Turning Fragile Ceasefires Into More Lasting Peace through IMEC Connectivity

As a fragile set of ceasefires tentatively holds across Gaza, and the wider shadow conflict between the US/Israel and Iran, a narrow but critical window has opened. The question now is whether the international community can move quickly enough to help translate de-escalation into durable stability.

Next week’s meeting in Brussels of the Global Alliance for the Implementation of the Two-State Solution is a unique opportunity for Europe to lead—not only diplomatically, but economically—by prioritizing the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) as a central pillar of regional stabilization.

IMEC, first announced at the 2023 G20 summit, is a proposed network of rail, ports, energy, and digital infrastructure linking India to Europe via the Gulf and the Eastern Mediterranean. While often framed as a trade initiative, IMEC’s deeper strategic value lies in its ability to reduce geopolitical risk—especially in light of growing threats to global shipping chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb. The recent war has underscored how vulnerable global trade remains to disruption at these narrow maritime passages.

Europe knows from its own history that connectivity can be transformative. After World War II, economic integration—beginning with coal and steel—created the foundations for lasting peace. Today, that same logic can be applied to the Middle East.

Building on the aligned objectives of the Global Alliance, the New York Declaration on the two-state solution, and the 20 point Trump peace plan, Europe can bring its comparative advantage to bear: the ability to link economic incentives with political outcomes.

This is where Europe’s IMEC envoys—Gérard Mestrallet of France, Francesco Talò of Italy, and Ralph Bohme of Germany—can play a decisive role. They are well positioned to champion a vision in which IMEC is not simply infrastructure, but a peacebuilding instrument.

The logic is straightforward. IMEC can act as a powerful economic and shared-security “carrot”:

• For Israel, through expanded development of the Port of Haifa as a regional gateway
• For Palestine, through the reconstruction and economic integration of Gaza Port
• For Lebanon, through the rebuilding of the Port of Beirut
• For Syria, through eventual reconstruction and reintegration of one or more Syrian ports
• For Jordan, as a central land-bridge hub linking Gulf markets to Mediterranean ports

The economic gains from such integration could help weaken public support for radical actors—whether Iranian-backed proxies or maximalist Israeli nationalist agendas—by offering a credible alternative rooted in prosperity and interdependence.

IMEC cannot replace maritime trade at scale. But it can reduce vulnerability to chokepoint disruptions while, more importantly, anchoring an inclusive “Peace Triangle” approach that links Gulf investment, Levant reconstruction, and European markets. This approach also aligns with post Gaza war, Saudi and Gulf conditionality, that ties normalization with Israel and large-scale investment such as under IMEC, to a credible pathway toward Palestinian statehood.

A second, equally important opportunity lies in energy.

IMEC’s renewable energy corridor—particularly from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan—could significantly reduce European dependence not only on Russian gas but also on Iranian oil. At the same time, it aligns with Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 strategy to diversify away from a fossil-fuel-dependent economy.

The current Iran conflict creates a stark choice. One path could see massive new Gulf oil pipelines built toward the Mediterranean and Red Sea to bypass maritime chokepoints—locking in long-term fossil dependence and posing serious environmental risks. The alternative is a rapid scaling of renewable energy exports—green electricity grids and green hydrogen pipelines—connecting the Middle East, North Africa, and Europe.

Europe, as the primary energy buyer, holds decisive leverage. But that leverage only matters if it is exercised through long-term purchasing commitments that give Gulf, Levant, and North African countries the confidence to invest at scale in renewables.

Here, European institutional leadership becomes critical. Kaja Kallas, alongside Dubravka Šuica and Luigi Di Maio, can mobilize the EU’s financial and policy tools—from Global Gateway to emerging Mediterranean and MENA strategies, including the Trans-Mediterranean (T-Med) energy and connectivity framework—to drive largely private-sector Gulf investments.

But this will require coordination. Notably, on the US side, an integrated team at the State Department is already linking Middle East peace efforts, Gaza reconstruction planning, and IMEC development.

By combining IMEC with the political framework of the Global Alliance, the New York Declaration, and the Trump Plan, Europe can do what it has done before: translate connectivity into peace. This approach would be further strengthened by establishing an International Fund for Israeli-Palestinian Peace. Together, these three pillars—economic integration, a credible political pathway to a two-state solution, and sustained investment in civil society—would form a coherent strategy in which each reinforces the other, aligning regional incentives, diplomatic progress, and bottom-up engagement into a durable architecture for peace.

The prize is significant. A climate-smart, economically integrated Middle East could not only stabilize a volatile region but also weaken the influence of extremist spoilers by replacing conflict economies with shared prosperity.

This could be Europe’s moment to support the infrastructure needed that helps make peace possible.