Beyond Hormuz: Iran and the Geopolitics of IMEC

The strategic significance of Iran extends far beyond its well-known leverage over the Strait of Hormuz. Recent regional conflicts have demonstrated that Tehran possesses another, less discussed form of geopolitical influence: the ability to undermine the strategic viability of the India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC).

IMEC was conceived as a geo-economic alternative designed to reduce dependence on traditional maritime chokepoints while strengthening connectivity among India, the Gulf, and Europe. Yet the corridor relies on a regional security architecture that assumes stable political relations across the Middle East. That assumption has become increasingly fragile.

Iran’s capacity to generate strategic uncertainty—whether through direct military confrontation, deterrence, or its network of regional partners—has substantially increased the perceived political and security risks surrounding the corridor. The issue is therefore not merely whether the Strait of Hormuz can be disrupted, but whether the broader geopolitical environment required for IMEC can be sustained. As several recent analyses have noted, the corridor’s implementation has become considerably more difficult under conditions of persistent regional instability.

This reveals an important shift in contemporary geopolitics. Iran is no longer simply a state capable of influencing a maritime chokepoint; it has become a strategic variable affecting the feasibility of competing connectivity projects themselves. In other words, Tehran’s geopolitical leverage increasingly extends from controlling flows to shaping the infrastructure through which future flows are expected to pass.

For policymakers, the implication is clear: the future of Eurasian connectivity cannot be understood solely through maps of trade corridors. It must also be assessed through the geopolitical balance of power that determines whether those corridors can ever become operational.