Analysis:TheMiddleEastNavigatesaNewDiplomaticReality—FromAutopilottoAutonomy

At the Antalya Diplomacy Forum in Turkey in mid-April, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, secretary-general of the Arab League, made a stark assessment: The turmoil engulfing the entire Middle East boils down to the policies of two nations — Israel and Iran.

The 84-year-old veteran Egyptian diplomat, who is set to step down in June from his post and a lifetime of public service, lamented that if Israel and Iran do not change their behavioral patterns, “I am afraid that by the time my grandchildren’s generation comes of age, we will still be discussing similar issues.”

The war involving the U.S., Israel, Iran and Lebanon, which erupted in late February 2026, has now raged for nearly two months.

When asked by Caixin about the role Turkey will play amid the rise and strategic maneuvering of middle powers, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan replied that the power vacuums created by major powers present a new test — whether the ability of middle powers to unite in this void is becoming increasingly critical. He noted that in the past, “every country belonged to an alliance. Within those alliances, regional issues could usually be regulated and managed to some extent.”

“But now, during this period of significant rupture in the international system and international relations, the rules need to be redefined,” Fidan said. “Amid this uncertainty, no one is on ‘autopilot’ anymore. All countries must manage problems through highly intensive communication, coordination and the exchange of ideas.”

Citing the recent Iran war and the maritime blockages in the Strait of Hormuz, Fidan explained that issues in the strait affect South Korea, Japan and China, while a conflict in the South China Sea tomorrow would conversely impact Turkey. “In other words, regional crises are increasingly generating global impacts,” he said. “This phenomenon has gradually become a ‘new normal.’”

Fidan noted that the boundary between regional and global crises is disappearing. “The civilizational structure we have built upon such a highly interconnected economic and informational system means that any crisis will have mutually reinforcing impacts, and this effect is continually growing.”

“Therefore, we must look at these issues with a different mindset than before and propose more structural solutions. This is the reality revealed by the current intensive communications,” the foreign minister said.

Meanwhile, Iran — one of the warring parties — dispatched Saeed Khatibzadeh, a deputy foreign minister who frequently handles external communications, to the forum. Tehran did not forsake this rare multilateral platform to voice its stance.

At a moment when U.S.-Iran negotiations have stalled following their initial dialogues and the timeline for restarting contact remains unclear, Khatibzadeh said the Iranian government is still heavily committed to finalizing an understanding framework through sustained diplomatic efforts, urging caution in the sensitive talks.

He blamed the deadlock on his adversaries’ “maximalist approach.”

The U.S. intent to maximize its own demands has obstructed a potential agreement, Khatibzadeh argued. He acknowledged that while significant progress was achieved during the initial discussions, Iran “will never accept becoming an exception to international law.”

His point was that, whether under the 2016 Iran nuclear deal or the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons — to which Iran is a signatory — Tehran retains the right to develop civil nuclear capabilities. “We have both the responsibility and the right,” he said.

During a sideline interview, Khatibzadeh urged the U.S. to abandon “extreme positions” and adhere to international law to ensure the currently arduous diplomatic path remains “results-oriented.”

When asked about transit issues in the strait, he noted that continued aggression will keep affecting maritime security. With a touch of irony, Khatibzadeh added, “The Strait of Hormuz has remained open for thousands of years. But this war of aggression has blockaded it. Therefore, if they want the Strait of Hormuz to reopen, they must stop this aggression.”

Representing the other side of the conflict, the U.S. sent Thomas Barrack, the U.S. ambassador to Turkey and special envoy for Syria. Barrack was originally a real-estate businessman.

The U.S. ambassador summarized his underlying philosophy for dealing with the Middle East: “This part of the world respects only one thing: power. And if you don’t reflect power — if you reflect weakness — you are on your heels.”

