What capabilities do Iran's regional proxies (Hezbollah, Houthis, Iraqi militias) bring to a sustained conflict with Israel?
Executive summary
Iran’s regional proxies offer complementary, asymmetric capabilities that can prolong and complicate a conflict with Israel: Hezbollah brings the most sophisticated missile and ground-force threat from the north, the Houthis provide maritime and long-range drone/missile pressure from the south, and Iraqi militias offer episodic rocket, drone and sabotage options that can tie down Israeli and U.S. attention—but all operate within limits imposed by autonomy, logistics, and recent attrition from Israeli and U.S. strikes [1] [2] [3]. Tehran’s support amplifies these effects while also creating risks of loss of control and escalation that have constrained full synchronization so far [4] [5].
1. Hezbollah: a near-peer asymmetric force on Israel’s northern flank
Hezbollah is the single most capable proxy confronting Israel: over decades it has built an extensive arsenal of rockets and missiles capable of striking deep into Israel, integrated air-defence and anti-armor systems, and a disciplined, brigade-like ground force that has fought in Syria and refined combined-arms tactics—meaning it can conduct sustained rocket salvos, interdiction of border zones, and limited ground operations to shape a protracted front that forces Israeli dispersion and civil-defense strain [1] [6] [2]. Despite setbacks from repeated Israeli strikes and the broader kinetic campaign that degraded some forward capabilities, analysts still rank Hezbollah’s sophistication and stockpiles as regionally unique among proxies, making it the primary engine of a sustained northern campaign [1] [5].
2. Houthis: a maritime and long-range asymmetric lever from the Red Sea
The Houthis specialize in anti-shipping attacks, sea-denial operations, and the use of drones and cruise/ballistic missiles to reach Israeli or transiting vessels and infrastructure, a capability that can economically and politically raise the costs of conflict by threatening global trade routes and port operations; they have demonstrated long-range strikes on Red Sea shipping and the potential to threaten Israel indirectly by attacking maritime lines of communication [1] [2]. Their geography makes a southern axis asymmetric rather than conventionally decisive, but persistent Houthi strikes can force Israel and allies to divert naval and air assets, complicating logistics and international pressure dynamics [1].
3. Iraqi militias: opportunistic, disruptive, and politically useful pressure points
Iraqi Shiʿa militias aligned with Tehran have shown an aptitude for episodic rocket and drone strikes, ambushes, and attacks on U.S. bases—operations that demonstrate low-cost methods to harass adversaries and require defensive responses—but their direct military reach into Israel is more limited than Hezbollah’s or the Houthis’ and tends to be politically calibrated or intermittent rather than orchestrated for sustained front-line combat [3] [7]. Their strategic value to Iran lies in creating multiple crisis zones that force Israel and the U.S. to allocate attention and resources across Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and the sea lanes, even if Iraqi groups lack the logistics for prolonged direct campaigns against Israel itself [3] [7].
4. Iran’s enabling role — amplifier and constraint
Tehran supplies finance, weapons (including missiles and drones), training, and targeting assistance that knit these disparate actors into a deterrent network capable of synchronized pressure, while preserving plausible deniability; this amplifies effectiveness but does not eliminate autonomy—proxies have acted independently in ways that risk escalation beyond Iran’s intentions, and Iranian command-and-control and logistic vulnerabilities (exposed by strikes in Syria and elsewhere) have at times degraded proxy effectiveness [4] [6] [5]. Iran’s own missile arsenal remains a strategic reserve that can be used directly, but prior kinetic exchanges have shown Tehran’s calculus balances deterrence aims against the risk of a broader war that could invite overwhelming retaliation [5] [8].
5. Strategic implications and escalation dynamics for Israel
Collectively the proxies force Israel into a multi-domain, multi-front defense problem: ballistic and cruise missiles, massed rocket salvos, swarm drones, maritime attacks, and intermittent ground probing can cumulatively grind Israeli air defenses, deplete interceptors, strain logistics, and impose economic and social costs—outcomes that complicate Israeli military planning and elevate the likelihood of U.S. involvement or preemptive counter-strikes [1] [9] [8]. Yet the network’s limitations—varying capabilities, political constraints inside host countries, and prior attrition—mean it is better suited to prolonged attrition and harassment than to a single decisive campaign to destroy Israel [3] [4].
6. Caveats, unknowns and likely trajectories
Open-source reporting documents the broad contours above but cannot fully resolve command relationships, exact stockpile levels after 2024–25 strikes, or the degree to which Tehran can or will forcibly synchronize all proxies for a sustained, high-intensity campaign; several sources warn proxies may act independently and that Iran’s deterrence model has been damaged yet not abandoned, leaving significant uncertainty about escalation thresholds and endurance [4] [5] [10]. Where reporting is silent about specific clandestine linkages or current inventories, this analysis refrains from definitive claims and instead relies on observed behavior and expert assessments in the cited sources [7] [6].