Among the lesser-known chapters in the career of Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi’s predecessor, General Eyal Zamir, is his time spent away from battlefields and war rooms. Despite a four-decade military record filled with high-ranking commands, it was Zamir’s year-long fellowship at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (2021–2022) that offers a revealing glimpse into the ideological blueprint shaping Israel’s current war with Iran.
During this research period, Zamir authored a 75-page strategic paper in May 2022 titled:
“Confronting Iran’s Regional Strategy: A Comprehensive Long-Term Plan.”
This document laid out a clear vision for countering what he described as Iran’s relentless expansion in the Middle East. In his analysis, Iran had surpassed the phase of regional nuisance and had approached nuclear breakout capability — a transformation that, in his view, necessitated a major shift in Western and Israeli policy.
Zamir’s framing sees Iran not as a temporary challenge, but as a deep-rooted geopolitical threat, one stretching back to the Islamic Revolution of 1979. His paper offered a detailed roadmap for U.S., Israeli, and Gulf policymakers, positioning Iran as the most complex threat to Western and Israeli dominance in the region.
A Strategic Threat Beyond Sanctions
Zamir argued that Iran could no longer be treated as a “rogue state” manageable through sanctions. Instead, it had evolved into a strategic adversary demanding a multi-front containment policy, involving the U.S., Israel, and allied Arab regimes.
His recommendations centred on a long-term plan to roll back Iran’s regional influence, designed to protect American and Israeli interests and uphold Western control over Middle Eastern security frameworks.
Zamir’s View of Iranian “Hegemony”
Zamir asserted that Tehran had developed a sophisticated, long-range strategy to expand its influence via the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and a web of loyal non-state actors across Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen.
Countering this network, he argued, would require far more than limited strikes or symbolic actions. It demanded a comprehensive, multi-domain response that integrated military, intelligence, economic, and ideological components.
Zamir described Iran’s actions not as tactical power grabs, but as part of a grand strategic campaign, willing to make temporary concessions — even within nuclear negotiations — to strengthen its long-term positioning.
Three Axes of Iranian Expansion, According to Zamir:
- Expanding a transnational militia network (e.g., Hezbollah, Houthis, Hashd al-Shaabi, Hamas).
- Maintaining regime stability via both conventional and unconventional military build-up.
- Undermining U.S. and Western presence through asymmetrical pressure and proxy warfare.
At the core of this structure stands the IRGC, operating beyond traditional military roles and acting as a state-within-a-state, managing Iran’s security, economy, and foreign influence operations.
Zamir warned that the IRGC’s real threat lay not only in its military capability, but in its ability to destabilise enemies through proxy warfare, including drone and missile attacks launched by the Houthis, framed as “asymmetric strategic disruption.”
The Shadow Army: Iran’s Regional Empire
Central to Zamir’s concerns was the Quds Force, the IRGC’s external operations arm, which he viewed as superior to Iran’s conventional military in shaping regional geopolitics.
He detailed an interconnected militant structure, including:
- Hezbollah in Lebanon
- Houthis in Yemen
- Iraqi Shi’a militias like Kata’ib Hezbollah and Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq
- Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas
- Foreign Shi’a fighters in Syria under Fatemiyoun and Zainabiyoun brigades
Zamir estimated the “radical Shiite army” to comprise over 200,000 fighters, embedded across multiple fronts.
He warned that any nuclear agreement providing Iran with economic relief would fund this network, expanding Tehran’s missile arsenal and proxy war capabilities rather than alleviating domestic suffering.
From Sanctions to Cyberwar: Zamir’s Deterrence Doctrine
Zamir proposed a seven-pronged plan to confront Iran, blending military, cyber, economic, and ideological tools into a single doctrine of deterrence:
- Cripple the IRGC’s financial networks, especially the Quds Force.
- Use flexible, targeted military reprisals to re-establish red lines.
- Launch cyberattacks to weaken Iranian infrastructure and communications.
- Isolate and disrupt proxy groups, severing support chains.
- Expand the Abraham Accords to tighten Israel’s regional grip.
- Wage an ideological “war of ideas” to weaken Iran’s revolutionary appeal among Shi’a populations.
- Prevent nuclear breakout at all costs, by force if necessary.
He called for the integration of Israel into CENTCOM, enabling joint operations with Arab states and facilitating shared intelligence, missile defence development, and cyber warfare capabilities.
Zamir emphasised that while diplomatic channels should remain open, they must not become substitutes for military readiness. Agreements with Tehran, he insisted, were merely tactical pauses in Iran’s ideological struggle, not genuine settlements.
How This Study Shapes Today’s War
Though written in mid-2022, Zamir’s study reads like a prelude to Israel’s current war strategy post-October 7, 2023.
Following the Hamas-led Al-Aqsa Flood Operation, Israel shifted from a policy of containment to a campaign of preemptive elimination — one that seeks to reshape the regional balance of power.
In this context, Zamir’s framing of Iran’s nuclear ambitions as an existential threat and his focus on dismantling Iran’s deterrence capabilities (through assassinations, cyber sabotage, and military strikes) has become Israeli doctrine.
Since Trump’s withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018, Israel has intensified its efforts to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program, targeting nuclear scientists, facilities, and command centres.
Who Is Eyal Zamir? A Profile of Israel’s Strategic Architect
Before becoming Israel’s Chief of Staff, Zamir held top military roles:
- Head of Ground Forces Command
- Military Secretary to Prime Minister
- Commander of Southern Command
- Deputy Chief of Staff
He oversaw massive weapons deals, expanded Israel’s defence industry, and completed elite military and academic training in France and the U.S., including a Wharton executive program.
Zamir’s year at the Washington Institute — an AIPAC-linked think tank — gave him access to powerful policy circles. The Institute, though officially non-partisan, is deeply embedded in U.S. foreign policy formation, particularly via figures like Martin Indyk, Dennis Ross, and Robert Satloff.
Zamir’s background is rooted in a right-wing Israeli-Syrian family, and his rise through Israel’s military hierarchy was marked by an ideological commitment to expanding Israeli regional dominance.
Conclusion: A War Informed by Doctrine, Not Just Reaction
Eyal Zamir’s strategic doctrine offers a lens through which to understand the current Israeli military approach toward Iran and its allies. His vision — steeped in decades of planning and bolstered by U.S. institutional backing — underscores that this war is not spontaneous, but deliberate, built on years of preparation, projection, and provocation.
In his own words:
“This work is the fruit of many years of broad reading, deep study, and reflection on the Iranian challenge, across various roles I’ve held in the Israeli army.”
This is not merely a military conflict. It is an ideological war, waged with missiles, sanctions, surveillance, and narratives — and Zamir wants it to end not with compromise, but with submission.
