In Its 14th Strategic Dialogue, TRENDS Global Deconstructs the Complexities of US Policy

The event shed light on the U.S. administration’s approaches to intertwined conflicts and forecasted the features of the shifting regional landscape. TRENDS Global, an affiliate of the TRENDS Group, organized its 14th strategic dialogue through its US office, titled The War in the Middle East: Reading US Policy in Light of Regional Escalation. The virtual panel, broadcast live across the group’s digital platforms, featured high-level political and intellectual discussions with an elite group of Middle East experts and former Washington officials. The event aimed to shed light on the U.S. administration’s approaches toward intertwined conflict files and to forecast the features of the shifting regional landscape. Complex Equations The dialogue opened with a welcoming speech by Hamdan Al-Hammadi, a researcher at the TRENDS Research & Advisory,. Al-Hammadi emphasized that this dialogue comes at a highly sensitive regional and international moment, when the Middle East is moving beyond traditional crises toward a fluid strategic environment marked by escalating tensions and a redefinition of regional security, particularly amid the complex developments surrounding the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. Al-Hammadi pointed out that instability is no longer merely the byproduct of local conflicts; rather, it reflects deeper shifts in the international system. At the heart of this lies US policy, which faces a highly complex strategic equation, balancing the protection of its interests, the security of its allies, and freedom of navigation against the rising influence of non-state actors and the decline of traditional decisive military tools. Moderation and Participants The panel was moderated by Bilal Saab, Director of the TRENDS US Office, and featured the following speakers:

• Kenneth Pollack: Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) / Middle East Policy Expert.
• Steven A. Cook: Eni Enrico Mattei Senior Fellow for Middle East and Africa Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).
• Danielle Pletka: Distinguished Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI).
• Anni Forzheimer: Non-Resident Senior Associate / Former Diplomat (and Middle East policy expert).

  A Hurting Stalemate The participants unanimously agreed that the current conflict between Washington and Tehran has entered a state of “hurting stalemate.” Expert Steven Cook explained that media outlets and social media platforms constantly push misleading narratives about an imminent memorandum of understanding or a ceasefire. However, these estimates clash with the stark reality and the non-negotiable US conditions set by President Donald Trump. These conditions demand Iran’s complete abandonment of highly enriched uranium, the dismantling of its nuclear capabilities, and the guarantee of absolute, unconditional freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. Cook stressed that fully reopening the strait could take months, not days. Cook added that Tehran, in contrast, is betting on time and the upcoming US midterm elections to break the administration’s political will by continuing “gray-zone” operations just below the threshold of conventional warfare. Leadership and Bureaucracy Researcher Danielle Pletka drew a sharp line between the brilliant tactical and military performance of U.S. forces in the field, which succeeded in paralyzing Iranian defenses and pushing its economy into a “death spiral,” and the political dysfunction and fragmentation within the White House. Pletka described the decision-making mechanism as a “stop-go” policy resulting from daily contradictory directives, which has weakened the credibility of US deterrence and made Washington appear hesitant. Regarding the bureaucratic stance in the capital, Pletka noted that the US intelligence community has transformed into a massive, “risk-averse” structure that opposes options such as “regime change” out of fear of operational failure. Instead, it drafts preemptive dissent memos to leak to the press, absolving itself of blame if things go wrong. Deconstructing President Trump’s decisions, Pletka asserted that gas prices and the impact on party seats in the midterm elections are not his primary obsession. Instead, his focus is on crafting a “final scene” that he can market as a personal historical achievement, placing personal loyalty above the traditional calculations of the Republican Party. The Democratization of Warfare Dr. Kenneth Pollack provided a profound analysis of the radical shift in modern warfare, based on lessons from the war in Ukraine, and announced the emergence of the “democratization of warfare.” Pollack explained that the era of massive, expensive military platforms (such as tanks and destroyers) has given way to the “era of information warfare, smart munitions, and cheap drones.” This shift has enabled small armed groups to inflict severe damage on major powers. Pollack highlighted the economic dilemma facing allies, where defensive missiles costing millions of dollars (such as Patriot and THAAD) are consumed to shoot down drones worth only a few thousand. This attrition has driven the region toward adopting a “mowing the grass” doctrine to secure temporary calm rather than achieving decisive victories. This pattern depletes resources and does not sit well with the American public. The Lebanon Front The experts criticized US diplomatic attempts to bundle the Lebanese front and Hezbollah into comprehensive ceasefire negotiations with Iran, calling it a grave mistake. Steven Cook asserted that the Israeli security mindset changed structurally after the events of October 7. It shifted from the concept of “mowing the grass” and temporary truces with Hezbollah to a doctrine of “brutal gardening,” which means the total and permanent uprooting of military infrastructure on the border based on a “kill or be killed” logic, making a return to previous rules of engagement impossible. Regional Security Anni Forzheimer pointed out that the traditional security architecture led by Washington for decades has fractured, leaving the region facing two distinct paths:

1. The Integration and Inclusion Path: Under the umbrella of the US Central Command (CENTCOM), this involves building a joint air and missile defense system and activating economic corridors, such as the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC).
2. The Pragmatic Disintegration Path: A result of the lack of certainty regarding US security guarantees.

Forzheimer explained that the absence of certainty about US commitment drives each country in the region to prioritize short-term self-preservation and to favor unilateral and bilateral tracks. This is reflected in the new map of alliances, split between a close “Western-integrative” axis and an “independent, pragmatic” axis, building alternative networks of relationships. Forzheimer called on Washington to send strong messages of solidarity and fill diplomatic vacancies to rebuild trust with its allies. Scenarios for Future Escalation The Q&A session yielded several critical strategic assessments, including:

• Red Lines for Confrontation: Danielle Pletka stated that Washington would not respond with devastating military force to Iranian movements in the gray zone unless an Iranian miscalculation results in the documented killing of US service members.
• Tehran’s Priorities: Kenneth Pollack believes Iran is willing to make concessions on its nuclear file in exchange for preserving its military proxy in Beirut (Hezbollah), which constitutes its forward and most vital line of defense, followed in importance by the Strait of Hormuz.
• Houthi Behavior: Forzheimer ruled out overt US offensive operations against the Iranian mainland to avoid targeting vital infrastructure. She described the current calm on the Houthi front as the product of a “temporary financial diplomacy” that does not eliminate their capability to blackmail and disrupt maritime waterways at any moment.

  Recommendations and Conclusion The symposium concluded with remarks by TRENDS researcher Shamma Al-Qutba, who emphasized that the dialogue proves traditional crisis management approaches in the Middle East are no longer sufficient to understand today’s fluid reality. Today, geopolitics intersects heavily with cybersecurity, supply chains, energy security, maritime navigation, and information warfare. Al-Qutba stressed that the region stands at a historic crossroads: either this crisis will serve as a catalyst for building a more balanced regional system, or it will slide into continuous cycles of resource and state depletion. She reaffirmed the TRENDS Group’s commitment to providing these intellectual platforms to deepen understanding and forecast future scenarios in a world undergoing unprecedented transformations.