Iran’s Absence at the Sharm el-Sheikh: Diplomacy or Inaction?
WANA (Oct 14) – The Sharm el-Sheikh summit is set to shape the future of Gaza — but Iran will not be among the parties involved, as the meeting has been convened primarily to legitimize a plan that ignores the rights of the Palestinian people. It should be noted that Iran was invited merely to play a ceremonial role, not to take part in any real decision-making or agenda-setting process.
Hamas, despite accepting the conditions of a ceasefire, also announced that it would not participate in the summit, understanding that the meeting aims to approve a plan designed to disarm Hamas and eliminate its role in Gaza’s future.
This development aligns with the U.S. strategy of imposing peace through power — a policy that effectively consolidates Israeli control over Gaza’s destiny, with no clear indication of when Israel might fully withdraw from the territory. Such a trajectory could also delay the formation of a two-state solution for years to come.
Given this context, Iran’s participation in such a summit would amount to endorsing and ultimately accepting a plan that not only fails to ease tensions between Palestinians and Israelis but would likely exacerbate them.
Sharm el-Sheikh Peace Summit on October 13, 2025. Social media/ WANA News Agency
Even in a hypothetical scenario where the Islamic Republic of Iran were to alter its stance — formally recognizing Israel and leaving the Palestinian issue to its own people — its attendance at this summit would only make sense if it received at least some form of reciprocal concession.
From the standpoint of defensive realism, Iran’s participation in the Sharm el-Sheikh summit would amount to playing on a field designed by the United States, without gaining any tangible benefit in line with its national interests.
In response to those who argue that Iran should abandon the “empty chair” policy and take part in international conferences to explain its positions, it must be noted that Iran had no effective opportunity to present its views at this particular summit. Why? The answer is clear:
Either Iran would have had to speak out sharply and lay bare all the injustices committed against the people of Palestine and Gaza over the past two years — which, given the composition of the invited countries, would have led to complete isolation and undermined the positive atmosphere created by the Foreign Ministry’s smartly worded statement on accepting the Gaza ceasefire.
Iran’s Meaningful Absence from Sharm el-Sheikh
WANA (Oct 14) – On the surface, Egypt’s invitation to Iran to attend the Sharm el-Sheikh Peace Summit appeared to be a green light for Tehran’s return to the regional dialogue table. In reality, however, Iran’s firm rejection of the invitation carried a message far beyond the bounds of ordinary diplomacy. The invitation was […]
Or, alternatively, Iran would have had to limit itself to vague, diplomatic formalities and general remarks, which would have implicitly endorsed the outcomes of the conference.
Therefore, the “empty chair” policy is indeed mistaken when it comes to summits whose agendas are the result of collective participation by all members. However, this principle does not apply to the Sharm el-Sheikh summit, where the agenda was pre-determined and dictated by the United States.
Moreover, considering the series of developments over the past few months, Iran lacked room for maneuver in Sharm el-Sheikh and was not in a position to introduce any new initiative at a meeting where everything had already been decided in advance.
Sharm el-Sheikh Peace Summit on October 13, 2025. Social media/ WANA News Agency
If Iran is to act effectively, it should take the initiative to hold meetings within the framework of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) — for instance, in Cairo — where, through cooperation with other countries, it might be possible to create a new environment for collaboration among Islamic nations in support of the Palestinian people — not necessarily limited to the Hamas movement.
In the end, experts are well aware of the real reason behind Iran’s absence from a summit designed by the United States. The foreign minister’s statement was merely a diplomatic pretext, the logic of which is unconvincing to analysts.
The true reason for Iran’s non-participation in such a meeting was its respect for the rights of the Palestinian people, since the summit ultimately ignored those rights in shaping Gaza’s future and reinforced Israel’s dominance over territories that are regarded by the United Nations as occupied lands.
