I was trying to get a better and more objective sense of what Tom Barrack said at Doha given the quite fractured reporting around this - and that many people seem to be losing their minds about him saying that Iran is "not an evil regime". The overview below is quite useful. On the whole, the position Barrack was conveying seems pretty sane and to take account of US, realities. ~~~~ Tom Barrack (US Ambassador to Turkey & Special Envoy for Syria/Iraq) delivered a candid set of remarks at the 8th Global Security Forum in Doha on Oct 20, 2026. On the US security role in the Gulf: - “America as the guarantor to the world, for the last 80 years, it is no longer there.” - The decades-old security-for-oil arrangement is “transitioning,” not ending. “Owning doesn’t work. Controlling hasn’t worked. Every place we’ve tried to control — Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq — Iraq, what a disaster. So the bargain is not to own but to tend. Not to leave. We’re not leaving.” - He called it a “realignment,” not abandonment. Regional governments must take greater responsibility for their own defense and for deterring Iran and its proxies. “That’s not America’s job.” - On past policy: The US has been involved in roughly 23 regime-change efforts. “Every time we try and intervene, change the person or the regime, it seems to have been a mistake.” On Saudi Arabia vs. Houthis: - The US will provide logistical support, but direct ground/kinetic involvement is “fruitless” and not America’s job. - No blanket guarantees. The direction is regional security arrangements (involving partners such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkey, and others), consistent with the Trump administration’s 2026 National Defense Strategy. On Iran specifically: Barrack drew a distinction between the Iranian system and the IRGC. He said the Iranian people are loved and adored, and described the Shia Twelver philosophy (the basis of the system since 1979) as a theocracy: “It’s a theocracy. It’s not an evil regime, that has nothing to do with it. That’s a religious content and practice that we all respect.” He then identified the IRGC as the problem: “The IRGC has become an adversary, and the IRGC and its adversarial role with Israel has been a problem.” He reiterated the lack of trust (especially with the IRGC) as the main barrier to a deal, while calling for a process involving a ceasefire in the straits, reopening the Strait of Hormuz, and easing hardship on the Iranian people. “Prosperity is the only answer.” He noted Trump is a “no forever wars president” and that the Iran war had “unintended consequences.” Broader framing: He advocated putting people “in a tent, give them coffee, put the guns and daggers on the table, and let’s figure something else out” through patience, presence, and dialogue. Reactions: - WSJ reported Barrack telling “nervous Gulf allies” the US cannot guarantee security forever. - Reporting from Al Jazeera, Al-Monitor, and others emphasized the nuance of transition and “we’re not leaving” rather than full abandonment. - His comments that Iran is “not an evil regime” (while labeling the IRGC an adversary) has drawn particular attention and criticism from some quarters for contrasting with broader administration rhetoric. - On social media, some accounts amplified a stronger “end of the US security umbrella” interpretation. In short, Barrack’s message was a reduced US willingness to serve as the indefinite sole guarantor, continued presence in a supporting role, a push for regional ownership of security, and a distinction between Iran’s theocratic system (which he said should be respected as religious practice) and the IRGC as the adversarial element.