The concept of messianic multipolarity, as articulated in the context of Russian foreign policy, offers a powerful lens through which to understand the foreign and domestic strategies of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Messianic multipolarity fuses a realist multipolar vision of global power—one where multiple centers of influence compete—with a quasi-religious or ideological mission. In this worldview, geopolitical power is not pursued merely for national interest, but as part of a larger civilizational, even divine, responsibility to challenge Western unipolar domination and the liberal democratic order it seeks to universalize.
In the case of Iran, this fusion of multipolar strategy and messianic belief is deeply embedded in the post-1979 Islamic Republic’s identity. The Iranian regime does not only seek survival in an anarchic world; it sees itself as the divinely chosen vanguard of a global Islamic awakening, an actor that not only resists Western hegemony but leads an alternative civilizational project rooted in Shi’a Islam, anti-imperialism, and ideological sovereignty. This self-perception shapes both its domestic politics and its foreign policy across the Middle East.
Iran’s foreign policy is not limited to securing borders or expanding influence through conventional means; it is animated by a sacred narrative. This narrative insists that Iran, as the heartland of Shi’a Islam and the inheritor of a revolutionary Islamic message, is obliged to challenge the moral corruption and political domination of the West, particularly the United States and Israel. The regime’s support for non-state actors like Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, Shi’a militias in Iraq, and even Sunni groups such as Hamas is justified through the lens of resisting a “Zionist-American axis,” which the regime paints as a global force of oppression and moral decay.
In this framework, multipolarity is not merely a strategic vision but a theological assertion: that Western liberalism is not universal, and that alternative, divinely inspired orders can and should exist. Iran thus allies itself with other non-Western powers—notably Russia and China—who also reject the unipolar liberal order. These alliances are framed not only in geopolitical terms but also civilizational ones: an axis of sovereignty, spirituality, and cultural resistance.
Domestically, the regime projects this ideology by asserting that liberal values such as democracy, gender equality, LGBTQ+ rights, and press freedom are Western tools of soft war aimed at undermining Iran’s Islamic identity. Any internal opposition that aligns itself with such values is portrayed as an agent of foreign influence. Thus, the suppression of dissent is reframed as a defense of national and religious sovereignty, echoing Russia’s own strategy of silencing civil society in the name of protecting “traditional values.”
Much like the Russian Orthodox Church provides spiritual justification for Putin’s imperial vision, the Iranian clerical establishment—with the Supreme Leader at its apex—provides the divine legitimacy for the regime’s multipolar resistance. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), acting as both a military force and an ideological guardian, enforces this vision across borders and within Iran’s social fabric. The IRGC’s elite Quds Force is explicitly tasked with exporting the revolution, tying military action to a higher mission.
The result is a sacralized foreign policy, in which proxy wars, regional interventions, and defiance of international norms are justified not in Machiavellian terms but as acts of faith, aimed at fulfilling the divine mandate of building a just Islamic order and resisting tyranny. This belief structure — a hybrid of Realpolitik and eschatology — explains why Iran continues to expend immense resources supporting foreign militias even under severe economic sanctions.
Nowhere is this messianic multipolarity more evident than in Iran’s posture toward Israel. The Islamic Republic does not view Israel as merely a geopolitical rival or an occupier of Arab lands. Rather, it portrays the existence of Israel as an affront to divine justice — a manifestation of Western imperialism implanted in the Islamic world. According to this worldview, the elimination of Israel is not just a strategic goal but a theological imperative. It is part of the cosmic battle between good and evil, between the “oppressed” (mostazafin) and the “arrogant powers” (mustakberin).
Iranian leaders routinely refer to Israel as a “cancerous tumor” that must be eradicated, and this rhetoric is not merely populist hyperbole. It is grounded in a messianic belief that the Islamic Republic, through its “axis of resistance,” is preparing the ground for the return of the Mahdi—the Shi’a messianic figure who, according to eschatological belief, will usher in an era of justice and Islamic governance across the world. In this vision, the war with Israel is not just inevitable but sacred—a prophesied confrontation that will culminate in divine victory.
This belief serves a dual purpose: it legitimizes endless confrontation with Israel and simultaneously justifies internal repression. Citizens questioning the utility or morality of Iran’s regional adventures are painted as traitors not just to the nation but to Islam itself. Critics of the regime are accused of weakening the messianic mission and aiding the enemy — reinforcing a totalizing narrative where politics, religion, and geopolitics collapse into one.
Importantly, Iran’s pursuit of messianic multipolarity does not occur in isolation. As Anne Applebaum has noted, the regimes of Iran, Russia, and China are increasingly coordinating their authoritarian worldviews and infrastructures, forming what she terms “Autocracy, Inc.” This informal alliance is not based merely on mutual interests, but on a shared hostility to the liberal international order and its normative foundations: human rights, democracy, pluralism, and individual freedoms.
Each member of this axis brings something unique to the table:
- Russia offers military hard power—especially in nuclear energy and arms sales—as well as disinformation tactics;
- China contributes economic leverage through its Belt and Road Initiative, surveillance technology, and market incentives; and
- Iran provides a revolutionary ideology, battle-tested proxy networks, and theocratic legitimacy.
Together, they form a tripolar front against liberalism, bolstering each other’s narratives and providing diplomatic cover in global forums like the UN. They support one another in times of crisis—China and Russia shield Iran from sanctions, while Iran backs Russia’s war in Ukraine rhetorically and materially. This system allows them to challenge democratic norms globally while maintaining authoritarian control at home.
In all three regimes, the liberal democratic project is cast as decadent, hypocritical, and imperialistic. They argue that liberal values are not universal but culturally specific, and thus should not be imposed on “traditional” societies. Messianic multipolarity becomes their ideological weapon: it doesn’t just deny Western dominance — it delegitimizes the very values underpinning that dominance.
What unites Iran, Russia, and China under this doctrine is their shared use of civilizational language. Each regime claims to represent a unique cultural or spiritual order under siege by globalism. Each accuses the West of cultural imperialism—exporting feminism, LGBTQ+ rights, secularism, and democracy in order to erode the sovereignty and identity of non-Western civilizations. Under the banner of multipolarity, they claim the right to govern without liberal constraints—to surveil, to censor, to imprison, to kill—because they are defending their civilization from extinction.
This ideological configuration—a blend of defensive nationalism, religious traditionalism, and anti-liberal universalism—is what makes these regimes so dangerous. They do not merely seek recognition within the international system; they seek to redefine it, replacing rules-based liberalism with a fragmented world order governed by authoritarian spheres of influence.
In conclusion, messianic multipolarity is not a neutral theory of international relations. In the hands of regimes like Iran’s, it becomes a theological and strategic doctrine. Iran’s leaders believe they are engaged in a holy mission — resisting Western unipolarity, destroying Israel, and preparing the world for the Mahdi. But this mission is not theirs alone. In alliance with Russia and China, Iran is helping construct a global authoritarian alternative—a world in which sovereignty is sacred, repression is legitimate, and human rights are dismissed as Western propaganda.
This “Autocracy, Inc.” represents the greatest threat to liberal values since the Cold War—not because it offers a better model, but because it offers no model at all, only resistance. It is a politics of negation—anti-liberal, anti-democratic, anti-universal — propped up by theologies of revenge, identities of victimhood, and ambitions of imperial restoration. Iran’s messianic multipolarity is the Islamic version of this worldview—and it is no less dangerous for being dressed in divine robes.
Bardia Farahmand is an independent analyst of Middle Eastern politics.
