For decades, the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) built the security and economic foundation of the nations on a strategic bargain with the West that provided them with security and economic prosperity. The current conflict has shaken the understandings undergirding that project and set GCC countries on divergent directions on what to do next. Ultimately, their relationship with Iran and the US will be crucial for how they move forward, but they may not have full control over how these relationships develop.

Some 60,000 people crossed from Morocco into Ceuta on 30-31 July 2026; nearly all returned within 48 hours and none reached the European mainland. The commentary traces the surge to a misread Spanish court ruling, smuggling networks and a lapse in Moroccan border discipline, dismantles the political retaliation narrative, and argues that the EU migration architecture has outsourced part of its own political stability to transit states.

NOTE: The author wishes to thank Sabiha Didouche for her support in the preparation of this article.

“Constructive ambiguity” is a common diplomatic practice, whereby negotiating parties obscure or defer points of disagreement in order to facilitate agreement on more central points. It cannot, however, serve as the sole basis for an agreement in the absence of a true meeting of the minds on fundamental issues.

For the first time in more than a decade, no Russian Navy combat ships are currently deployed in the Mediterranean. While this marks the end of the permanent Mediterranean Operational Squadron that emerged after Russia's intervention in Syria, it does not signal Moscow's withdrawal from the region. Instead, Russia is adapting its military posture to the constraints imposed by the war in Ukraine, the closure of the Turkish Straits and the changing political landscape in Syria. Rather than abandoning the Mediterranean, Moscow is increasingly relying on a lighter network of logistical facilities, political partnerships and strategic access linking Syria, Libya and Africa. The result is not the disappearance of Russia's Mediterranean strategy, but its transformation.

NOTE: The author wishes to thank Igor Delanoë and Laetitia Meenen for
generously sharing their insights during the preparation of this article.

This is an edited summary of a MEIS publication series that highlights American, Chinese, Iranian, and Russian perspectives on the 14-15 May 2026 Beijing meeting. In this post-mortem, Ali Ahmadi, a geo-economics and sanctions specialist based in Tehran, Igor Delanoë, a Russia expert based in Paris and Moscow with a PhD on Russian naval history, and Paul Fritch, a former US diplomat, career officer and senior NATO official, discuss the outcomes of the meeting.  

The Iran war has weakened Donald Trump’s negotiating leverage significantly vis-à-vis China, by diminishing his political standing at home, weakening US military posture in the Asia-Pacific region, depleting stocks of key munitions, and raising questions about the reliability of the United States as a political and security partner. In the weeks since the visit (first scheduled for late March) was delayed, Beijing has skillfully exploited these vulnerabilities, leaving President Xi in a much-strengthened position.

Economic Interdependence and the scope for managed trade takes this meeting beyond economics and towards policy coordination on global hotspots and the management of inevitable competition.

The upcoming summit between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping is being closely monitored in Moscow amid growing tensions between Washington and Beijing. While Russia does not appear directly threatened by a potential Sino-American deescalation, the talks could shape the trajectory of the wars in Iran and Ukraine, the future of sanctions regimes, and the evolution of strategic arms control.

The upcoming US-China summit will take place under the shadow of the Iran war, which has reshaped the strategic environment in ways that favor Beijing. China has little incentive to abandon its economic and limited military support for Tehran, particularly as American resources and attention remain tied down in the Middle East. At the same time, US weapons depletion and dependence on Chinese-controlled rare earth supply chains have weakened Washington’s negotiating position. This commentary examines how the Iran conflict has deepened America’s vulnerabilities while enhancing Beijing’s leverage ahead of crucial trade talks.

Using military innovations and taking advantage of the modern realities of shipping, Iran has converted the Strait of Hormuz into a controlled toll booth, charging up to $2 million per vessel, routing traffic through its territorial waters, and granting tiered access based on diplomatic alignment. The article argues European firms should treat this as a structural shift rather than a temporary disruption, with lasting consequences including a lasting impact on Hormuz-related supply chains, the operational validation of de-dollarized payment infrastructure, and the fragmentation of commercial access across EU member states based on each capital's diplomatic posture toward Tehran.