In an era of evolving maritime threats and contested littoral zones, submarines have emerged as critical tools for state naval forces seeking strategic leverage against superior adversaries. This study explores the strategic use of submarines in asymmetric naval warfare, focusing on how select state actors employ undersea capabilities to offset conventional military imbalances. Using a qualitative research design, the study draws military doctrine analysis, and declassified strategic documents from countries such as Iran, North Korea, and Pakistan. Asymmetric Warfare Theory was adopted as the most suitable for this study, as it most directly addresses the structural power imbalances and unconventional strategies employed by smaller actors. The research reveals that submarines serve not only as instruments of deterrence and disruption but also as platforms for intelligence gathering, special operations delivery, and anti access/area denial (A2/AD) strategies. Key narratives indicate a deliberate embrace of stealth, surprise, and survivability as core principles in state submarine doctrine. The study further finds that the asymmetric value of submarines is enhanced by indigenous innovation, geographic advantage, and strategic ambiguity. By foregrounding the perspectives of naval officers, defense analysts, and maritime strategists within these states, the research contributes to a deeper understanding of how non-dominant maritime actors shape contemporary naval competition. The findings offer valuable insights for global defense policy, naval
architecture, and the dynamics of regional maritime deterrence.