Putin, Araghchi, and Yi (AI Generated) Remember the word: “Security architecture.” Security architecture in the Persian Gulf, was used by President Putin and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi when speaking to Iran’s Foreign Minister during his visit to Russia on April 27 and to Beijing on May 5–6, 2026. The phrase refers to a multilateral, regionally led framework for long-term stability in the Gulf and broader Middle East.
The term “security architecture” in the Persian Gulf is not new diplomatic language invented for these visits. Russia has been proposing a “collective security architecture in the Gulf” since at least 2019, with Foreign Minister Lavrov reiterating that proposal as recently as February 28, 2026, the day the war began. China has backed Russia’s proposed collective security concept, which would replace the Gulf’s US defense umbrella and position Russia as a power broker alongside — or instead of — the US.
During his conversation with President Putin, Foreign Minister Araghchi said that Iran “supports the establishment of a new post-war regional architecture that can coordinate development and security.” In a subsequent meeting China’s Wang Yi, the Chinese Foreign Minister stated that Beijing “supports the establishment of a regional peace and security architecture by which regional countries jointly participate, safeguard common interests, and achieve common development.” S&P Global Wang Yi also called the US-Israel war on Iran “illegitimate” and articulated three essential Chinese positions: support for all of Iran’s reasonable claims, support for the withdrawal of US military bases across the Persian Gulf, and active participation in the post-war order.
The term “security architecture” is diplomatic code for a fundamental restructuring of who provides security in the Gulf, on what terms, and who gets excluded. The concept has several concrete components:
First, removal of US forces . The core demand — shared by Iran, Russia, and China — is that the United States withdraw its military bases, carrier strike groups, and security guarantees from the Gulf region. This would include bases in Bahrain (home of the US Fifth Fleet), Qatar, Kuwait, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia.
Second, replacement with a regional framework . The proposed coalition would include the Gulf states, Russia, China, and other stakeholders in a multilateral framework, with Russia arguing its advantage is that it maintains good relations with all parties — including Iran — unlike the United States.
Third, Iran as a legitimate regional power . Araghchi told Iranian media that “our Chinese friends believe that Iran after the war is different from Iran before the war. Its international standing has improved, and it has demonstrated its capabilities and power. Therefore, a new era of cooperation between Iran and other countries is ahead.” The architecture therefore formally legitimizes Iran’s dominant role in Gulf security rather than treating it as a threat to be contained. ING THINK Fourth, management of the Strait of Hormuz . The PGSA and Iran’s transit permit system described earlier is effectively the first concrete institutional manifestation of this architecture — Iran asserting sovereign-style administrative authority over the world’s most critical chokepoint.
Fifth, linkage to the broader multipolar order . The Russia-Iran-China triangle has emerged as the driving force behind what its proponents call “Eurasian integration and multipolarity,” with the Gulf security architecture as a microcosm of the new global order China is driving at a macro level.
The US-led security architecture in the Gulf, built over decades through bilateral defense agreements, military bases, and carrier presence, would effectively be dismantled under this framework. Gulf states face a difficult strategic dilemma: they cannot afford to sever ties with the United States, yet cannot comfortably maintain an alliance structure that exposes their security to decisions made beyond their borders. IFPRI Many Gulf Arab states are apprehensive about the conflict and have concerns about US reliability as a guarantor, even as they are also apprehensive about Israel’s increased regional influence following its strikes on Qatar in September 2025. Wisfarmer In short, “security architecture” is a polite phrase for the eviction of American power from the Persian Gulf and its replacement with a multilateral framework in which Iran, Russia, and China are co-equal — or dominant — players. It is arguably the most consequential geopolitical ambition to emerge from this conflict.
I received another piece of evidence today that the Russian/Chinese vision for a new security architecture is real and may be progressing. While chatting with a new friend who is well connected to Pakistan’s intelligence service (i.e., ISI), he told me that a very senior official in the ISI — his personal friend — told him earlier this week that Saudi Arabia and Qatar are going to cut security ties with the US… They reportedly want to move under a security umbrella offered by Russia and China. If true, this will mark further erosion in the US status as hegemon.
Nima and I chatted about the latest developments in the Persian Gulf: Glenn Diesen and I discussed the prospects for a new Middle East if the Gulf Arabs accept the Russian and Chinese proposal for a new security architecture: I closed out the day with Judge Napolitano, Ray McGovern and Scott Ritter. Scott broke some huge news about Russia’s hardening position regarding Germany: --- I thank you for your invaluable support by taking time to read or comment. I do not charge a subscription fee nor do I accept advertising. I want the content to be accessible to everyone interested in the issues I am discussing. However, if you wish to make a donation, please see this link .