The Middle East has been Reshaped Forever | Vali Nasr

Nasr argues that the war sharply weakened U.S. credibility: Washington failed to defeat Iran, protect its bases, or reassure Arab partners, prompting Gulf states to diversify toward Israel, India, Pakistan, and Turkey. He says that loss of confidence also damaged the Gulf’s investment model, which had assumed that data centers, AI infrastructure, manufacturing, services, trade, and tourism could remain insulated from regional conflict.

Nasr characterizes Iran as the conflict’s relative winner because the Islamic Republic survived the strikes, retained power, and weakened trust in the American-Arab security relationship. He argues that the strategy of removing the supreme leader and selected Revolutionary Guard commanders misread Iran’s internal politics: nationalist backlash strengthened the regime, no replacement faction emerged, and a new supreme leader was installed.

The failed 60-day memorandum and continued pressure around the Strait of Hormuz have produced a cycle in which Washington seeks a more favorable agreement while Iran escalates through attacks on U.S. bases, tankers, and Saudi oil facilities to raise the costs of delay. Nasr argues that blockade-related trade disruption, rather than additional sanctions, is the main economic pressure on Iran, while diplomacy is now the only remaining path because further military escalation could trigger a larger conflict and damage the global economy.