-led invasion, with bombings becoming near-daily occurrences, causing tens of thousands of civilian casualties. Libya’s collapse after the 2011 civil war similarly turned the country into a hub for illegal arms trafficking across North Africa and the Sahel.

There are similar fears. A destabilized Iran could create space for extremists, traffickers, and the so-called Islamic State (IS). The IS has long viewed Iran as an enemy and has previously carried out deadly attacks inside the country. In January 2024, twin suicide bombings killed nearly 100 people during a memorial ceremony. Despite such attacks, Iran has actively campaigned against the group and supported regional efforts to combat militants linked to the Islamic State.

The group also poses great threats to US allies in the Gulf. According to one report, the United States was spending more than $9 million a day on military operations against Islamic State militants during earlier phases of the conflict.

If Iran’s internal security structure were to weaken significantly, jihadist groups like IS could exploit the power vacuum and may open up a new front of instability across the region.

Regional Implications for US Allies

The Israel–Iran confrontation has already produced serious regional repercussions. Key US allies in the Gulf, including Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates face heightened economic and security risks as the conflict intensifies.

Iranian missile strikes and attacks on energy infrastructure in the Gulf have raised serious concerns about disruptions to global energy markets. The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz and attacks on energy facilities in Qatar and Saudi Arabia have threatened a large share of the world’s energy supply. Continued missile strikes have also inflicted a massive economic blow on the United Arab Emirates.

The conflict has caused widespread anxiety among Gulf states, many of which increasingly fear their countries becoming war zones and are questioning the reliability of US security guarantees. The escalation has also created operational challenges for Washington, prompting the United States to evacuate personnel from several bases and temporarily close diplomatic missions across the Middle East.

The war has also intensified domestic pressures in Pakistan, another key US partner. Rising tensions have inflamed sentiments among Pakistan’s Shiite minority while raising security concerns along the country’s southwestern border with Iran.

In October 2019, Donald Trump wrote in a social media post on X that the United States had spent “eight trillion dollars fighting and policing in the Middle East,” calling American involvement in the region “the worst decision ever made.” The current escalation has revived debate over whether Washington’s long-standing military engagement in the region has produced stability or prolonged cycles of conflict.

Conclusion

The debate in Washington has largely focused on whether the United States should have joined Israel’s military action against Iran. However, the more consequential question may be what follows if external pressure undermines Iran’s internal stability.

Iran sits at the crossroads of several fragile regional fault lines, including ethnic insurgencies, narcotics trafficking routes, migration corridors, and jihadist networks.

Should the country’s security structures collapse, the consequences would extend far beyond its borders. Moreover, if a pro-American government were installed, establishing legitimacy would prove challenging. Insurgent movements could intensify along Iran’s peripheries and neighboring countries. Organized crime networks could proliferate across the region, and Islamist extremist groups might exploit emerging security vacuums.

For the United States and its allies, such an outcome would present a complex strategic dilemma: destabilizing Iran may weaken a hostile government in Tehran, but it could also trigger broader instability with severe regional and global repercussions. The main takeaway is that despite the immediate appeal of pressuring Iran, the potential fallout from a weakened Iranian state, ranging from increased organized crime and extremism to regional economic disruption, could ultimately generate more acute and unmanageable challenges than the regime itself.

The post What a Destabilized Iran Means for Regional Security Interests appeared first on Small Wars Journal by Arizona State University.