The US-Israeli war on Iran has expanded beyond the expectations of most, if not all, of those who have willingly or unwillingly become involved in the conflict. As usual, careful calibration has become victim to chance, misperception, and misassumption. The price per barrel of oil has skyrocketed with the Strait of Hormuz effectively closed. The limiting of container traffic in the Persian Gulf has impacted the global economy. All of this is creating an inflationary trend that could lead to a global recession if the war continues and/or deepens – and for a wary Trump administration, midterms are on the horizon.
Most, if not all, are looking for an off ramp. Ideally, it would be one in which all sides can claim some sort of victory, the definition of which would vary widely. Trump has been all over the place with the goals and end game for this war. In true Trumpian fashion, sometimes it is strategically useful to keep moving the goal posts so that a game winning field goal can happen in any direction one kicks. But that is just one game. A more comprehensive conceptual paradigm is needed that catapults one – possibly fleeting – victory into a winning season.
But there is now an opportunity for that winning season by creating an on ramp to a bigger idea following the off ramp. Indeed, the Trump administration can lead the way by signaling that an off ramp to a war most no longer want can be found by simultaneously offering an on ramp to something everyone might very well find attractive.
Some of the most innovative solutions occur during times of crisis. It generates the collective attention of the international community to brainstorm resolutions – the space for new sets of ideas based on new sets of circumstances can emerge.
There are a number of changed circumstances because of this war, militarily, economically, and geo-strategically; however, perhaps the biggest change is psychological. Arab states of the Persian Gulf have long been portrayed as islands of stability in an otherwise volatile region, a repository for tourists, capital, transit trade, and expat relocation. This has been shattered by a war coming not just to their doorsteps but inside their homes. Realizing that their new found vulnerability might be due to their close association with an unpredictable United States under Trump, they may begin to seek shelter and safety by diversifying their allies and adopting more independent policies. Or, perhaps their collective shock of real insecurity presents an opportunity to construct a new, inclusive regional architecture, one that makes any repeat of what is happening now highly unlikely – with the real possibility of a secure and stable Middle East.
What would this look like? First, the off ramp would be a regional cease fire that would safeguard the Strait of Hormuz. This could lay the foundation for the on ramp, negotiating a security and economic architecture for the region. The ultimate product could look like a combination of NATO and the EU for the Middle East.
Collective security in the Middle East is not new. Post-WWII history in the region is replete with proposed defense pacts, organized mainly as a function of the superpower cold war and destined for failure due to the mismatching of international objectives with regional realities. Even a Middle East common market was discussed seriously in the 1990s, emerging out of the US-led UN coalition victory in the 1991 Gulf war. This fell victim to the inability to consummate an overall Arab-Israeli peace and the lack of true progress on the Palestinian issue. Any new attempt must be conscious of this history.
But a post-Iran war Middle East could be different. Whatever one might think of the Abraham Accords, they discarded remaining taboos for normalizing relations with Israel in the Arab world. It can provide the diplomatic foundation on which to build toward economic and security integration. This process can exponentially move forward if the current Israeli government, however unlikely, or a new Israeli government after elections, utters a simple phrase: Israel will work toward a two-state solution, with Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace. The Gaza war has shown that an overall Arab-Israeli concordant still cannot really happen until the Palestinian situation is resolved, or at least viable progress is made. This will provide the necessary cover for remaining Arab states, most notably Saudi Arabia, to make peace with Israel.
This new Middle East entente would not be arrayed against any particular country, say Iran, but rather promote security cooperation, protection, and economic integration across the region, Arab and non-Arab. Just as NATO has conditions for entrance, so would this new organization, although they would be quite different based on the different political systems and orientations of the countries involved. Indeed, a goal of this process would be to include Iran at some point in the near future if they agree to what all others have agreed to in terms of security and economic protocols, such as mutual defense, a nuclear free zone (yes, Israel too), and cross-border trade and transportation.
Now is the time for imagination, to not accept what could become a festering or intermittently very hot conflict environment if only claiming a one-game victory. It is time to take an off ramp on a highway to disaster and an on ramp to a different highway of possibility.
