The recent convening of the six-party Afghan alliance in Tehran signals more than a routine diplomatic engagement it underscores Iran’s increasing reliance on the Taliban as a strategic instrument in its regional policy. As Afghanistan continues to navigate political uncertainty, Tehran has positioned itself as a key external actor, ensuring that the Taliban remain not only in power but aligned with Iranian interests in ways that extend beyond immediate Afghan politics. The motivations driving Tehran’s involvement are both pragmatic and preemptive, shaped by domestic pressures, regional rivalries, and a broader effort to safeguard influence across South and Central Asia.
Historically, Iran has cultivated ties in Afghanistan and Central Asia by leveraging shared Persian cultural heritage, particularly among Tajik and Hazara communities. While religious differences exist—Sunni majorities dominate in Afghanistan and Tajikistan, while Iran remains a Shia-majority state Persian linguistic and cultural connections have provided Tehran with a unique avenue for influence. By promoting Persian identity and heritage, Iran has historically projected itself as a custodian of regional culture, using soft power to create loyalist networks across borders. These ties allowed Tehran to exercise influence in Afghanistan without overtly imposing its political or religious agenda, embedding itself in social and cultural institutions across the region.
Yet the dynamics underpinning Iran’s influence have shifted dramatically in recent years. Internally, Tehran confronts growing dissent, driven by reformist movements, youth activism, and broader calls for political and cultural liberalization. The Iranian establishment, long dominated by religious conservatism, is facing erosion of its traditional authority as ordinary citizens increasingly embrace reformist ideals and assert cultural autonomy. Externally, nations like Tajikistan are asserting their independence from Shia-centric Iranian influence, instead reviving Persian literary traditions such as the Shahnameh to solidify national identity and reaffirm historical roots. These developments represent a challenge to Tehran’s previously unassailable position as the central anchor of Persian cultural influence in the region.
In Afghanistan, this changing landscape has manifested through the emergence of a new generation of leaders who are wary of Tehran’s strategic maneuvering. Figures like Ahmad Massoud exemplify a cohort that is conscious of Iranian opportunism perceiving Tehran’s professed commitment to Persian identity as secondary to its pragmatic pursuit of influence. These leaders seek to diversify regional partnerships, often reaching out to countries beyond Iran, to ensure Afghanistan’s sovereignty and prevent any single external actor from dominating political outcomes. The Iranian regime, recognizing the potential resurgence of Persian cultural and political influence under non-Taliban leadership, views the Taliban as a counterweight, providing a Pashtun-led structure that limits the scope of alternative political currents.
The Taliban, from Tehran’s perspective, serve as a multifaceted strategic asset. Their continued hold on power allows Iran to maintain a presence in Afghan affairs without directly governing or imposing policies, effectively functioning as a proxy force. By supporting the Taliban, Tehran ensures that any revival of Persian-dominated political authority in Afghanistan is constrained, mitigating the risk that new leadership could challenge Iran’s influence in Kabul or along shared borders. This support is not ideological but highly calculated, reflecting Iran’s preference for a stable, predictable partner rather than an Afghan government aligned primarily with regional Persian networks that may resist Tehran’s sway.
Complicating this regional calculus is the role of the United States. Reports suggest that select Taliban factions have received indirect or tacit support from the US, reflecting Washington’s long-term strategic interest in maintaining leverage over both Afghanistan and Iran. From a geopolitical standpoint, the US recognizes the fragility of Tehran’s position, assessing that a destabilized Iranian regime could be counterbalanced by controlled influence over Taliban factions. Thus, the Taliban occupy a unique position at the intersection of competing regional interests: they are simultaneously bolstered by Tehran to secure Iranian strategic objectives and observed by Washington as a potential instrument of influence in its broader Middle East policy. While both powers seek to utilize the Taliban for their respective purposes, their objectives are contradictory, highlighting the complexity of Afghan politics in a region shaped by overlapping strategic agendas.
Tehran’s reliance on the Taliban is further reinforced by the shifting Middle Eastern landscape. Efforts to expand the Abraham Accords, with states like Qatar and Saudi Arabia normalizing relations in ways that may marginalize Iran, exacerbate Tehran’s anxieties. In this context, the Taliban serve as one of the few remaining levers through which Iran can project power, maintain influence over Afghan territory, and hedge against the erosion of its broader regional networks. The collapse of Iranian leverage in Syria, Lebanon, and Palestinian territories has heightened the importance of Afghanistan as a zone where Tehran can exercise strategic discretion. The Taliban thus function as a last-resort proxy, ensuring that Iran retains a degree of operational control in a region increasingly influenced by competing powers and diplomatic realignments.
Iran’s focus on the Taliban also reflects concerns about domestic vulnerabilities. The Iranian leadership is aware that political and cultural revivals beyond its borders particularly in Persian-speaking regions like Afghanistan and Tajikistan—could embolden internal opposition and further weaken the regime’s authority. By bolstering the Taliban, Iran seeks to maintain a semblance of stability, ensuring that its external environment does not provide a template for domestic dissent. In essence, the Taliban act as both a buffer and a stabilizer for Iranian interests, helping to insulate Tehran from pressures that could arise from geopolitical shifts or internal reformist movements.
The consequences of this strategy are far-reaching. While Afghanistan remains under Taliban control, Iran’s involvement shapes political discourse, economic alignments, and security considerations in ways that extend beyond Kabul. By securing the Taliban as a reliable proxy, Tehran can influence Afghan domestic policies indirectly, ensure its borders are safeguarded from unregulated movements, and maintain leverage in regional negotiations. The Taliban’s position allows Iran to project power without direct confrontation, mitigating risks associated with overt intervention while maintaining strategic flexibility.
Ultimately, Tehran’s engagement with the Taliban is a product of necessity and pragmatism. Facing internal unrest, declining leverage in other theaters, and regional realignments that threaten its traditional influence, Iran has turned to the Taliban as a strategic hedge. For Tehran, the Taliban are not simply a partner in Afghan governance they are a critical instrument for preserving influence, counterbalancing rival powers, and mitigating the risk of unwanted political and cultural developments that could weaken Iran’s position in the Persian world.
As Afghanistan continues to navigate its political future, the presence and influence of Tehran-backed Taliban elements will remain a defining feature of the country’s regional interactions. This dynamic highlights the enduring importance of Afghanistan in broader geopolitical calculations and underscores the extent to which the Taliban have become central to the strategic interests of one of the region’s most consequential actors.
