Gulf countries prepare for Iran-Israel war

BeirutThe Middle East enters a new phase in the standoff between Iran and Israel. Tension continues to mark every diplomatic meeting, with the sound of war drums in the background. Donald Trump, after meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday He opened the door to bombing Iran if it is confirmed that it has resumed its nuclear program. "We'll give them a beating," he told reporters. What role do the Gulf states play in this context?

In Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, the corridors of the foreign ministries are bustling with activity, while phone calls, draft agreements, and discreet trips to Tehran and Washington define the negotiators' agenda. They have assumed a dual role: that of discreet mediators and, at the same time, guardians of their own strategic interests. According to diplomatic sources, Iran has asked these countries to pressure the United States to achieve a ceasefire with Israel. In return, Tehran is offering flexibility in the nuclear negotiations, a gesture that Washington is viewing with caution. Meanwhile, Qatar and Oman are maintaining their traditional role as neutral facilitators.

The atmosphere, however, is tense. Saudi Arabia and the UAE have publicly condemned the Israeli attacks and are calling for a halt to hostilities. But behind closed doors, the conversation is more complex. No Gulf country wants to directly confront Israel, a strategic partner under the Abraham Accords, championed by Trump during his first term. This strategy, continued by Joe Biden, remains the guiding principle of the Republican's current policy: that Israel normalize relations with its neighbors in the economic, diplomatic, and military spheres. But at the same time, the petro-monarchies also don't want to provoke Iran, whose influence stretches from Yemen to Lebanon. A senior Saudi official has expressed "great concern" about the regional escalation and the need for restraint to avoid a wider crisis, as reported by [source missing]. Arab News Citing an official statement from the Foreign Ministry.

In Washington, the Trump administration is watching closely. The Gulf states are acting as an indirect bridge, relaying messages from Iran to the White House and vice versa. But their room for maneuver is limited. Any pressure on Israel requires coordination and approval from the United States. However, Gulf diplomacy has gained prominence because, at this stage of the conflict, the war is being fought as much in offices as in the skies and on borders.

Balancing Peace and Alliances

The position of the Gulf states reflects the tension between their desire for stability and his close relationship with WashingtonDavid Makovsky, from Washington Institute for Near East PolicyIt notes that, in the current context, Gulf diplomacy "is forced to navigate between supporting de-escalation and managing the expectations of the United States and Israel," and underlines that these capitals are trying "to balance pressure for peace with the reality of their security alliances" at a time when any misstep could undermine both their own.

From Tehran, the narrative is clear. "We want the Arab countries to talk to the United States. We need a ceasefire now, before the situation escalates again," a senior Iranian official told the Lebanese news agency LBCI. This strategy reflects Iran's awareness that its military capabilities have limits, as was evident in the twelve-day war in June in which Israel wreaked havoc on its strategic installations, and that political and diplomatic legitimacy is as important as its missile arsenal. It will also be necessary to see how internal tensions evolve, with the protests of recent days over the rampant inflation in the country.

The challenge for the Gulf states is to maintain a balance. The crisis directly threatens vital trade routes, foreign investment, and the stability of oil prices—factors that cannot be ignored. Therefore, even while condemning the attacks, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are seeking to allow room for diplomacy before becoming embroiled in military conflict.

For their part, Oman and Qatar have offered their capitals as neutral negotiating points. In discreet rooms in Doha, Iranian and American diplomats have exchanged drafts of potential agreements under the supervision of Gulf emissaries. The scenario highlights a crucial point: the Gulf states are not mere spectators. Their intervention can accelerate de-escalation or, if it fails, become an additional source of friction. Mediation is delicate. Any undue concession could be interpreted as alignment with Tehran, while inaction could undermine their regional credibility if they act merely as a conduit for Washington's interests.

In the end, the Iran-Israeli conflict is no longer just a military matter. It is a test of diplomacy, influence, and strategy, in which the Gulf actors attempt to play the role of arbiter without losing their balance. In the coming months, the diplomatic corridors of Riyadh, Abu Dhabi, Doha, and Muscat will be both witnesses and protagonists in a region learning to negotiate peace while remaining mindful of the dangers of war.