How the Great Game between East and West Will Shape the Country’s Future
Author: Abdul Naser Noorzad, Security and Geopolitics Researcher, Special for "Sangar"
Original article: ایران در آستانه انتخاب سرنوشتساز
Following the recent ceasefire, Iran stands on the brink of making a strategic decision. This ceasefire is unlikely to be sustainable, as it is not the result of a direct agreement between Iran and Israel but rather a temporary deal among three great powers — the United States, Russia, and China. Once this fragile balance is disturbed, the ceasefire will lose its validity.
In this situation, Iran has only two paths ahead, and the time to choose is very limited. It must swiftly make a fundamental, forward-looking decision aligned with the realities of the international system. What are these two paths?
First Path: Moving Toward Nuclear Status
Iran may choose the path of nuclear development, preparing for more complex and dangerous future scenarios. The nature of wars and their participants will likely change, and the country will face adversaries far superior in economic and military power.
In this case, the key question is: what strategic options does Tehran have to ensure its survival? Which international ally can it rely on? Can its geopolitical position, the doctrine of exporting Shiite ideology among Sunnis, ideological hostility toward Israel, and obstruction of NATO bases in the event of regime collapse serve as support for this strategy?
Second Path: Conditional Surrender to the Order of Great Powers
The second option is handing over enriched uranium to Russia and joining a nuclear agreement under the security umbrella of Eastern powers (Russia or China). In this case, the guarantee of the Islamic Republic’s survival as a factor of geopolitical stability in the region will be maintained by these powers.
However, this choice is not simple either, because despite supporting stability in Iran, China and Russia never want a nuclear Iran that threatens their long-term interests. They support Iran only to the extent that it prevents the expansion of NATO and US influence in this strategic region.
The reality is that Tehran, in the great game between East and West, plays not the role of a strategic ally but merely a temporary deterrent tool.
Iran — Victim or Player in the New World Order?
In the transition to a post-American order, in which the East will play a more prominent role, the creation of controlled hotspots and their exploitation for the benefit of global powers is common. The West tries to overthrow regimes friendly to the East, and sometimes even the East collaborates with the West in these projects.
The experience of overthrowing Saddam, Gaddafi, Ali Abdullah Saleh, and attempts to remove Bashar Assad clearly demonstrated the existence of backstage agreements between Eastern nationalists and Western globalists. Therefore, Iran cannot expect to be exempt from this rule.
The only way to maintain the balance of power is to move toward possessing nuclear weapons. However, this path requires considerable time, enormous costs, and stable security — conditions that even Iran’s Eastern allies are not yet ready to guarantee.
A nuclear Iran would not only threaten the "American peace" but could also become an obstacle to the future Eastern order. The East seeks to establish a bipolar order between itself and the West, not a multipolar one with new uncontrolled nuclear players. Even in this new order, Western ideas — free trade and economic liberalism — retain their significance.
Conclusion: A Difficult Choice at a Historic Crossroads
Iran faces a fateful strategic decision: to pursue nuclear development, accepting the associated risks and costs, or to enter the imposed order of great powers and abide by their rules of the game.
Tehran’s choice is not merely a national decision; it is a decision that will influence the fate of regional and even global order. The question remains: which path will Iran choose in the time remaining? And ultimately, where will this great game between East and West lead Iran?
