By Howaida Awad Ahmed
To this day, the American-Iranian war has not truly ended, nor have the parties reached an agreement to close this chapter, which has yielded no decisive outcome. The Strait of Hormuz was not permanently closed, the Americans and their Zionist allies failed to obtain Iran’s enriched uranium, the rule of the clerical establishment was not overthrown, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was not eliminated, and Iran did not prove to be an easy target for complete penetration. Despite the heavy pressure exerted by the U.S. military presence in the Strait of Hormuz against Iranian forces, Washington failed to achieve results on the ground that would satisfy Israel and move it toward the next phase of its long-standing vision of expansion throughout the Middle East.
So far, what tangible benefits has Israel carefully planned for and successfully achieved?
It has destabilized the Gulf region, drawn it into a war it neither initiated nor chose, and strained Gulf Arab economies. Israeli arms exports reached a historic $19.2 billion, marking an unprecedented increase of 30 percent. This surge did not come from the United States or Europe, but rather from major arms deals with Gulf countries.
The United Arab Emirates and Bahrain purchased advanced air-defense systems and counter-drone technologies. Morocco also acquired air-defense systems based on the Barak MX platform, loitering munitions, electronic warfare systems, and signed agreements to establish two domestic factories for the production of Israeli drones.
These Arab funds are being injected into the Israeli economy, enabling further growth and deeper military and political penetration into Arab territories, particularly in Lebanon and Syria, while supporting the construction of new bases in the Mediterranean.
It is also widely known that some Gulf states have financed arms deals for Ethiopia, an ally of Israel, and supported the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan, thereby fueling conflict and instability south of Egypt and creating ongoing threats to Egypt’s southern borders.
Kushner’s investment fund, Affinity Partners, acquired islands in Albania with financial backing from Gulf investors in Qatar, Bahrain, and the UAE. According to this perspective, these islands may eventually host military facilities overlooking both the Mediterranean and Black Seas, with the strategic aim of influencing regional balances involving Egypt, Turkey, and maritime navigation.
Israel has also significantly deepened its ties with Greece and Cyprus through joint military exercises and drone operations. Greece subsequently granted Israel access to facilities associated with the Souda Bay base for intelligence activities during the confrontation with Iran.
In addition, Israel has been expanding its presence in the self-declared region of Somaliland, building relationships with local authorities and seeking influence near the Bab el-Mandeb Strait. This, according to proponents of this view, forms part of a broader regional alignment intended to counter Iran and its allies while affecting the interests of Egypt, Sudan, and Saudi Arabia.
As a result, global alliances are shifting, and the map of the Middle East continues to change, with new borders and emerging balances of power. Meanwhile, Israel continues to expand its influence amid what critics describe as weak resistance.
In the end, supporters of this interpretation argue that the entire geopolitical drama has become increasingly clear. They believe that the American-Iranian confrontation was carefully managed and ultimately served hidden strategic objectives.
According to this view, the region is being divided into spheres of influence shared between Israel and Iran. The first objective would be the eventual replacement of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and the restructuring of power across the Gulf, the Red Sea, and the wider Middle East.
This scenario envisions a controlled confrontation with Israel, designed to avoid major damage to critical Israeli infrastructure while allowing Tehran to present itself to its allies as actively resisting Israel. The United States would then appear as Israel’s protector, while Iran targets American bases in the Gulf and threatens Kuwait, Bahrain, the UAE, and Qatar.
Following damage to Gulf airports and radar systems, the Strait of Hormuz could become effectively closed, leaving Gulf states isolated. Under this interpretation, the blockade would affect Gulf countries and Iraq more than Iran itself, while Tehran would continue receiving support from Russia and China.
A subsequent grand agreement would then recognize Iranian influence through its allies in Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Palestinian territories, while allowing Israel to continue expanding, citing security concerns and self-defense. Israel would continue extending its control in Syria and Lebanon, while Iran maintained support for its regional allies.
The Gulf would remain in a constant state of tension due to Iranian influence over both the Strait of Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb through its allies, alongside the permanent presence of American naval forces in the Arabian Sea.
Iran would emerge as a regional power free from sanctions and constraints, while the broader Middle East would fall into spheres of influence allegedly agreed upon in advance between the United States and Israel in the west and Iran in the east.
Consequently, Gulf states would be compelled to purchase even more American weapons as protection against Iranian power and in response to the changing role of U.S. military bases.
In this scenario, Arab states would eventually accept the end of the Palestinian issue and be forced to transport oil and gas through overland routes terminating on Mediterranean shores under American and Israeli protection, ensuring Western access to these resources.
At the same time, Iran would become the primary supplier of oil and gas to China and Russia under the terms of this arrangement.
An older generation of clerical leadership would eventually be replaced by a new group of figures, such as Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Abbas Araghchi, who, according to this theory, would be more aligned with American interests.
The ultimate objective, supporters of this argument claim, would be to weaken Arab states, control their resources, and preserve Iran as the enduring threat that keeps Gulf governments dependent on foreign protection. Tehran would continue supporting allied militias throughout the Arab world, allegedly with tacit backing from both the United States and Israel.
