Sara Sadek is an affiliated researcher and coordinator at the Center for Migration and Refugee Studies (CMRS) at the American University in Cairo. She obtained an MA in Refugee Studies from the University of East London. Since 2005, she has worked on various research projects on Iraqi and Sudanese communities in Egypt, contributing to a report on Iraqis in Egypt and recently producing a paper on challenges of integration for Iraqis in Arab states for the Henry L. Stimson Center’s forthcoming volume Transnational Challenges.
Brian sits down with Andrew J. Tabler, the Martin J. Gross Senior Fellow in the Linda and Tony Rubin Program on Arab Politics at The Washington Institute, to trace his unique and distinctive path from Oil City, Pennsylvania, to fourteen years living and working in the Middle East. Tabler discusses his time in Syria under the Assad regime, his service as director for Syria at the National Security Council and as senior advisor to the Special Envoy for Syria Engagement at the US State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs in the first Trump administration, and explains how these experiences shaped his perspective and inspired him to found the Drake Energy Forum.
Saudi Arabia’s East-West pipeline is back in operation after a drone attack from Iraq, blamed on Iran-backed militias, shut it down for nearly two weeks. The pipeline is the kingdom’s main way to export oil while the Strait of Hormuz is closed, so the shutdown dealt another blow to global energy markets. How vulnerable is this route, and what does that mean for the kingdom and the world economy? This episode of Middle East Focus features a recent MEI Virtual Briefing in which Director of Communications Zeina Al-Shaib is joined by MEI Senior Fellow Colby Connelly and MEI Affiliate Yesar Al-Maleki. They examine the new geopolitical risks facing the oil market, what further losses of global supply could mean for Saudi Arabia and the world economy, and which buffers outside the Persian Gulf could ease the pressure.
When Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan agreed to a mutual defense pact in August, it was principally seen as a political commitment. The “Mecca alliance,” as it was dubbed, stipulated that an armed attack on one would be treated as an attack on all three, accompanied by deeper military cooperation.
This article is part of a collection of short essays written by the Fellows of the Middle East Institute to explore aspects of the ongoing war with Iran. The intent of the collection is to help readers see new and unexpected elements of the dynamics and impact of the ongoing hostilities and to think harder, deeper, and broader about the implications of the conflict.
The outbreak of the war with Iran demonstrated the strategic value of maritime chokepoints in the Islamic Republic’s confrontation with the United States. But as Tehran’s strategy of using the Strait of Hormuz to pressure Washington seems to be backfiring, Iran is working with the Houthis to strengthen its leverage over another strategic chokepoint: the Bab el-Mandeb. The recent escalation in Yemen should be viewed within this context.
As the summer draws to a close, the storyline for the 2026 Iran war remains incomplete and the United States’ broader Middle East policy direction highly uncertain. None of the major issues that have long headlined Washington’s Iran portfolio appear any closer to resolution, and new problems have emerged that did not exist before.
A war that the White House initially hoped would be brief has now dragged on for more than six months, with prospects for a resolution frustratingly remote, and the Trump administration’s credibility among friend and foe alike is nearly exhausted. Focusing on defense and security, there are multiple lessons from the Iran war that should shape US strategic thinking.
In February 2026, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan suggested that shifting international dynamics could push Turkey to acquire nuclear weapons. That rhetoric, combined with Turkey’s civilian nuclear energy and research programs and its indigenous surface-to-surface missile development projects, has fueled concerns that these capabilities could eventually form the backbone of a Turkish nuclear weapons program.
When the US and Israel launched military action against Iran on February 28, 2026, it set in motion a chain of events that saw violence spread across the Middle East. Yet as the region found itself engulfed in conflict, Syria has experienced its most peaceful months in 15 years, and the government in Damascus appears determined to stay its course toward recovery.
More than 30 years after NATO overcame the threat from the Eastern Bloc, the alliance is struggling. Russia is waging war on Ukraine, the US is trying to pivot to Asia, and fresh conflict has erupted on Europe’s doorstep, with Russia and China both seeking advantage. Unexpectedly, for an alliance feeling unmoored, herein lies opportunity.
The war with Iran has not yet resolved the contest between Tehran and Washington, but it has already begun to reshape the Middle East — and nowhere as clearly in the United States’ favor as in Lebanon. The challenges in Lebanon have presented the US with a defining test: whether Washington and its partners have the determination to convert Iran’s material losses into lasting strategic change.
The 20-point plan for Gaza introduced before the war with Iran began has languished, with no meaningful recovery, reconstruction, Hamas disarmament, governance transition, or Israeli withdrawal. The diplomatic pivot back to Gaza in late July and early August suggests that the Iran war’s stubborn persistence may be causing the US and regional actors to seek wins on other fronts.
The American-Israeli campaign against Iran that began in February 2026 resulted in a regional conflict its authors never intended. The war’s chief product is not what the United States and Israel destroyed, though that was significant, but what Iran proved: that it holds a strategic lever over its neighbors, the world economy, and the US.
