In the corridors of power in Tehran, a dangerous assumption appears to have taken root: destabilizing the Persian Gulf, targeting oil tankers, and threatening the energy infrastructure of Arab states will serve as an effective lever of pressure against Washington. Raise the temperature in the Gulf, goes the thinking, and the Americans will eventually back down.

This reflects a fundamental misreading of today’s geopolitical reality. What the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps perceives as a sophisticated tactical maneuver to raise energy prices and deter the United States is, in practice, accelerating Iran’s isolation and strengthening the very regional alliances it fears. Instead of trapping its adversaries, Tehran may be tripping over its own strategy.

At the tactical level, striking Gulf states is a reckless gamble. The Persian Gulf is one of the world’s most vital energy corridors — roughly a fifth of globally traded oil passes through it. Any disruption there is not a localized incident but a trigger for expanded Western surveillance, intelligence deployment, and interception capabilities. Each act of aggression exposes IRGC operational patterns in real time and enables Western militaries to refine their technological and operational responses with increasing speed and precision. In trying to project strength, Iran is also revealing its playbook.

Strategically, the cost is far greater. Tehran appears to assume that heightened aggression will cause Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain to reconsider their positions and distance themselves from the West out of fear of escalation. The opposite is happening. Rather than generating deterrence, Iran is deepening the historic rift between itself and the Sunni Arab world. Violations of Gulf state sovereignty push these countries to rely more heavily on the American security umbrella and, in some cases, on emerging regional security frameworks that include Israel. What was meant to intimidate is instead incentivizing alignment.

The notion that the United States will retreat under the pressure of energy coercion is equally flawed. Washington’s commitment to freedom of navigation and stability in the Gulf energy market is a core component of its global standing. Attacks on Gulf states are viewed not as peripheral provocations but as direct assaults on vital American interests. Such actions do not drive the United States out of the region. They compel it to deepen its presence, deploy additional forces, and reinforce defense agreements with regional partners.

From an Israeli perspective, the depth of Iran’s miscalculation becomes even clearer. In the past, Tehran succeeded in driving a wedge between Israel and its Arab neighbors. Today, aggression in the Gulf produces the opposite effect. The Abraham Accords are no longer merely a framework for economic cooperation. They have evolved into a tightening strategic and security infrastructure. As the Iranian threat grows, so too does the shared understanding in Jerusalem and in Gulf capitals that this is a single regional challenge. Intelligence and military cooperation, often under the auspices of US Central Command, are creating a coordinated front that constrains Tehran’s hegemonic ambitions. Through its own actions, Iran has transformed Israel from an external actor into a relevant security partner in Gulf defense.

Ultimately, the IRGC’s strategy rests on short-term coercion that may produce isolated tactical gains but at the cost of legitimacy and the consolidation of a countervailing axis. Instead of dividing its adversaries and extracting concessions, Iran now faces a more unified, more determined, and more interconnected regional and international front. The Gulf, which Tehran sought to turn into an arena of pressure under its influence, is steadily becoming a focal point of international cooperation aimed at containing its expansion.

Ella Rosenberg is an Iran and financial terrorism expert at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs.

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)