Phil Gordon argues against complete U.S. disengagement from Middle East
Phil Gordon examines the trajectory of United States involvement in the Middle East, arguing against complete disengagement despite the costly failures of recent military campaigns, Foreign Affairs reported. The analysis evaluates how every American president over the past thirty years has been drawn back into the region despite vows to pivot elsewhere, culminating in the ongoing war with Iran.
The Historical Cycle of Presidential Entanglements
Bill Clinton focused on the economy but spent the end of his presidency consumed by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and containing Saddam Hussein. George W. Bush sought a humble foreign policy before invading Afghanistan and Iraq. Barack Obama announced a pivot to Asia only to be drawn into the Arab Spring, the military campaign against ISIS, and negotiations with Iran.
Joe Biden attempted to deprioritize the region until Hamas launched its attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. Donald Trump campaigned against endless wars, yet oversaw a reckless war against Iran that could define his second term. Each administration tried to distance itself from the Middle East, only to be pulled back in by sudden crises.
Arguments For and Against Complete Disengagement
Michael Fuchs argued in Foreign Affairs in August that the Iran conflict is an epic disaster that should prompt a total U.S. withdrawal. Fuchs contends that Washington should pull all bases and forces out of the region and end its role as a regional guarantor to focus on Asia and Europe.
The human and financial toll of past U.S. policies supports this critique. The Iran war added direct military costs, casualties, depleted munitions stocks, strained alliances, and supply disruption in the global oil market.
Large military bases built after the 1991 Gulf War are now vulnerable targets for Iranian drones and missiles rather than effective deterrents. Unconditional backing for partners like Israel created a moral hazard, encouraging risk-taking and drawing Washington into unchosen conflicts.
Enduring American Interests in Energy and Security
Despite the failures of past approaches, core American interests in the Middle East persist. Energy security remains a critical factor. Oil functions as a fungible commodity with a single global price. When supplies face disruption, Americans pay more at the pump, and sluggish economic growth in Asia and Europe pulls down the U.S. economy.
Global consumption of oil and coal recently reached an all-time high, supplying roughly 80 percent of the world’s energy. During the Iran war, Tehran attacked regional energy infrastructure and closed off shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, through which a quarter of the world’s seaborne oil trade and nearly a fifth of its liquefied natural gas flowed. U.S. gasoline prices jumped more than 40 percent, while diesel rose over 70 percent, driving inflation and raising interest rates.
Nuclear nonproliferation remains a second vital interest. This outcome could trigger a cascading arms race. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman stated that if Iran acquires a nuclear weapon, Saudi Arabia will also have to obtain one. Turkey’s foreign minister indicated his country would consider doing the same. A multi-power nuclear Middle East presents severe proliferation risks.
ISIS Threats and Gulf Assets Bind Washington to Region
Terrorism threats have diminished, but groups like ISIS and its affiliates retain operational capacity. Following the fall of the Assad regime in December 2024, hundreds of ISIS members escaped or were freed from Syrian prisons, maintaining the need for modest counterterrorism cooperation.
Positive economic stakes also bind Washington to the region. Gulf Cooperation Council states manage sovereign wealth funds exceeding $5 trillion and hold up to $2 trillion in U.S. assets, including Treasury bonds that help maintain lower American borrowing costs. GCC states with a combined GDP surpassing $2 trillion are investing heavily in data centers built by U.S. technology firms.
Neither doubling down on large-scale military intervention nor walking away provides a viable escape from the historical cycle. A pragmatic middle course requires defending a narrower set of core interests with a smaller military footprint, expanded diplomacy, and more diversified regional partners.
Global consumption of oil and coal recently reached an all-time high, with fossil fuels continuing to supply roughly 80 percent of the world’s energy demand.