Napoleon's campaign failed, but it awakened the strategic concerns of the Middle East gateways, so the campaign retreated. However, the dream of the Suez Canal project remained strong, this canal that brought together the two seas, and brought the worlds closer, but it revealed the central importance of the Bab al-Mandab Strait, the Gulf of Aqaba, the Strait of Hormuz, and other maritime corridors and ports, such as the Arabian Sea and the location of Somalia, and the sensitivity of the Gulf of Djibouti, and what Eritrea represents as a buffer strip with a strong geopolitical impact. The "Tripartite Aggression" war of 1956 AD, which broke out after the nationalization of the Suez Canal, exacerbated the awareness of the importance of these crossings, and thus made the Middle East a global attraction area, where cross-border interests collide, and a permanent home for external plans that cast heavy shadows on the entire region.
It is a siege from a distance, as the war of corridors today is very similar to the tactics of besieging castles and cities in ancient wars, but it is a war of long distances. Today, you do not need to lead large armies and travel long distances to besiege Europe. It is enough to disrupt a strait or close a nearby passage to your borders to have a deep impact there in the distance. Moreover, the impact here casts its shadow on both production and consumption countries, which increases the complexity of any modern military confrontation. Here, the advantage and curse of the geopolitical location appear at the same time, which is what the Middle East enjoys from the blessing of the sensitivity of the geographical feature and the curse of the fragility of the straits and corridors for any military or security reality. You do not only close the door on your enemy, but also on yourself, which makes the use of these straits as a regional-global weapon accompanied by the game of patience and strategic endurance, as if we are facing a game of biting fingers.