Nournews: As the United States continues its comprehensive support for the Israeli regime while pursuing hostile policies against the Islamic Republic of Iran, it has simultaneously promoted plans for new energy transport corridors aimed at reducing reliance on the Strait of Hormuz. Rather than representing a purely economic initiative, this parallel track reflects Washington’s broader attempt to reshape the geopolitical balance and consolidate its influence across West Asia.
Within this framework, Tom Barrack, the U.S. president’s special envoy to Iraq, announced a plan that, according to him, is under discussion with Syria, Jordan, Türkiye, Lebanon, and Egypt. The proposal envisions turning the Strait of Hormuz into a "secondary route" for global energy trade within the next two years. He also referred to the expansion of the "Middle Corridor," stretching through Türkiye, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan to connect Central Asia with Europe.
At the same time, during the Iraqi prime minister’s visit to the United States, Iraq’s oil minister revealed that Baghdad is studying the construction of a pipeline that would transport Basra’s crude via Kirkuk to Türkiye’s Ceyhan port and Syria’s Baniyas port. Although Washington presents these projects in the language of economic development and infrastructure expansion, the available evidence suggests objectives that extend well beyond the energy sector.
Military Presence Under the Banner of Energy Security
Having faced growing challenges from the Islamic Republic of Iran’s deterrence capabilities and indigenous defense capacity, while also confronting the end of its military mission in Iraq, the United States continues to seek new justifications for maintaining its presence in the region. At the same time, President Donald Trump’s campaign pledge to reduce America’s overseas military footprint has created a strategic dilemma for Washington. Remaining in the region carries considerable political and social costs, while withdrawal would mean surrendering some of its remaining strategic leverage.
Against this backdrop, reviving long-standing energy transfer projects from Iraq to Syria and proposing new energy corridors appear less a response to genuine market demand than a means of sustaining the U.S. military presence under an economic cover, with much of the financial burden shifted onto regional countries. The timing of these proposals, coinciding with renewed instability and the reactivation of terrorist groups in parts of Syria, further reinforces the perception that securing these projects could serve as a pretext for the continued deployment of American forces.
The Economics of Dependency: Reproducing Influence Through Energy
Intensifying competition with emerging economic powers—particularly China—along with declining global confidence in U.S. policies has driven Washington to adopt new instruments for preserving its influence. From this perspective, the proposed energy projects cannot be viewed merely as initiatives to strengthen Europe's or the region's energy security. Rather, they form part of a broader strategy to deepen the economic dependence of regional states, especially Iraq, on American companies, technology, and investment.
This model of economic dependence follows earlier policies aimed at expanding U.S. influence through control over financial resources and restrictions on Iraq’s access to portions of its foreign currency reserves. In such a framework, economic leverage becomes a platform for political and security influence, gradually weakening the strategic independence of regional states.
At the same time, Washington is promoting investment packages and economic partnerships designed to establish new patterns of regional integration under U.S. leadership. The participation of countries such as Türkiye, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Egypt reflects less a natural process of regional cooperation than an American effort to build alliances that could prevent the emergence of independent and indigenous regional mechanisms.
Energy Corridors: The Missing Link in the Normalization Agenda
On the surface, these projects are presented as efforts to diversify energy transport routes and reduce reliance on the Strait of Hormuz. However, the geographic configuration of the proposed corridors, coupled with parallel initiatives to connect Arab states with the Israeli regime through railway networks, suggests far broader political and security objectives.
Washington recognizes the significant obstacles facing political and security normalization with the Israeli regime. As a result, it is seeking to use economic integration, trade, and transport infrastructure to establish networks of mutual dependence that would ultimately link regional countries with the occupied territories.
Under this framework, interconnected energy networks, ports, railways, and trade corridors would become instruments for imposing a form of compulsory coexistence with the Israeli regime—a process that, from this perspective, advances the long-term objectives associated with the so-called "Nile-to-Euphrates" project through economic rather than military means.
Geopolitical Reality: The Strait of Hormuz Remains Irreplaceable
Despite extensive promotion of these initiatives, the geopolitical realities of the region indicate that the Strait of Hormuz cannot be replaced. Owing to its unique geographic position, energy transit capacity, established infrastructure, and enduring security, it will remain the world's most important energy chokepoint. No alternative route is capable of matching its role in the short or even medium term.
Moreover, many of the corridors proposed by Washington pass through areas still affected by chronic instability, domestic conflicts, and political fragmentation. Syria is a clear example—a country that continues to grapple with the consequences of war, the de facto division of parts of its territory, and persistent insecurity. Investing in such routes therefore represents less a sound economic decision than the acceptance of substantial political and security risks.
By contrast, the lasting security of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz has, over recent decades, been maintained through regional capabilities and the responsible role played by the Islamic Republic of Iran. Consequently, any attempt to sideline this strategic waterway or replace it with corridors designed around U.S. intervention and the interests of the Israeli regime lacks practical viability and could expose regional energy security and economic stability to serious risks. From this standpoint, countries that choose to participate in these projects in alignment with the United States and the Israeli regime against Iran’s regional interests will inevitably have to bear the political, economic, and security costs of that decision.
Nournews