A Historic Middle East: How a Free Iran Will Send Geopolitical Shockwaves

The fall of the regime in Tehran would be the single most significant geopolitical event in the Middle East since the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the establishment of the state of Israel.

The immediate effect would be the financial and logistical suffocation of the proxy network that has destabilized the region for decades.

Without Iranian funding, training, and weaponry, organizations like Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and the Houthis in Yemen would face an existential crisis far more devastating than any Israeli attack.

They would be forced to either disarm and integrate into their local political systems or wither away without a state sponsor.

For the global superpowers, the board would be reset. Russia would lose its primary supplier of cheap drones and a key sanctions-evasion partner, severely hampering its war efforts in Europe.

China, which has relied on Iran as a lever against American influence in the Persian Gulf, would be forced to recalibrate its Belt and Road Initiative to accommodate a pro-Western or neutral Tehran.

The strategic alliance between a free Iran, Israel, and the Sunni Gulf states would create a formidable economic and security bloc that dominates the energy markets and secures the waterways from the Suez to the Strait of Hormuz.

Economically, the re-entry of a non-sanctioned Iran into the global market would stabilize energy prices and open a massive market for Western investment, making Israel an even more important stakeholder in maintaining regional stability.

The Abraham Accords would likely expand rapidly, as the common threat that pushed Israel and the Gulf states together disappears, replaced by the opportunity for a train line running from Haifa to Dubai and on to Tehran.

The region would move from a state of perpetual Cold War to an era of economic integration, driven by the technological prowess of Israel and the energy wealth of the Gulf and a revitalized Persia.

From the national perspective, in order to avoid disintegration, based on its diverse demographics, and divided geographics, Iran should enable some form of self autonomy to the Baluchi, Arab, and Kurdish minorities, with the promise of national economic integration.

From a religious perspective, the end of the Shiite revolution that began in 1979 will start taking effect in many countries, especially Iraq which is strategically located between Iran, Syria Turkey and Jordan, and which also has a Shiite majority.

This shift can also have positive consequences on the delicate nature of Shiite-Sunni relations within Iraq.

For Turkey, which recently found itself circumvented with regards to its ability to exercise power in syria (due to the government's allegiance and reliance on the US) the rise of a strong independent and Democratic Iran will sure balance its own imperialistic fantasies.

For less spoken of state actors, such as Azerbaijan to the north, a democratic iran, would provide more regional stability, open up trade routes while benefiting the large Azeri minority living in Iran.

Given that the danger of some extremist government will rise to power if the regime should fail, is less likely (as has happened in Syria), Israel would definitely see itself as the main beneficiary.

And finally for Saudi Arabia the prospect of a democratic iran could save billions of dollars in defense spending, but also go about invigorating the renewed spirit of secularization and democratization in the region, which the current government in Rad is not interested in.