Interesting article on political Islam from 2007 by Samir Amin that I found. I will try to quote the relevant points:

I also agree that in their response to the challenge that confronts the peoples of the South, the forces in action are not necessarily consistent in their manner of dealing with its social and political dimensions. It is, thus, possible to imagine a political Islam that is anti-imperialist, though regressive on the social plane. Iran, Hamas in Palestine, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and certain resistance movements in Iraq immediately come to mind. I will discuss these particular situations later. What I contend is that political Islam as a whole is quite simply not anti-imperialist but is altogether lined up behind the dominant powers on the world scale.

This remains true. While Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and Ansar Allah in Yemen have acted in an anti imperialist manner, Jordan shot down the Iranian drones, and other countries in the region such as the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Egypt are pretty firmly lined up behind the United States in service of its imperialism, as the title of the article states. It was actually the more secular government in Syria that provided Iran with assistance yesterday by providing air defence for Iranian drones, to the best of their limited ability. The rest of the paragraphs go on to explain how the dominant imperialist powers of the time (first the UK and then the USA) promoted political Islam in opposition to secular and socialist/communist forces in the region. All of this is well known already most here, so I will not quote it. Feel free to read it if you want.

The Zionist colonial project has always been a threat, beyond Palestine, for neighboring Arab peoples. Its ambitions to annex the Egyptian Sinai and its effective annexation of the Syrian Golan are testimony to that. In the Greater Middle East project, a particular place is granted to Israel, to its regional monopoly of nuclear military equipment and its role as “indispensable partner” (under the fallacious pretext that Israel has technological expertise of which the Arab people are incapable. What an indispensable racism!) ...

It is Iranian nationalism—powerful and, in my opinion, altogether historically positive—that explains the success of the modernization of scientific, industrial, technological, and military capabilities undertaken by the Shah’s regime and the Khomeinist regime that followed. Iran is one of the few states of the South to have a national bourgeois project. Whether it be possible in the long term to achieve this project or not is not the focus of our discussion here. Today this project exists and is in place.

This is very important. The technological progress made by Iran and it's nationalist project has shattered the belief of invincibility within the colonial Zionist project. Such a belief amongst the general populace of Israel was always kept alive by racism, that Arabs, South-West Asians and Persians could not develop advanced technologies. But Iran has shattered that racist illusion and executed an attack on Israel with modern guided weaponry, including drone swarms, guided ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, hitting military targets accurately. This is a positive historical advance.

It is precisely because Iran forms a critical mass capable of attempting to assert itself as a respected partner that the United States has decided to destroy the country by a new preventive war. As is well known, the conflict is taking place around the nuclear capabilities that Iran is developing. Why should not this country, just like others, have the right to pursue these capabilities, up to and including becoming a nuclear military power? By what right can the imperialist powers and their Israeli accomplice boast about granting themselves a monopoly over weapons of mass destruction? Can one give any credit to the discourse that argues that “democratic” nations will never make use of such weapons like “rogue states” could, when it is common knowledge that the democratic nations in question are responsible for the greatest genocides of modern times, including the one against the Jews, and that the United States has already used atomic weapons and still today rejects an absolute and general ban on their use?

Unfortunately the West did succeed in maintaining Israel's monopoly on nuclear weapons with the Iran nuclear deal. They temporarily won that preventative war without having to take direct military action in Iran. However, there are many signs that Iran is looking to get to building nuclear weapons again. In conclusion:

The region of the Greater Middle East is today central in the conflict between the imperialist leader and the peoples of the entire world. To defeat the Washington establishment’s project is the condition for providing the possibility of success for advances in any region of the world. Failing that, all these advances will remain vulnerable in the extreme. That does not mean that the importance of struggles carried out in other regions of the world, in Europe or Latin America or elsewhere, should be underestimated. It means only that they should be part of a comprehensive perspective that contributes to defeating Washington in the region that it has chosen for its first criminal strike of this century.