The war in the Gulf has entered a decisive phase. Six months from now, the strategic landscape will look markedly different, shaped not only by the immediate destruction but by the recalibration of alliances, energy markets, and global power balances. The question before us is simple yet profound: Cui bono? Who benefits from this conflagration, and who emerges diminished? The answer is neither uniform nor static. Gains are relative, losses are cumulative, and the balance of power is shifting in ways that demand sober recognition.

Russia: The immediate beneficiary

Russia is the clearest short-term winner. Elevated oil prices have delivered billions in windfall revenues, replenishing Moscow’s war chest and enabling it to sustain its campaign in Ukraine while projecting influence abroad. By strengthening ties with Iran, Russia consolidates a strategic axis that challenges US dominance in the Middle East. Moreover, Washington’s entanglement in the Gulf War distracts from its European commitments, easing pressure on Moscow.

Yet Russia’s gains are precarious. Overreliance on volatile energy markets exposes it to sudden reversals. If Gulf instability escalates into a broader disruption of global trade, Russia could find itself blamed for opportunism, eroding its diplomatic standing. Still, in the six-month horizon, Russia remains the most obvious beneficiary.

Iran: Surviving to gain leverage

Iran has suffered grievous blows—its leadership decapitated, its infrastructure battered, its economy strangled. Yet survival itself is a form of victory. The regime has withstood attempts at regime change, rallied domestic support through defiance, and demonstrated resilience by keeping the Strait of Hormuz contested.

In six months, Iran will emerge weakened but not broken. Its proxies, particularly Hezbollah, may still be able to carry the torch of resistance, ensuring Tehran’s influence remains alive across Lebanon and Iraq.

In six months, Iran will emerge weakened but not broken. Its proxies, particularly Hezbollah, may still be able to carry the torch of resistance, ensuring Tehran’s influence remains alive across Lebanon and Iraq.

The war has elevated Iran’s stature as the region’s indispensable disruptor. For Washington, this means that despite tactical successes, the strategic goal of neutralising Iran remains elusive.

READ: Russia offers to halt sharing intel with Iran if US does the same with Ukraine: Report

Israel: Strategic attrition

Israel entered the war with confidence in its military superiority. Six months later, it finds itself bogged down in a war of attrition. Resources are drained, infrastructure strained, and the spectre of US disengagement looms large. Israel’s tactical victories against Iranian assets are overshadowed by the strategic reality: prolonged conflict erodes deterrence and risks isolation.

If Washington signals fatigue or retrenchment, Israel may be left to face Iran alone. This scenario would force Jerusalem into a defensive posture, recalibrating its security doctrine and potentially accelerating its pursuit of unilateral solutions, including preemptive strikes or expanded reliance on nuclear ambiguity.

The United States: Overstretched and distracted

For the United States, the Gulf War is a costly distraction. Treasure, blood, and political capital are being expended perhaps at unsustainable rates. Domestically, the war strains public patience; internationally, it erodes credibility.

For the United States, the Gulf War is a costly distraction. Treasure, blood, and political capital are being expended perhaps at unsustainable rates. Domestically, the war strains public patience; internationally, it erodes credibility.

Allies in Europe bristle at accusations of abandonment, while partners in the Gulf question Washington’s staying power.

Six months hence, the U.S. faces a paradox: it has demonstrated military reach but lost strategic coherence. The war has not toppled Iran, secured the Strait of Hormuz, or reassured allies. Instead, it has deepened perceptions of American overreach. The Oval Office must recognize that continued entanglement risks diminishing U.S. global leadership at a moment when Russia and China are eager to fill the vacuum.

The GCC states: Trapped in the middle

The Gulf monarchies are among the greatest losers. Their energy infrastructure suffered considerable damage, revenues have plummeted, and their future relationship with Iran is strained enormously. Six months from now, they will face the dual challenge of reconstruction and recalibration.

While sympathy from the international community may be translated into political solidarity, the GCC’s strategic position is weakened. Reliance on US protection appears increasingly tenuous, while rapprochement with Iran seems politically challenging.

The GCC countries are trapped between dependence and vulnerability, a position that undermines their long-term stability.

The GCC countries are trapped between dependence and vulnerability, a position that undermines their long-term stability.

The European Union: Paying the price

Europe suffers indirectly but profoundly. High energy prices strain economies already burdened by inflation. Political rifts with Washington deepen as accusations of abandonment fly. Six months from now, the EU may be grappling with economic stagnation and strategic uncertainty.

The war underscores Europe’s dependence on external energy sources and its limited ability to shape outcomes in the Gulf. For Brussels, the lesson is clear: strategic autonomy remains aspirational, not operational. The EU is a net loser, paying the price of instability without reaping any geopolitical dividends.

READ: Iran FM says end of war must include guarantees against future attacks

China: Short-term pain, long-term gain

China’s position is nuanced. In the short term, Beijing pays more for imported energy, including Russian oil. Yet in the long term, China positions itself as a reconstruction partner and alternative to Western influence in the Gulf. Six months from now, Chinese firms will be negotiating contracts to rebuild infrastructure, supply technology, and deepen economic ties.

Thus, while China suffers immediate costs, it quietly lays the foundation for strategic gains. By presenting itself as a reliable economic partner, Beijing advances its Belt and Road ambitions and expands its footprint in a region traditionally dominated by the West.

Thus, while China suffers immediate costs, it quietly lays the foundation for strategic gains. By presenting itself as a reliable economic partner, Beijing advances its Belt and Road ambitions and expands its footprint in a region traditionally dominated by the West.

Conclusion: A shifting balance

The Gulf War is not producing clear victors, only relative beneficiaries. Russia profits most in the short term; Iran survives to fight another day; Hezbollah will be constrained in Lebanon; China positions itself for long-term influence. The United States, Israel, the GCC, and the EU are net losers, each suffering from overstretch, attrition, or economic strain.

Six months from now, the strategic map will reveal a Middle East more fractured, a global order more contested, and an America more burdened. The question cui bono demands a sobering answer: the war benefits those who thrive in chaos—Russia, Iran, and China—while diminishing those who seek stability.

For U.S. decision makers, the imperative is clear. Recognize the limits of military power, recalibrate alliances, and prepare for a world where adversaries exploit distraction and allies question resolve. The Gulf War is not merely a regional conflict; it is a crucible in which the future of global order is being forged.

OPINION: The original sin: How Churchill’s oil and Khomeini’s vision fuelled decades of Middle East turmoil

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

© Middle East Monitor