How US actions after 9/11 empowered Iran

Twenty-three years after the world was shaken by devastating Islamic terrorist attacks in the United States, it's challenging to view the current Middle East crisis as a direct outcome of that "day of infamy," to quote President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

September 11 is far from forgotten, but its aftermath is often viewed through the lens of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. What is frequently overlooked is how these costly and traumatic conflicts, and the geopolitical shifts they triggered, have shaped the current regional dynamics. Today’s complex Middle East quagmire, heavily influenced by Iran’s growing support for various actors, can be traced back to the ripple effects of those wars and the changes they imposed on the region’s power structure.

As hijacked airliners struck New York’s twin towers and the Pentagon, killing thousands, Americans united with a strength not seen since World War II. The global community rallied behind the United States, even supporting its swift invasion of Afghanistan to root out the terrorists responsible for the attacks. This unprecedented unity reflected the world’s collective resolve in confronting the threat of terrorism in the immediate aftermath of September 11.

But the ill-planned 2003 invasion of Iraq opened the floodgates to an Iranian expansion few could have imagined on September 10, 2001, when Saddam Hussein still controlled Iraq, practically begging Washington to be left alone and promising to behave. Disregarding the looming dangers of unintended consequences, the Bush administration relentlessly shoveled coal into the furnace of a reckless train, charging toward disaster in the region.

The Iraqi invasion badly damaged the US image among the Arabs, especially that the original excuse for the war, the alleged existence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction proved false. This fueled a chain of events that allowed Iran to step into the power vacuum left by Saddam, reshaping the Middle East in ways no one foresaw. Meanwhile, the unending war in Afghanistan also sapped resources and focus, perhaps diverting attention from Iran's regional plans, while two simultaneous wars undoubtedly did not help the United States.

A few months after the invasion, signs began to emerge that Iran’s Islamic regime was beginning to build influence among Shiites in Iraq and even assisting the growing Sunni insurgency against the United States.

As the Taliban once famously said, “You may have the watches, but we have the time,” the Iranians began experimenting with a model of proxy warfare that today has brought the region to a new phase of instability, war and the partial closure of the Red Sea to a significant portion of world shipping.

As the US withdrew its forces from Iraq in 2009, Iran found a wide-open playing field in the country, exerting influence in local politics and becoming a king maker in the fragile and unstable democratic system in Iraq.

The more the region experienced tremors, the more Tehran capitalized on them to expand its influence, forming a Shiite crescent that now stretches to the Mediterranean. The first significant tremor came with the Arab Spring, followed by the outbreak of popular protests against Bashar al-Assad in Syria. Tehran quickly stepped in, pledging military support to Assad in suppressing the growing rebellion, largely driven by the Sunni majority. By 2011, Iran was fully committed to the Syrian conflict, sending its Revolutionary Guard as "advisors" and organizing Iraqi, Afghan, and other forces to serve as foot soldiers in the brutal civil war. From 2011 to 2014, Iran’s involvement deepened, establishing a crucial foothold in Syria’s devastating conflict, all in an effort to safeguard Assad’s regime and expand its regional influence.

Meanwhile, the United States focused on diplomacy and sanctions aimed at curbing Iran's nuclear ambitions and fought ISIS in Iraq, without responding decisively to developments in Syria. Russia capitalized on the situation, deploying its forces to support Iranian efforts to crush the Syrian rebels. By the time former President Donald Trump partially reversed U.S. policy and took a tougher stance on Tehran, Syria was largely pacified, solidifying Iran’s Shiite crescent of influence extending to the Mediterranean.

During a brief period, following Trump’s “maximum pressure” sanctions and the January 2020 killing of Qasem Soleimani, Tehran's threat appeared to diminish. However, the situation shifted when President Joe Biden initiated new nuclear talks. Although these efforts ultimately proved futile, the US had already relaxed sanctions, allowing Iran to export nearly 1.5 million barrels of oil per day to China. Additionally, just before Hamas's October 7 attack on Israel, Washington unfroze around $16 billion in Iranian assets, further loosening financial constraints on Tehran.

This has sparked criticism that the Biden administration indirectly enabled Iran’s support for the October 7 attack. While there may be some truth to this, one could argue that the roots of the October 7 incident trace back to earlier events—9/11 and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. These pivotal moments set the stage for the ongoing instability in the Middle East, with Iran gradually expanding its influence over the years.