U.S.-Based Groups Declare Unconditional Solidarity with Iran and the “Axis of Resistance”
Executive Summary
On June 25, 2025, the Tariq El-Tahrir Youth and Student Network alongside Al-Yudur Palestinian Youth released a joint statement from the United States pledging unwavering support for Iran and its “Axis of Resistance.” They denounce recent Israeli and U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear and military sites as “Zionist terror” and assert that armed resistance is not merely permissible under international law (citing UN Resolution 3070) but an imperative duty. By framing missiles, fedayeen actions, and diplomatic efforts as inseparable tools of decolonial struggle, they cast all normalizing Arab regimes as traitors and predict their downfall alongside the collapse of the Zionist entity itself.
Analysis
The declaration’s tone is maximalist: it presents the “Axis of Resistance” not as a pragmatic geopolitical network but as the embodiment of internationalist anti-colonial solidarity. In a single, sweeping narrative, the authors link the mountains of Yemen, the streets of Baghdad, the fields of South Lebanon, and Iran’s fortified nuclear sites into one uninterrupted front against U.S. and Israeli “imperialism.” They invoke the sacrifices of martyrs and the moral weight of UN Resolution 3070 to argue that resistance—whether through missiles, materials, or martyrdom—is an indivisible whole, not subject to moral or strategic caveats.
Yet the practical counterpart to these rhetorical commitments tells a different story. Since Israel’s June 13 strikes on Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan—and the subsequent U.S. deployment of B-2 bombers to drop Massive Ordnance Penetrators—Tehran’s key proxies have been conspicuously restrained. Hezbollah, reeling from last year’s decapitation of its leadership and the loss of Syrian supply lines, has largely avoided cross-border rocket fire. Iraqi Shi‘ite militias, despite their history of targeting U.S. forces, have held back, wary of provoking a broader American escalation. And the Houthis in Yemen, though publicly vowing to hit Israeli and U.S. shipping lanes, have limited attacks to avoid crippling essential services in territory they govern.
Analysts point to three main drivers of this restraint. First, Israel’s precision assassinations of IRGC Quds Force commanders and senior military staff have created a command vacuum, disrupting coordination across the militia network. Second, the December 2024 fall of the Assad regime severed the overland corridors that once funneled rockets and guided munitions to Lebanon, exposing Hezbollah to supply shortages in a high-intensity conflict. Third, Iran’s proxies fear severe domestic backlash if they drag their communities into a wider war, especially at a moment when their own populations face economic hardship and infrastructure damage from intermittent strikes.
This gap between ideological zeal and operational prudence reveals a deepening crisis in Iran’s “forward defense” doctrine. For four decades, Tehran has relied on allied non-state actors to extend its strategic depth and deter aggression via asymmetric means. Yet when the Islamic Republic itself comes under direct assault, its proxies’ hesitation undermines Tehran’s deterrent credibility. Looking ahead, Iranian strategists may conclude that resources are better invested in reliable indigenous capabilities—drones, precision missiles, cyber-offensive tools, and robust air defenses—rather than uncertain militia interventions.
Finally, the fervent solidarity voiced by U.S.-based networks such as Tariq El-Tahrir risks outpacing the material realities of the conflict. Grandiose calls for “death to Zionism,” the criminalization of Arab normalization, and the prediction of regime collapses may energize a radical base but can also alienate potential allies and trigger state repression at home. If genuine solidarity is to be more than rhetoric, it must align moral support with strategic understanding, acknowledging the operational constraints facing proxies and the necessity of disciplined, coordinated action on the ground.
