Saudi Arabia’s recent $1.5 billion arms agreement with Sudan’s military included a significant diplomatic condition: weapons would only be delivered if General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan distanced his forces from Iranian drone technology. This strategic maneuver, confirmed by Gulf officials and sources briefed on the matter, illustrates how Gulf monarchies are subtly exploiting Iran’s declining regional influence while avoiding direct confrontation.
Tehran’s current vulnerabilities stem from a combination of military setbacks against Israel and domestic unrest fueled by economic crises. Gulf states recognize this weakness presents unprecedented opportunities to extract concessions and expand their regional influence. However, analysts and officials reveal deep concerns that potential U.S. military action against Iran could disrupt this delicate balance, potentially triggering catastrophic responses that would endanger regional stability.
Joshua Yaphe, senior fellow at the Center for the National Interest and former State Department Gulf analyst, notes: “There is an advantage for the Gulf in a weak Iran that is not engulfed in chaos.” Gulf monarchies particularly fear that American strikes could provoke retaliatory measures across their borders or lead to further consolidation of power by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
Despite Iran’s demonstrated military capabilities—including missile strikes on Tel Aviv during the June 2025 conflict and survival after nuclear facility bombings—the U.S. and its Gulf partners disagree on how to capitalize on Tehran’s weakened state. While Washington and Jerusalem see an opportunity for decisive strikes, Gulf nations prefer extracting diplomatic concessions through careful negotiation.
Recent tensions escalated when President Trump threatened military action during Iran’s crackdown on protesters earlier this month. Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Qatar actively lobbied against intervention, though concerns persist that Trump may still authorize new strikes. The deployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln to the Arabian Sea has further heightened anxieties.
Gulf opposition to military action stems from multiple factors: hosting vulnerable U.S. military bases, fear of unpredictable retaliation, and recognition that Iran’s weakness creates negotiation opportunities. As one Gulf source stated: “Trump had his Venezuela. What the Americans are being told is ‘this is our region. We can make a deal.’”
Regional dynamics reveal significant divisions, however. While Saudi Arabia leads anti-strike efforts, the UAE’s position remains ambiguous due to its closer alignment with Israel and higher risk tolerance. This divergence reflects the ongoing deterioration of Saudi-Emirati relations, evident in recent confrontations in Yemen and Sudan.
The dramatic transformation in Saudi-Iranian relations underscores the region’s shifting alliances. Since restoring diplomatic ties through Chinese mediation in 2023, Riyadh now expects Tehran to “reciprocate” by moderating Houthi aggression in Yemen. Meanwhile, Qatar emerges as a key power broker, backing Syria’s president while sharing the world’s largest natural gas field with Iran.
Oman and Qatar are leveraging the current situation to promote renewed nuclear negotiations, finding some receptive ears in international forums. As consultant Steve Witkoff noted at Davos: “Iran needs to change its ways… if they indicate willingness, I think we can diplomatically settle this.” This diplomatic approach remains the Gulf’s preferred path forward.