The war involving Iran has triggered a far-reaching reassessment of global power dynamics, with its consequences extending well beyond the battlefield and reshaping calculations among major and regional powers, according to a new assessment by The Soufan Center.
As diplomatic efforts continue to bring the conflict to a close, the report argues that the geopolitical fallout could redraw the international landscape, creating opportunities for some states while weakening the strategic standing of others. Although Iran sustained significant military and economic costs during months of fighting, The Soufan Center contends that Tehran has emerged with new strategic leverage that is likely to influence regional security and great power competition for years to come.
The conflict has also prompted renewed debate over the traditional hierarchy of global powers. Discussions of international competition have long centered on the United States, China, and Russia, with countries such as Iran, Israel, Türkiye, India, and Indonesia often described as influential middle powers. However, recent events have challenged many assumptions surrounding military capability, strategic resilience, and geopolitical influence. Just as Russia’s war in Ukraine prompted questions about Moscow’s standing as a great power, the Iran conflict has led analysts to reconsider how power is measured in an increasingly complex international environment.
After approximately four months of fighting, negotiations are underway to finalize an agreement aimed at ending the conflict. According to The Soufan Center, the Trump administration is engaged in talks designed to bring hostilities to a close. Yet the report suggests that despite the damage sustained during the war, Iran has emerged with several strategic advantages that could strengthen its regional position regardless of the outcome of those negotiations.
Among the most significant developments identified in the assessment is Tehran’s growing confidence in its ability to influence global commerce through the Strait of Hormuz. The report states that Iranian leaders now believe they possess the capability to disrupt one of the world’s most important maritime trade routes whenever tensions with the United States escalate. While neighboring countries continue exploring alternative overland and maritime routes, few viable substitutes currently exist, leaving the strait as one of Iran’s most powerful strategic assets.
The report also argues that a negotiated settlement accompanied by sanctions relief could provide Iran with additional financial resources. Under the leadership of hardline figures within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, those resources could strengthen Tehran’s broader regional posture even after active combat subsides. At the same time, Israel continues to confront ongoing hostilities involving Lebanese Hezbollah, underscoring the assessment that the long-running shadow conflict between Israel and Iran is expected to persist irrespective of any agreement reached between Washington and Tehran.
While the conflict has transformed Iran’s strategic calculations, it has also reinforced China’s preference for pursuing influence without direct military confrontation. According to The Soufan Center, Beijing’s restrained approach has enabled it to avoid becoming deeply entangled in the conflict while positioning itself to benefit from shifting economic and geopolitical conditions.
Although China depends on discounted Iranian oil for a notable share of its imports, the report notes that Beijing has simultaneously expanded its role as an alternative supplier to countries affected by energy disruptions resulting from the conflict. Traditional United States allies in Asia, many of which rely heavily on imported energy, have sought new supply arrangements as uncertainty surrounding regional energy markets has increased. The report points to the Philippines as one example, noting that despite ongoing disputes with China in the South China Sea, Manila has engaged Beijing in efforts to diversify supplies of both energy and fertilizer following disruptions linked to the war.
Russia’s experience during the conflict has been more complex. The Soufan Center describes Moscow’s position as producing both significant gains and notable challenges. The initial disruption to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and the resulting increase in global energy prices provided Russia with a substantial economic boost after years of sanctions had sharply reduced exports to Europe. Higher oil prices, combined with the easing of some Western sanctions referenced in the report, offered important support for Russia’s economy during its continuing war in Ukraine.
However, those economic gains were accompanied by strategic complications. Rising security concerns among Gulf states and increasing uncertainty about American security guarantees elevated international interest in Ukraine’s experience with drone warfare. According to the report, Kyiv’s battlefield expertise attracted growing attention from governments in the Middle East seeking to strengthen their own defense capabilities, giving Ukraine an expanded diplomatic profile while influencing the broader regional security landscape.
The report also notes that Russia initially faced criticism for not openly assisting Iran despite their longstanding partnership. As the conflict progressed, however, information emerged indicating that Moscow had supplied Tehran with intelligence, satellite imagery, and drone technology used in operations targeting United States assets. The assessment describes this cooperation as reflecting the reciprocal relationship that has developed between the two countries during Russia’s prolonged war in Ukraine, where Iranian-made Shahed drones have played a significant role in Russian military operations.
Beyond the major powers, the war has also reshaped relations between Iran and the Gulf states. In recent years, several Gulf governments pursued diplomatic engagement with Tehran, culminating in agreements such as the China-brokered restoration of relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Those efforts were intended to reduce regional tensions through expanded political dialogue and economic cooperation despite decades of rivalry and sectarian divisions.
According to The Soufan Center, the recent conflict exposed the limits of that rapprochement. Iranian missile and drone attacks, including the unprecedented strike on Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar and significant attacks targeting the United Arab Emirates, revived longstanding concerns about regional security and highlighted the fragility of the diplomatic progress achieved before the war.
Even so, Gulf governments continue to demonstrate an interest in maintaining diplomatic channels. The report cites recent reporting that the United States and Iran established a deconfliction hotline designed to reduce the risk of misunderstandings and unintended escalation, suggesting that efforts to preserve communication continue alongside broader negotiations.
The assessment concludes that the full geopolitical consequences of the Iran war will take time to emerge, as shifts in international alliances, trade relationships, and strategic partnerships often unfold gradually. Nevertheless, The Soufan Center argues that the conflict has already overturned many assumptions that previously shaped discussions of great power competition. Among the central questions that remain unresolved is whether Gulf states will continue relying primarily on the United States for their security or increasingly diversify their strategic partnerships by strengthening ties with other global powers, including countries that compete with Washington for influence in the region.