Barrack also views the two nations under his purview through a paradigm shift in energy security. Today, the energy system is shifting focus from cost and flexibility to security, he said. “If you look at trade routes now, energy is no longer just about the cheapest and most flexible shipping by sea. It’s about security. Ships can be moved if threatened; pipelines cannot. That’s why pipelines have been underutilized. Now the issue is security, not production. ‘Just in time’ is becoming ‘just in case.’ Everything flows through Turkey and Syria — energy, fiber optics, data, materials.”

Regarding the long-term security pressure exerted on U.S. allies such as Israel by Iran-backed regional proxies like Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Barrack bluntly stated, “War hasn’t worked. … So what is the answer? The answer must be based on prosperity. When you have a sovereign state like Iran supporting a militia group like Hezbollah, you can’t solve the problem just by killing them.”

In terms of revitalizing “regional autonomy,” one of the most prominent public moves at the 2026 Antalya forum was the quadrilateral talks held among the foreign ministers of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey.

Asked about the specifics of the quartet meeting, Fidan said officials primarily discussed regional stability, cooperation and maritime security. “We are not forming an alliance to oppose anyone. We are looking at how to end conflicts, advance economic progress and ensure the stability of this region,” he said.

He denied that these four Muslim nations — all of which maintain close security ties with the U.S. — are forming a new military alliance.

However, Fidan noted that Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey and Pakistan “represent a broader regional architecture,” emphasizing that enhanced cooperation among them will unlock the region’s potential. If the region merely “continues to wait for external assistance, it will face the same problems indefinitely,” he added.

Previously, in September 2025, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan signed a joint strategic defense agreement, forging a defensive alliance between the only nuclear-armed nation in the Muslim world and its wealthiest oil state.

Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev remarked that “middle powers” like Kazakhstan and Turkey have demonstrated a high sense of responsibility in managing global processes today.

“Our diplomatic actions prove this. It is no exaggeration to say that compared to those major powers in the U.N. Security Council who frequently create confrontation when solving global issues, middle powers demonstrate an even greater sense of responsibility,” Tokayev said.

Beyond middle powers acting as regional pillars, some nations with relatively smaller overall strength continue to tirelessly play pivotal shuttle-diplomacy roles. One such country is Qatar, an Arab nation situated directly across the Persian Gulf from Iran.

On March 18, the Qatari government, which has historically maintained close and pragmatic relations with Iran, notified the Iranian Embassy in Qatar that Iran’s military attaché and related personnel were declared “persona non grata,” ordering them to leave within 24 hours in response to multiple attacks by Iranian armed forces on Qatari targets.

Even so, diplomatic channels between the two countries were not completely severed.

On April 26, Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani maintained during a phone call with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi that it is “necessary for all parties to participate in the ongoing mediation efforts.” This, he argued, would pave the way to address the root causes of the crisis through peaceful means and dialogue, thereby reaching a sustainable agreement and preventing further regional escalation.

Meanwhile, Al Thani also demanded that Iran keep maritime corridors open to ensure freedom of navigation. He stressed that navigation rights should not be used as a bargaining chip or a tool for leverage, warning that doing so would negatively impact regional nations, disrupt global energy and food supplies and shock international peace and security.

At the Antalya forum, Mohammed bin Abdulaziz Al-Khulaifi, a Qatari minister of state for foreign affairs, elaborated on his country’s philosophy of diplomatic mediation. Mediation should not be viewed as a tool for securing media exposure or engaging in international competition, but rather “should be seen as a responsibility and an effective tool for resolving conflicts,” he said.

“Trust is the currency of mediation,” Al-Khulaifi added, noting that over the past two decades, Qatar has consistently maintained a steady and prudent approach, keeping open channels of communication with all parties to build this trust.

Escalating situations inevitably complicate the diplomatic environment, Al-Khulaifi emphasized, “because escalation hardens the stances of all parties, deepens mistrust, and shifts priorities from long-term political solutions to immediate security concerns.”

He explained that the strategy employed by Qatar and other nations is to remain engaged, flexible and pragmatic — prioritizing de-escalation while supporting a ceasefire whenever possible. “Even when a breakthrough seems unlikely in the immediate term, a platform for dialogue must be maintained,” Al-Khulaifi said.