When Secretary of State Marco Rubio landed in Abu Dhabi on June 23 for his first Gulf visit since the Iran war erupted, he struck a conciliatory note, telling reporters, “We want to make sure their views are taken into account in every decision that we make.” The sentiment was welcome—but long overdue.
Gulf states absorbed the heaviest blows from Iranian missiles and drones during the conflict. Key energy, transportation, and tourism infrastructure was hit. Their economies suffered severe disruption after Iran shut the Strait of Hormuz. Yet the administration that now claims to prioritize their interests had previously sent no top officials to stand with them in their darkest hour—countries that were in Tehran’s crosshairs because of a war President Trump launched against their advice.
Rubio’s belated outreach signals progress, but it also amounts to an admission of failure. The gap between last month’s diplomacy and the consultations that should have occurred before and after the war began is not an anomaly—it’s a hallmark of Trump’s foreign policy. That disregard for basic statecraft was a critical flaw in the U.S. war plan, one that ultimately hamstrung the effort and contributed to a memorandum of understanding that handed Iran largely favorable terms.
The Iran war was the most vivid demonstration in a generation of American power stripped of its diplomatic component. With a network of allies that together command vast diplomatic, military, and economic resources, Trump never bothered to build a supportive coalition. Contempt, not consultation, defined the approach. No sustained effort was made to address the concerns of Gulf states—who warned they would bear the brunt of Iranian retaliation—or European allies whose economies depend on Hormuz, or Asian partners reliant on Gulf oil.
The decision for war was made unilaterally in Washington. The missiles fell in the Gulf; the economic shockwaves hit hardest in Europe and Asia. When the going got tough—when Hormuz closed, oil prices spiked, and Trump’s quick victory campaign turned into a costly stalemate—America turned for help and found no one. NATO’s strongest allies flatly refused to send forces to reopen the strait. After a year of tariff wars, threats to annex Greenland, and relentless disparagement, the chickens came home to roost.
Is Trump capable of learning the obvious lesson? Alliances are not a switch to flip when trouble arises. They are relationships built through sustained investment and mutual respect. Allies are not marks to be extorted; they are force multipliers that lend critical resources and legitimacy. Treat them as adversaries, and don’t be surprised when they’re absent at your moment of greatest need.
Two areas where concerted diplomacy could still improve outcomes stand out. The first is Hormuz. The memorandum commits Iran to reopening the strait but leaves its long-term governance dangerously ambiguous. Most nations want a return to the status quo ante—no Iranian fees or coercive regulation. U.S. diplomacy should weaponize that consensus, including by tabling a binding UN Security Council resolution demanding restoration of pre-war conditions. China and Russia blocked such efforts during the war, but both have an interest in free passage. With guns silent, diplomacy may build leverage that military pressure couldn’t.
The second is negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program. The memorandum ceded important economic leverage before talks began. Rebuilding negotiating power requires assembling the broadest possible coalition around a common definition of an acceptable final deal—one that neutralizes Iran’s enriched uranium, imposes permanent limits on further enrichment, and ends Tehran’s financing of proxies. These goals are shared by partners across the Gulf, Europe, and Asia. A united front pushing for them is badly needed leverage waiting to be forged.
Rubio’s joint statement with Gulf counterparts last week spoke powerfully on these issues. It’s an excellent start that must be expanded and sustained as part of a comprehensive strategy to rejuvenate U.S. post-war leverage. As America marks its 250th birthday, Trump could do worse than heed the Declaration of Independence’s counsel that American interests are best served by demonstrating “a decent respect to the opinions of mankind.”
