Challenges of Deterrence and Neutrality: Gulf States Facing the Fires of the American-Iranian Conflict

The six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states are facing their toughest test in decades, finding themselves in the direct line of fire of the escalating conflict between the United States and Israel on one side, and Iran on the other. Despite attempts at joint coordination, disparities in foreign policies and fears of the repercussions of military involvement continue to hinder the achievement of a unified stance towards attacks targeting their territories.

Since the launch of the American-Israeli attack on Iran on February 28, the region has entered an unprecedented spiral of violence, with Tehran launching more than two thousand missiles and drones towards the Gulf states. This escalation has placed Gulf capitals before a painful reality, where the conflict is no longer far from their borders, but now threatens vital infrastructure and global energy sources.

Field data indicates that the pain has not been evenly distributed among the region's countries, as more than half of the Iranian attacks were concentrated on the United Arab Emirates. In a dangerous development, drones targeted Bahrain's only oil refinery on March 9, injuring dozens and prompting the state oil company to declare 'force majeure' in its contracts.

In Kuwait, sources reported that air defenses managed to intercept three ballistic missiles and drones targeting Kuwait International Airport. Despite the successful interception, missile fragments caused limited fires at the Subiya power station and the explosion of fuel tanks, leading to a temporary suspension of air navigation before its gradual resumption.

In Saudi Arabia, defensive forces destroyed a drone in the Empty Quarter region that was en route to target the Shaybah oil field. Official sources confirmed the registration of the first two fatalities in the Kingdom as a result of falling interceptor missile fragments, increasing popular and political pressure to take a firmer stance against continuous Iranian threats.

There is a state of paralysis in decision-making within the GCC, where officials are divided between a faction urging restraint to avoid an all-out war, and a faction demanding military deterrence against Iran. This division is essentially due to a loss of trust in the current US administration led by Donald Trump, who faces declining popularity and widespread internal opposition to the continuation of the war.

Gulf capitals bitterly recall Washington's inaction after the attacks on Saudi oil facilities in 2019, which reinforces doubts about the seriousness of American security commitments. Gulf leaders fear that Washington might succeed in dragging them into a destructive conflict, then suddenly withdraw, leaving them in direct confrontation with a wounded and motivated Iranian neighbor.

In a related context, Israeli attempts to draw regional countries into the conflict emerged through media leaks claiming the participation of Emirati and Qatari aircraft in striking targets inside Iran. Abu Dhabi and Doha quickly denied these reports entirely, with Gulf officials describing these leaks as a 'dirty game' aimed at imposing a fait accompli and embarrassing Arab states before their people.

These Israeli leaks provoke unspoken anger in Abu Dhabi, which has sought since the signing of diplomatic agreements in 2020 to build a close partnership that endured even during the war on Gaza. Observers believe that leaking information that may be secret or false represents a stab in the back of security understandings, and may sometimes amount to incitement to war crimes.

Domestically, Gulf rulers cannot ignore public opinion, which is overly sensitive to involvement in a regional war. In Bahrain, Iranian attacks raise fears of new social unrest, especially with old grievances among some groups, where videos recorded voices chanting support for the attacks as they occurred.

In the UAE, there is a divergence of views between the political capital, Abu Dhabi, which tends to adopt a firm foreign policy towards Iranian threats, and Dubai, which represents the commercial center and prefers complete neutrality. Prominent businessmen have expressed concern that the war could destroy the economic model based on stability and attracting global investments.

Advocates of restraint believe that joining the US military alliance represents an unacceptable risk, especially with a president who does not believe in international multilateralism. In contrast, the hardline faction believes that the conciliatory messages sent by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian have not prevented missiles from falling on Gulf cities, making deterrence an inescapable necessity.

The biggest concern remains related to the post-war phase; assuming the Iranian regime remains, it will face severe sanctions and billions of dollars in economic losses. Officials in the Gulf fear that Tehran may resort to blackmailing neighboring countries through intermittent drone attacks or harassing ships in vital waterways to compensate for its losses or to alleviate pressure on it.

Ultimately, it seems that the advocates of restraint currently hold the upper hand in Gulf ruling circles, awaiting what the coming days will bring. However, a major Iranian attack causing widespread human casualties could completely tip the scales, pushing the region towards an all-out confrontation that no one desires but everyone is preparing for.

It's a dirty game; Israel is trying to impose a fait accompli by leaking reports of alleged military action by GCC states.