Did America ever have a plan for the Middle East? | The Economist

Historical Drivers of US Involvement:

• Oil security and the Carter Doctrine remain foundational to US regional strategy, though the US has shifted from importer to exporter.
• Sentimental and ideological attachments to Israel continue to distort American policy.
• US involvement is partly a historical accident stemming from British and French mandates after WWI and their inability to manage the region post-Suez.
• Gulf states actively encouraged US security outsourcing via the "oil for security" bargain.
• Israel has consistently welcomed and benefited from US intervention and support.

Evolution and Current State of US Policy:

• Since the Arab Spring in 2011, the US has lacked a coherent strategy, operating instead on a reactive basis to immediate events.
• George W. Bush's 2000s policy was the last distinct framework, focused on exporting democracy (which failed).
• The region does not share a liberal democratic ideology with the US, making US interventions ideologically disconnected from local dynamics.
• The US is currently withdrawing military forces from Syria and Iraq and drawing down presence in the Gulf.
• The US is pivoting toward economic leverage, relying on sanctions as a primary tool rather than direct military intervention.

Iranian Internal Dynamics and Succession:

• The Iranian regime is currently reconfiguring itself following the nomination of Supreme Leader Mujtaba Khamenei in March.
• The absence of the new Supreme Leader for six months has created a power struggle and uncertainty regarding who will control future negotiations.
• Internal factions disagree on strategy: whether to escalate for leverage or attempt a deal with the US despite past US unreliability.
• No nuclear or security deal is expected until the succession question and internal power balance are resolved.

Gulf State Calculations on Iranian Strength:

• Strong Iran: Viewed negatively if it controls the Strait of Hormuz, but Gulf states may still seek deals to maintain economic flow.
• Weak or Collapsed Iran: Removes the immediate military threat but creates risks of a failed state, non-state actor proliferation, and refugee flows.
• Gulf states face a "no-win" scenario regardless of the war's outcome, requiring them to hedge their bets with Iran.

Regional Security and Power Vacuums:

• A strong Iran will likely seek to rebuild and rearm militias (Hezbollah, Houthis, Iraqi groups) to reassert regional power in the event of US withdrawal.
• Despite claims of leadership decapitation, the Iranian regime has demonstrated resilience and an ability to reassert control quickly.
• Hezbollah remains stronger than the Lebanese government and capable of holding its own against state forces.
• Analysts dispute the existence of a power vacuum; instead, forces like Iranian proxies are positioned to compete for hegemony once US influence recedes.