Gulf Arab leaders have increasingly called on the United States to reopen diplomatic efforts with the Islamic Republic of Iran, reflecting a deep-seated anxiety over the balance of power in the Middle East and the persistent threat posed by Tehran’s expanding regional activities. During a recent tour of the Gulf, former U.S. President Donald Trump was reportedly urged by leaders in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar to support renewed negotiations with Iran in order to stabilize a region shaken by years of conflict, surging sectarianism, and mounting proxy warfare. This push, relayed by Arab sources with direct knowledge of the high-level meetings, underscores a broader political reality: Despite appearances of strength, Gulf monarchies remain highly apprehensive of Iranian ambitions and the structural vulnerabilities they face should hostility escalate into open conflict.
Iran’s revolutionary regime, established in 1979, has long declared its aim of projecting influence beyond its borders. Through the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the Quds Force, Tehran has cultivated a powerful network of militias and proxy actors stretching from Lebanon and Syria, through Iraq and Gaza, to Yemen—constituting what Western analysts now term the “axis of resistance.” This axis includes Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis, and is widely credited with advancing Iranian strategic objectives while destabilizing neighboring countries. These networks present real and immediate dangers to the Gulf states, from direct missile attacks on Saudi oil facilities to threats against maritime security in the Strait of Hormuz. The September 2019 strike on Saudi Aramco infrastructure—attributed by U.S. defense officials to Iran—exposed how vulnerable even the best-protected Gulf energy assets remain in the face of asymmetric tactics.
For decades, the security of the Gulf monarchies has depended on robust military ties with the United States and Western coalition partners. U.S. forces at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar and across the broader region have underwritten Gulf security architecture, deterring Iranian expansionism and reinforcing order. However, evolving American priorities, including the perception of decreased willingness to commit troops and resources to the Middle East, have left local allies uncertain about the reliability of these guarantees. As highlighted by the drawdown of U.S. troops in Iraq and the shifting U.S. diplomatic posture under multiple administrations, Gulf rulers increasingly view engagement with Iran as a pragmatic fallback—a way to hedge against further regional instability should U.S. support waver.
This careful balancing act is rooted in realism rather than naivety. Reliable intelligence assessments and repeated episodes of military confrontation have convinced Gulf governments that Iranian capacities and intentions pose tangible risks. The proliferation of precision-guided munitions, growing drone capabilities, and Iran’s demonstrated ability to escalate with deniable proxies have eroded any room for complacency. While Gulf states invest heavily in U.S. and European defensive systems, awareness of the IRGC’s operational reach has driven diplomatic overtures intended to modulate Tehran’s behavior and reduce the specter of catastrophic war.
However, this strategy elicits skepticism—and sometimes frustration—from regional observers, especially in Israel. Israeli leaders have consistently branded Iran’s regime as their foremost adversary, pointing to the documented record of terror sponsorship, clandestine weapons development, and public incitement. The October 7, 2023 massacre perpetrated by Iranian-backed Hamas terrorists in southern Israel, which resulted in the deadliest anti-Jewish violence since the Holocaust, crystallized Israel’s fears regarding the growing threat from Tehran’s regional network. Senior Israeli security officials, including Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir, emphasize that containment must be prioritized over accommodation, insisting that firm deterrence remains both a moral obligation and a prerequisite for national survival.
The Abraham Accords—led by the U.S. and formalizing ties between Israel, the UAE, and Bahrain—have created opportunities for new, security-driven regional coalitions. Nevertheless, Gulf Arab partners tread cautiously, mindful that enthusiasm for public security cooperation with Israel could invite retaliation from Tehran and inflame domestic dissent. This is especially true for Saudi Arabia, which despite quiet intelligence coordination with Israel, has not formalized full diplomatic relations. The Gulf’s reluctance to openly confront Iran derives from both the practical limitations of their military and security apparatus and the broader imperative to ensure regime continuity amid ongoing economic and social transformation.
Recent diplomatic moves illustrate both the Gulf’s lingering wariness and willingness to hedge. Saudi Arabia’s China-brokered rapprochement with Iran, announced in March 2023, marked a pivotal shift in posture, emphasizing dialogue and de-escalation over escalation and confrontation. Kingdom officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, have framed this strategy as consistent with Riyadh’s commitment to economic modernization under Vision 2030 yet have acknowledged the continuing necessity of external security partnerships, particularly with the United States. Western analysts warn, however, that such overtures risk encouraging Tehran’s belief that its regional ambitions and methods will be tolerated, if not accommodated, so long as open war can be avoided.
On the ground, the challenge posed by Iran and its proxies remains acute. The flow of Iranian-supplied ballistic and cruise missiles to Houthi militants in Yemen has enabled ongoing strikes targeting Saudi civilian and energy infrastructure, according to United Nations expert reports. In Iraq and Syria, pro-Iranian militias have targeted U.S. personnel and convoys with increasing sophistication, leveraging Iranian technology and training. In Lebanon, Hezbollah’s arsenal now numbers well over 100,000 rockets and missiles, forming a persistent threat facing Israel’s northern border. Each escalation prompts new diplomatic activity—including urgent calls for crisis mediation by Western capitals and the United Nations—but leaves underlying strategic concerns unresolved.
The root of Gulf caution, analysts contend, lies in their assessment of regime survival and internal stability. Investments in advanced Western weaponry notwithstanding, the Gulf monarchies view armed conflict with Iran as a last resort, one that risks both physical devastation and the erosion of their legitimacy at home. Historical experiences—including the shocks of the 1991 Gulf War and the 2011 Arab uprisings—underscore the high stakes of regional volatility. That their diplomatic channels with Tehran remain open reflects not a willingness to capitulate, but a recognition that enduring regional security requires both alliances and calibrated engagement.
For the Western alliance, maintaining credible deterrence and supporting partners through concrete security and intelligence cooperation remains a cornerstone of policy. Washington, London, and Paris continue to supply advanced defensive systems and conduct joint exercises, reinforcing Gulf resilience and reassuring leaders of the ongoing Western commitment. Yet the region’s future security architecture will likely require even deeper partnerships, sustained by a clear-eyed understanding of the costs and limits of either appeasement or isolation.
Israel, caught at the nexus of regional hostility and great power competition, continues to emphasize the moral clarity of its cause. October 7th and its aftermath serve as permanent reminders of the nature of the threat posed by Iranian-backed terrorism: indiscriminate, ideologically motivated, and indifferent to international law, including the abduction and illegal detention of innocent hostages. Israeli authorities argue that normalization efforts and enhanced regional cooperation should be leveraged not merely as hedging tools, but as instruments of collective self-defense and political solidarity against a regime that seeks the destruction of democratic societies throughout the Middle East and the West.
As Iran maintains its revolutionary posture, expanding its influence through both hard and soft power, the strategic dilemma facing the Gulf monarchies remains: how to balance sovereign interests, regime survival, and deep-seated fears of escalation, while navigating an increasingly polarized global order. The calculus is unlikely to change until the costs of Iranian aggression and subversion are met with coordinated resistance and enduring Western support for frontline states, most notably Israel. Until that moment, the cautious, sometimes hesitant diplomacy that characterizes Gulf-Iranian relations will remain emblematic of an era defined by uncertainty and the ever-present risk of unchecked terror.
