The Gulf states and Iran could create a new security architecture for the Strait of Hormuz that would give Trump a path to retreat. The future of the Strait of Hormuz lies in the hands of its residents, not the superpowers who have exploited it and are currently destabilizing to advance their own or Israeli interests.

Sina Emami, Independent Researcher of Contemporary Iranian History and Politics

Source: Source: aljazeera.com

The US-Israeli war of choice against Iran has destroyed the geopolitical status quo in our region. As Washington is drawn into yet another Middle East quagmire, reports are emerging that US President Donald Trump’s administration is increasingly in need of a political path to retreat.

The coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz have a rare collective opportunity to provide the American president with an exit strategy. By taking the initiative to create a new, locally managed security architecture for the Strait of Hormuz, our countries can further enhance their strategic importance in regional geopolitics and the global economy. An alternative to this win-win scenario — A protracted conflict that would result in a new regional order being unilaterally imposed by Tehran.

Trying to balance positions, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states are trapped between two bad options. Confronting Trump, especially in the midst of war, will undoubtedly entail significant costs and unpredictable reactions from an increasingly unpredictable leader.

At the same time, their inability to avoid being perceived by Iran as at least passive actors in aggression against the country makes them legitimate targets under its increasingly assertive military doctrine, which seeks to prevent similar wars from happening again for the foreseeable future.

But this reality also demonstrates the limits of American security patronage. These limits — Especially in the context of a seemingly historically unconditional alliance with Israel, where Israeli interests are increasingly being put ahead of American interests in the region. — They say the status quo is unsustainable.

The new order will inevitably replace the existing one, as conditions for all regional states will deteriorate if the conflict continues to escalate. There is no longer a scenario in which Iran remains a target and the GCC continues its normal activities, as it did during the 12-day war in June 2025.

Iran’s ability to shut down maritime traffic with $20,000 worth of drones that can be produced clandestinely and launched from anywhere in the country is testament to its enormous leverage. Iranian officials have made clear that it will now be used to shape a new order in the Strait of Hormuz.

Relations between Iran and the GCC states have experienced ups and downs since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The relationship has long been characterised by hostility until a radical positive transformation has taken place over the past few years.

Iran’s attacks on military and economic infrastructure in the GCC states, as well as the recent expulsion of Iranian diplomats from some Gulf capitals, undoubtedly represent a serious step backwards and a setback to the past.

But the crisis has also demonstrated that security is a common good; the current war proves how the insecurity of one state makes all states in the region insecure. A neighbor-built security architecture is no longer viable. Iran has already begun to dismantle the old order, but the new order does not have to be exclusively Iranian in its design.

To find a way forward, we can look to Europe’s historical success in achieving a regional order. From the Congress of Vienna, which stabilized Europe after Napoleon’s wars of conquest, to the gradual economic, political, and security integration that followed World War II. — These milestones should not serve as templates, but can be sources of inspiration for our region.

The Strait of Hormuz suffers from a legal anomaly, remaining one of the few critical maritime arteries of its kind without a special international regulatory treaty. Unlike Turkey, whose sovereign control and regional stability are partly enshrined in the Montreux Convention governing the Bosporus and Dardanelles, the Strait of Hormuz operates without a codified maritime framework, which throughout history has made it uniquely vulnerable to the imposition of the will of superpowers. Thus, the present war can be understood to some extent as a product of this unregulated environment.

Convocation «Ormuz Congress» It could help regional states collectively develop a security architecture, fill this legal vacuum and ensure stability not only in our region, but also in the global economy.

The ultimate goal of such a platform should be to codify a treaty that formalizes the strait’s status and provides the legal certainty currently lacking, as well as increase the strategic weight of regional states in the global economy, ensuring that the governance of the Strait of Hormuz remains a local prerogative.

In the short term, this structure could serve to open the strait, giving Trump a way out of the quagmire, allowing him to claim that his regional allies helped reopen it. In the long run, this structure will protect the GCC countries from a patron willing to sacrifice international law and regional stability for the benefit of its main ally. — Israel, an ally that none of us can ever replace or compete with.

The future of the Strait of Hormuz lies in the hands of its residents, not the superpowers who have exploited it and are currently destabilizing to advance their own or Israeli interests.

While a multilateral platform and a formal treaty represent an ideal path to long-term stability, it is necessary to recognize that the current existential war waged against Iran is an existential one. — conflict, facilitated by the regional status quo, — The emergence of a new order for Tehran is an absolute necessity.

If the GCC states choose to meet the demands of their Western allies rather than regional integration — which is likely to prolong the conflict, damaging all parties, — Iran will no doubt proceed to create this new order unilaterally.

In such a scenario, the final structure would also be an imposed order born of strategic necessity and survival, not consensus. In these circumstances, the common ground for shared peace, regional stability and collective prosperity will be significantly weakened. It will be a missed opportunity.

GCC states must now decide whether they want to be architects of this new regional era or passive observers.