Negotiation Under Fire: The New Rules of the Game in the Gulf
Tonight (July 9), the United States struck Iran once again, marking yet another chapter in the ongoing series of “negotiations under fire” that has played out between the two nations in recent weeks, following the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).
This is no longer an isolated incident. The second consecutive wave of American airstrikes tonight underscores that Washington has transitioned into a pattern of systematic and high-intensity military actions. These strikes serve as a direct response to any Iranian military provocation in the Gulf or any violation of the freedom of navigation through the vital shipping lanes of the Strait of Hormuz.
During these two consecutive waves, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) forces targeted dozens of military and strategic objectives across Iran’s coastal regions—specifically in the cities of Bandar Abbas and Bushehr, on Kharg and Sirik islands, and throughout the Persian Gulf ,And even in the city of Tabriz in the north of the country. The operations primarily focused on dismantling the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) military infrastructure threatening the Gulf region. Dozens of fast attack craft used to harass shipping vessels were destroyed, alongside heavy damage inflicted upon coastal radar arrays, drone bases, air defense systems, command-and-control networks, and anti-ship missile launch sites. These massive strikes were a swift, direct retaliation for Iranian attacks on civilian merchant ships in international waters, and follow Washington’s decisive move to revoke the temporary sanctions waivers previously granted to Tehran under the framework agreement.
Parallel to the kinetic action on the ground, the American administration has dramatically escalated its rhetorical warnings over the past 24 hours. Speaking on the sidelines of the NATO summit, President Donald Trump made it clear that, from his perspective, the temporary easing under the MOU has come to an end. Trump issued a blunt, explicit threat to the Iranian leadership, warning: “They hit a few ships, so we are going to hit them much harder. When they hit us, we respond with ten times the force.”
The American rationale behind this utilization of power is clear: guaranteeing the freedom of civilian navigation in the Strait of Hormuz is an uncompromisable red line. Washington is signaling that any further Iranian provocation will be met with increasingly intense and punishing counterstrikes until the message is fully internalized.
Just as Israel has acted with absolute military and diplomatic resolve to reshape its strategic equation against Iran—establishing new rules of the game to decouple the Iranian and Lebanese fronts—the United States is now working to dictate rigid rules of engagement in the Gulf. The Trump administration is proving once again that while it remains willing to negotiate and pursue a long-term resolution, it will never compromise on foundational principles: zero tolerance for progress on the nuclear file, and zero tolerance for disruptions to global trade routes and energy supplies.
Nevertheless, despite the combative rhetoric and heavy fire, the core strategic assessment remains unchanged: American strikes at this stage are not designed to spark a wider escalation or a total war. Rather, they are a targeted containment measure intended to recalibrate the regional balance of power, forcing Tehran back to the negotiating table from a position of distinct disadvantage.
Conversely, the volatile dynamics on the ground cannot be ignored. The Iranians, for their part, have launched retaliatory missile strikes against targets and installations across the Gulf, including reports of fire directed at American bases in Kuwait and Bahrain. These developments, in which neither side appears willing to blink, could easily trigger a dangerous escalatory spiral. Under these conditions, the path toward a permanent, sustainable diplomatic agreement seems to be slipping further away.
For the time being, this direct military escalation remains contained within the maritime arena of the Persian Gulf. Israel’s distinct interest is for the conflict to remain confined there—leaving the direct military and economic burden squarely on the shoulders of the U.S.-led international coalition, so long as Israel itself is not directly threatened.
In this explosive reality, Israel must navigate its steps with profound strategic prudence. While the U.S. and Iran clash in the Gulf, Israel must concentrate its primary efforts and focus on its immediate objectives: dismantling Hezbollah’s military capabilities in Lebanon and Hamas’s infrastructure in Gaza, degrading them entirely until the immediate threats on our borders are neutralized. Concurrently, Israel must keep a watchful, analytical eye on the unfolding friction between Washington and Tehran—both on the battlefield and around the diplomatic negotiating table—and remain fully vigilant and prepared for any scenario.
