NextFin News - Gulf Arab states are privately questioning the reliability of U.S. security guarantees as the conflict between the Trump administration and Iran enters its second month with no clear resolution in sight. According to people familiar with the matter cited by Bloomberg, officials in Riyadh and Abu Dhabi are increasingly frustrated by what they perceive as a lack of a coherent strategy from U.S. President Trump, fearing that their nations have become primary targets for Iranian retaliation while Washington pursues an unpredictable "maximum pressure" campaign that has now escalated into direct military confrontation.
The anxiety in Gulf capitals stems from a fundamental misalignment of objectives. While U.S. President Trump has signaled a desire to jump-start negotiations through a 15-point peace proposal delivered via Pakistani intermediaries, Gulf leaders worry that any potential deal might prioritize U.S. interests—such as nuclear non-proliferation—while leaving Iran’s regional proxy network and ballistic missile program intact. This "abandonment" scenario would leave the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states to face an emboldened Tehran that still maintains a stranglehold on the Strait of Hormuz, the world’s most critical oil chokepoint.
Lana Nusseibeh, the UAE’s assistant minister for political affairs, recently met with U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance to emphasize that "all options" must remain on the table to ensure the permanent unblocking of the Strait of Hormuz. This public posture masks a deeper private skepticism. According to Bloomberg, some Gulf officials are now questioning the utility of hosting American military bases, which they believe act more as magnets for Iranian strikes than as deterrents. However, the risk of alienating U.S. President Trump remains too high for any state to publicly demand a troop withdrawal.
The shift in sentiment is already altering regional military calculations. Saudi Arabia and the UAE are reportedly considering direct participation in strikes against Iran if their own critical infrastructure—such as the Abqaiq oil processing facility or Dubai’s financial hubs—is targeted again. This represents a significant departure from the cautious de-escalation policies seen in 2023 and 2024. Anwar Gargash, a senior diplomatic adviser to the UAE presidency, has stated that any ceasefire must address the "nuclear threat, missiles, drones, and Iranian intimidation" as a single package, signaling that the Gulf will not accept a partial peace that leaves them vulnerable.
A more cautious perspective is offered by analysts at the Atlantic Council, who suggest that the current friction may be a tactical maneuver by Gulf states to extract firmer, written security commitments from the Trump administration. They argue that despite the rhetoric, the GCC remains fundamentally dependent on U.S. hardware and intelligence, making a true "pivot" away from Washington unlikely in the near term. Instead, the region may see a "new normal" where Gulf states maintain backchannel communications with Tehran to hedge against U.S. volatility, even as they publicly align with Washington’s military objectives.
The economic stakes of this strategic drift are immense. With oil markets reacting to every headline from the Strait of Hormuz, the perceived erosion of the U.S. security umbrella adds a permanent "instability premium" to global energy prices. If the Trump administration fails to provide a roadmap that secures both the flow of oil and the physical safety of its partners, the Gulf states may increasingly look toward a multi-polar security arrangement involving China or European powers to balance their risks.
Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.
