The US-Israeli war on Iran has triggered changes that extend far beyond the battlefield, threatening to reshape the balance of power in the Middle East and across the world. These shifts include the possibility of an expanded Chinese military presence, Israel’s adoption of a strategy of permanent border wars, and Tehran’s increased ability to threaten its adversaries despite the losses it has suffered.
In an article published by Foreign Policy, Kenneth Pollack, vice president for policy at the Middle East Institute, says the war could mark a historic turning point that redraws the rules of geopolitics. He warned that its long-term strategic consequences could prove more serious than its immediate military effects.
According to Pollack, a former military analyst at the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the war demonstrated the effectiveness of Western defense systems in intercepting most Iranian missiles and drones. However, the small proportion that got through was enough to cause significant damage and raise economic and psychological concerns across the Gulf states.
A war meant to limit Iranian hegemony in the Middle East may have instead enabled it. https://t.co/NkRjWsI0MQ
— Foreign Policy (@ForeignPolicy) October 19, 2026
Pollack argues that intercepting around 90% of incoming attacks does not provide sufficient protection, as the remaining damage threatens the energy, trade, investment and tourism sectors and undermines the Gulf’s image as a safe haven for business and stability.
After recognizing the limitations of relying on US and Israeli protection, countries in the region began purchasing Turkish drones, while others are seeking to develop their own production capabilities in cooperation with American, Israeli, Chinese and Ukrainian companies.
China and Military Power
Pollack also notes that the war exposed the limits of China’s ability to protect its interests and partners in the region, despite its heavy reliance on Gulf oil, which accounts for up to half of its oil imports, and annual trade with regional countries exceeding $500 billion.
He suggests that these developments could prompt China to strengthen its ability to project military power in the Gulf and the Arabian Sea, taking advantage of the expansion of its navy and aircraft carrier fleet.
If this shift materializes, it could alter the region’s military balance and security relationships, presenting Washington with a new competitor in a sphere it has dominated for decades.
‘Israel’ and Permanent Wars
In a possible development, Pollack expects ‘Israel’ to adopt a strategy based on establishing buffer zones in the Gaza Strip, Lebanon and Syria, while conducting continuous military operations to prevent its adversaries from developing capabilities that threaten its security.
He compares this approach to the strategy of the Roman Empire, which relied on buffer zones and wars beyond its borders to maintain domestic stability.
However, such a strategy would require long-term military and societal mobilization, potentially straining Israeli economy and harming its technology sector, which depends on global openness.
Continued military operations could also deepen Israeli isolation and widen disagreements with the United States, where criticism of the alliance between the two countries is growing.
Iran Could Emerge Stronger
Regarding Iran, Pollack does not rule out the possibility that the war could strengthen Tehran’s influence rather than weaken it. Iran has learned that threatening the Strait of Hormuz and targeting Washington’s allies can impose substantial economic and psychological costs on all sides.
Pollack also believes that the rise of those he describes as hardliners could make reaching a nuclear agreement more difficult, particularly if they become convinced that acquiring nuclear weapons is the only way to prevent future attacks.
He noteds that Russian and Chinese support could help Iran rebuild and upgrade its arsenal. Therefore, ending the war without deterring Iran’s ability to disrupt maritime traffic and threaten the Gulf could leave Tehran with greater regional and international influence, despite its military losses.
Source: Foreign Policy