Escalating regional militarisation: How US-Israel-Saudi axis weaponises infrastructure as geopolitical leverage against Iran

Indigenous and traditional perspectives on infrastructure often prioritise communal access and ecological harmony over militarised control. In Iran, railway systems have long been tied to narratives of national resilience, particularly during the Iran-Iraq War when civilian infrastructure became a target of foreign aggression. The framing of trains as 'targets' ignores the cultural significance of public transit as a unifier in a diverse, multi-ethnic state like Iran, where railways connect Persian, Azeri, Kurdish, and Baloch communities.

The weaponisation of infrastructure is not new—it dates back to colonial-era blockades, such as Britain’s 1951 oil embargo on Iran during the Abadan Crisis, and the 2019 attacks on Saudi Aramco facilities, which disrupted 5% of global oil supply. The 1973 Yom Kippur War saw Arab states use oil as a weapon, while Israel’s 2006 Lebanon War targeted Lebanon’s civilian infrastructure, including roads and power plants. Trump’s 'maximum pressure' campaign on Iran mirrors Reagan-era sanctions on Nicaragua, where economic warfare aimed to destabilise a sovereign government.

Cross-culturally, infrastructure is often a site of both cooperation and conflict—China’s high-speed rail projects in Africa and Southeast Asia are framed as development, while Western powers historically used railways to extract resources (e.g., British-built Indian railways for cotton and tea). In the Middle East, the Hejaz Railway (1900–1914) was a symbol of Ottoman modernity but also a target of Arab revolt, illustrating how transport systems become proxies for political struggles. The Saudi-Bahrain bridge, meanwhile, reflects Gulf states’ ambivalence toward integration, where economic ties are pursued while political autonomy is fiercely guarded.

From a systems perspective, the targeting of civilian infrastructure violates international humanitarian law (e.g., Geneva Conventions’ protections for civilian objects) and exacerbates humanitarian crises by disrupting supply chains for food, medicine, and fuel. Studies on sanctions regimes (e.g., UNICEF reports on Iran) show that economic warfare disproportionately harms vulnerable populations, including children and the elderly. The use of 'dual-use' justifications (e.g., trains as potential military transport) is a loophole exploited to normalise civilian harm, as seen in NATO’s 1999 bombing of Serbian railways during the Kosovo War.

Artistically, infrastructure has been a recurring motif in Middle Eastern cinema and literature—from Abbas Kiarostami’s films depicting Iran’s rural roads as symbols of isolation and connection, to the poetry of Mahmoud Darwish, who framed bridges as metaphors for occupation and resistance. In Persian culture, railways are often depicted as veins of the nation, pulsing with life and resilience. Meanwhile, in Gulf states, the Saudi-Bahrain bridge is a contested symbol, with some seeing it as progress and others as a neocolonial imposition, reflecting deeper spiritual tensions around unity versus sovereignty.

Scenario modelling suggests that continued militarisation of infrastructure could trigger a regional arms race in cyber and kinetic attacks on critical systems, with ripple effects for global trade (e.g., disruptions to the Strait of Hormuz). A potential escalation pathway involves Iran retaliating by targeting Gulf energy exports, while Israel and Saudi Arabia deepen military coordination, further alienating Arab publics. Long-term, this could accelerate de-dollarisation efforts in the region, as states seek alternatives to US-controlled financial systems to mitigate sanctions risk.

Marginalised voices include Iranian railway workers, who face heightened risks of attack while commuting to work, and Bahraini Shia communities, who oppose the Saudi-Bahrain bridge as a symbol of forced unification under Sunni-led regimes. Palestinian citizens in Israel, who rely on shared infrastructure with the West Bank, are also affected by the normalisation of military strikes on transport networks. Additionally, migrant labourers in Gulf states—who build and maintain these infrastructures—are often excluded from political debates but bear the brunt of economic fallout.