Research & Commentary Results

This special episode of Middle East Focus features a conversation from MEI’s Virtual Briefing Series. Host Alistair Taylor is joined by former National Security Council Senior Director Stephen Flanagan and MEI Senior Fellow Iulia-Sabina Joja to discuss the impacts of the Iran war on US-European relations. The conflict has hit Europe’s economy hard and created deep divisions across the continent, even as some European countries play a quiet supporting role to the US. President Donald Trump has called for NATO member states to help secure shipping through the Iranian-blocked Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for international maritime trade. Flanagan and Joja explore the prospects for stepped-up European military involvement, the knock-on effects on the war in Ukraine, and the potential longer-term impact on the future of the US-European alliance.

Libya’s stability has taken on renewed strategic importance as the impact of the US and Israeli war with Iran reverberates through global energy markets. Sustaining existing Libyan oil production depends on a governing arrangement capable of keeping ports open, pipelines flowing, and revenues distributed without triggering conflict.

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states are confronting the greatest threat to their economic security and energy strategy since their formation. The economic fallout of the US-Israeli war with Iran is severe, but uneven across the Gulf. So too is each state’s ability to sustain energy exports and protect critical infrastructure—both of which have been targeted unequally by Iran.  

The US-Israeli war against Iran has created the largest disruption to global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies in modern history. There is a tremendous amount of economic uncertainty for Gulf states to navigate, and it will reshape the way they engage with one another and with Iran, Israel, and the United States for years to come. But this war has also laid bare how urgently the United States needs to update its own approach toward the Gulf states when it comes to energy.

The economic stress points vary considerably across the Gulf. Assuming a resumption of exports by May, Kuwait, Iraq, Bahrain, and Qatar still face sharply declining revenues and contracting GDP—as much as 14 percent in Kuwait and Qatar—because of shut ins, time to restart, and lack of alternative delivery routes. After the Iranian attacks on Ras Laffan, Qatar’s economic outlook and time to recovery look much more difficult.

Gulf states — including their national oil companies and sovereign and related entities — are energy giants. They understand the risks of a prolonged threat from Iran and did not choose this war. They also recognize the risks of their geographic location, should the region endure another bout of instability and dislocation from a fragmented and collapsing neighbor.

With the Strait of Hormuz closed and oil production from Iraq’s south in free fall, Baghdad’s failure to maximize the Iraq-Turkey Pipeline is no longer a policy dispute. It is a national emergency.

The Israeli-U.S. military strikes on Iran that began on February 28 have done more than ignite a Middle Eastern war. They have sent shockwaves rolling across Asia, from the Strait of Hormuz to the Sea of Japan, exposing the brittle underpinnings of regional energy systems, straining diplomatic balancing acts, and forcing governments to make hard choices they have long deferred.

The launch of large-scale US and Israeli strikes against Iran places Beijing in a strategically uncomfortable position. This campaign is the most significant US military operation since the Iraq War, unfolding across a region central to China’s energy security and commercial ambitions.

The latest cycle of U.S.-Iran escalation has followed a familiar script: sharpened rhetoric from the United States, calibrated military signaling by Iran in the Persian Gulf, indirect diplomacy through Oman, and Israeli warnings that remain deliberately ambiguous but unmistakably real. Yet beneath this choreography lies a more consequential development inside Tehran. The current crisis is forcing Iran’s political class to reassess its central foreign-policy wager of the past decade: that deepening alignment with Russia and China would provide strategic insulation against Western coercion.

Crude oil legally sanctioned by the United States and its allies today makes up an estimated 18% of global tanker capacity, or 6-7% of total unrefined petroleum flows — shares that have been growing. Increased pressure on Russian exports and US intervention in Venezuela have further constrained Russian flows and temporarily removed Venezuela, the smallest sanctioned producer, from the market. Iranian exports, however, remain largely untouched.

The Abraham Accords have represented a remarkable shift in U.S. Middle East policy. They reframed Arab-Israeli normalization as a result of shared interests – within the Middle East and directly with the US, rather than as a byproduct of Israeli-Palestinian peace. Signed in September 2020, on the last leg of the first Trump administration, the Accords brokered by Washington normalized relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain, followed by framework agreements with Morocco and Sudan. From the American perspective, the Accords were intended to break decades of diplomatic stagnation in the Middle East in order to establish a regional framework aligned with American strategic objectives.

In November 2025, the United States sought and obtained approval for a United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR 2803) endorsing the formation of a Board of Peace (BoP) and International Stabilization Force (ISF) to support the implementation of the 20-point peace plan agreed to by Israel and Hamas the previous month. The ISF’s stated role is to help secure and demilitarize the Gaza Strip, primarily by facilitating the decommissioning of weapons, protecting civilians, and training and advising burgeoning Palestinian police forces. In the intervening months, however, progress on standing up the ISF has stalled, and conflicting messaging from US officials provides more questions than answers.

Hosts Alistair Taylor and Matthew Czekaj are joined by MEI Distinguished Military Fellow Mick Mulroy to discuss the Trump administration’s new National Defense Strategy (NDS) and its implications for the Middle East. While serving as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (DASD) for the Middle East from 2017 to 2019, Mulroy helped prepare the 2018 NDS, giving him an insider perspective on US defense planning. Together, Taylor, Czekaj, and Mulroy unpack what the new strategy means for US priorities globally and for the Middle East in particular, including how it could be reflected in a potentially looming military strike on Iran.