Revista OEconomica

Tudor Constantin BĂLAN - Cycles of Freedom: Are Our Rights Today Permanently Secured, or Are We in a Transitional Phase? The Cases of Great Britain, the United States, and Russia

Marius-Cristian PANĂ, Adela BĂLAN - Economic Freedom and Prosperity: A Comparative Analysis of Welfare Determinants at the International Level

Ana Octavia ALBU - When Accurate Forecasts Still Produce Waste: Demand Shocks and Over-Forecasting Risk in Food Retail

Adrian-Ioan DAMOC - The Persian Pivot and the Reconfiguration of Geopolitical Realism: Iran and Venezuela in Strategic Competition among the United States, China, and Russia

Emmanuel Olusegun STOBER - Coercive Diplomacy in the Gulf and the Limits of the Strike-Forward Strategy: Toward a Middle-Power Coalition for Regional Stability

Sorin-Nicolae CURCĂ - On the Informational Entropy of Economic Shock

Florin DĂNESCU - The Banking Sector as Critical Infrastructure in the Logic of Hybrid Conflict: Post-2014 Legislative Convergence in Central and Eastern Europe and the Case of Romania

Mihai LĂCĂTUŞ - GDP as a Means, Not an End: Inequality as the Missing Variable in Fiscal Policy Design – A 60-Country Analysis of Economic Growth and Subjective Well-Being

Articles on Issue Theme

Emmanuel Olusegun STOBER

Academia de Studii Economice din Bucureşti

The accelerating militarization of diplomacy in the Gulf has transformed coercion from a supplementary instrument of statecraft into the dominant grammar of regional interaction. Against the backdrop of escalating tensions surrounding Iran’s nuclear program, retaliatory strikes, and mounting risks to energy markets and maritime trade, the article examines the strategic logic and limitations of the contemporary “strike-forward” approach pursued by the United States and Israel. Drawing on theories of coercive diplomacy, deterrence, and escalation management, the analysis argues that military pressure alone is increasingly counterproductive: while capable of temporarily degrading capabilities, it simultaneously incentivizes nuclear hardening, dispersal strategies, reduced transparency, and wider regional destabilization. The paper further explores how repeated cycles of coercion weaken verification mechanisms, amplify threats to Gulf infrastructure and shipping corridors, and undermine the legitimacy of long-term containment efforts. In response, the study advances the concept of a Middle-Power Coalition for Gulf Stability (MPC-GS), centred on Gulf states with direct exposure to escalation and supported by external middle powers possessing significant diplomatic, commercial, and energy interests in regional stability. Rather than advocating idealistic de-escalation detached from geopolitical realities, the proposed framework seeks to institutionalize coercion within a broader architecture of negotiated restraint, verification, maritime security, infrastructure resilience, missile risk reduction, and managed strategic competition. The article concludes that a sustainable Gulf Security Compact represents not a return to earlier diplomatic formats, but a necessary adaptation to an increasingly fragmented and multipolar international order.

ŒCONOMICA no. 1-2/2026

Keywords: coercive diplomacy, Gulf security, Iran nuclear program, strike-forward strategy, escalation management, deterrence, Middle East geopolitics, middle powers, maritime security, geoeconomics, regional stability, strategic competition, security architecture

JEL: F51, F52, F53, F59, H56, Q34

Coercive Diplomacy in the Gulf and the Limits of the Strike-Forward Strategy: Toward a Middle-Power Coalition for Regional Stability

Select Issue: