The Iran Cease-Fire Was Doomed to Fail: Why Transactionalism Won’t Deliver Peace in the Middle East

Foreign Affairs | Neil Quilliam, Sanam Vakil

The United States and Iran have resumed bilateral missile and drone strikes following the collapse of their June 2026 memorandum of understanding, which also closed the strategic Strait of Hormuz. This breakdown highlights the inherent instability of transactional diplomacy, which prioritizes short-term conflict management over addressing root geopolitical grievances.

Similar to the October 2025 Gaza cease-fire—which left Hamas armed and Israel in control of 70 percent of the enclave—these limited bargains fail to establish durable regional security frameworks. Instead, they foster a dangerous security dilemma where regional actors, including Gulf states that traded commercial ties for unfulfilled American security guarantees, face severe economic and physical vulnerabilities. With the Houthis breaking a long-standing cease-fire to trade strikes with Saudi Arabia on July 13 and declaring a naval blockade on July 20, the Middle East faces an escalating risk of a dual-chokepoint shipping crisis.

Comment

The collapse of transactional security arrangements in the Persian Gulf exposes the structural fragility of the Abraham Accords framework. By decoupling regional normalisation from core territorial disputes, these bilateral pacts left Gulf signatories highly vulnerable to asymmetric retaliation from Tehran's proxy network. Consequently, the absence of integrated air defence architectures or formal mutual assistance treaties within the Abraham Accords framework prevents the formation of a cohesive deterrent front against Iranian missile strikes. This deficit ultimately forces Gulf capitals like Abu Dhabi and Manama to hedge between Washington and Tehran during active hostilities.

To read in details click here