A New War on Iran Would Deal a Death Blow to U.S. Leadership in the Mideast

Foreign Policy | Marc Lynch

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Trump administration are reportedly preparing a renewed military campaign against Iran following the 3 November U.S. midterm elections, raising the risk of widespread Middle Eastern destabilisation. While intended to force concessions or trigger regime collapse in Tehran, a protracted strike cycle risks hardening Iranian domestic resistance and severely disrupting critical maritime shipping lanes.

The regional strategic landscape has shifted significantly following the Houthi seizure of the Bab el-Mandeb chokepoint in September and militia drone strikes on Saudi Arabia’s East-West pipeline. Gulf economies cannot endure endless maritime disruption. Recognising that international military intervention carries severe political risks, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan ratified the Mecca Pact while simultaneously pursuing diplomatic outreach to Iran alongside Oman. Consequently, a renewed U.S.-Israeli campaign risks accelerating regional diplomatic realignment toward Tehran, undermining Washington's security posture across the Persian Gulf.

Comment

The ratification of the Mecca Pact by Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan demonstrates a structural shift in regional collective security away from exclusive reliance on Washington. While the agreement establishes a framework for trilateral defence cooperation, its operational utility remains constrained by divergent national interests regarding direct troop deployments in Yemen. Gulf states are increasingly insulating themselves against U.S. policy unpredictability by building overlapping diplomatic and security arrangements.

This institutional hedging accelerates the de-coupling of regional energy security from Western military umbrella guarantees. Consequently, Riyadh's ability to bypass maritime chokepoints using the East-West pipeline remains subordinated to bilateral diplomatic arrangements struck directly with Tehran.

Strategic Question for Discussion

If the Mecca Pact fails to provide ground forces for regional conflict resolution, does the arrangement genuinely alter Gulf security dynamics, or does it merely function as a symbolic hedge against U.S. retrenchment?

The available evidence points toward the Mecca Pact acting primarily as a diplomatic hedge rather than an integrated operational alliance. While the treaty signals a willingness to diversify security partnerships beyond Washington, member state reluctance to deploy combat troops limits its immediate deterrence against non-state adversaries.

Share your assessment in the comments below.

Read the original article