Arab Gulf states are increasingly concerned that President Donald Trump’s emerging agreement with Iran could reshape the regional balance of power in Tehran’s favor, raising new questions about Washington’s role as the Gulf’s primary security guarantor.

Get today's headlines by email

For decades, Gulf leaders viewed the United States as a strategic partner central to their security. Trump, however, has often described the relationship in more transactional terms. During his first term, he publicly suggested that Saudi Arabia depended heavily on US protection and should pay more for its defense.

Doubts Over US Security Commitments

Those concerns intensified after the 2019 attacks on major Saudi oil facilities, which temporarily disrupted roughly half of the kingdom’s crude production. Although Washington blamed Iran and condemned the strikes, Gulf governments questioned how far the US would go to confront Tehran on their behalf.

By the start of Trump’s second term, Gulf states had begun adjusting their expectations. While pledging trillions of dollars in investments in the US economy, they also sought assurances that American security commitments remained firm.

War Rekindles Regional Anxiety

Those assurances faced a major test this year when the United States and Israel launched military operations against Iran despite Gulf efforts to avoid a broader regional conflict.

Iran responded with attacks across the Gulf, forcing regional governments to reassess their dependence on Washington. During a visit this week to the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Kuwait, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio sought to reassure allies that American commitments remained unchanged.

Speaking in Kuwait, Rubio said the United States would not take steps that undermine the security of its long-standing Gulf partners. He stressed that regional allies would be consulted throughout negotiations with Iran and said he had not detected doubts about US security guarantees.

Despite those assurances, analysts say confidence in Washington has weakened significantly. Hasan Alhasan, a senior fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, described the conflict as a major setback for the Gulf security order.

While Gulf governments supported the ceasefire agreement between Washington and Tehran, Alhasan argued that they view it as a preferable alternative to continued conflict rather than an ideal outcome.

Concerns Over the Emerging Pact

Gulf states opposed the 2015 nuclear agreement between Iran and the United States under President Barack Obama and welcomed Trump’s decision to withdraw from it in 2018. The new arrangement is expected to generate even greater unease.

Among the most controversial elements is a provision granting Iran a role alongside Oman in overseeing commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical route for Gulf trade and energy exports.

The agreement also leaves unresolved concerns about Iran’s missile program and its network of allied militant groups, issues many Gulf governments regard as more urgent than Tehran’s nuclear activities.

Another source of uncertainty is a proposed $300 billion reconstruction fund for Iran. Trump has suggested Gulf states could contribute, but Saudi Arabia has said it lacks details about the proposal, while Qatar has only expressed preliminary interest. Rubio said this week that seeking financial commitments was not part of his current regional discussions.

Gulf States Explore New Strategies

As doubts grow over long-term US involvement in the region, Gulf governments are considering ways to diversify their security arrangements.

Officials are exploring stronger defense cooperation among Gulf states and looking at alternative military suppliers, including Turkey. At the same time, some leaders are considering whether a future regional non-aggression pact with Iran could help reduce tensions.

Analysts caution, however, that diplomacy alone may not be enough. Alhasan argued that Gulf states would need stronger and more integrated defense capabilities to create a credible deterrent before any such agreement could succeed.

The debate reflects a broader reassessment taking place across the Gulf. Increasingly, policymakers are reconsidering not only how to manage relations with Iran, but also how much they can rely on the United States in the years ahead.

Firas Maksad of Eurasia Group said years of disappointments had eroded confidence in Washington. As a result, Gulf states may pursue a dual strategy of engaging Iran diplomatically while strengthening their own military capabilities to reduce dependence on external protection.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?

Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 25 June 2026

View full article

Can you blame them !! America is a spent force, totally lost the war with a 3rd world country, Talk B/S with no honest commitment to anything !

They’ve learned a hard lesson. To western elite class they’re are always backward Arabs and low on priorities.

16 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

Can you blame them !! America is a spent force, totally lost the war with a 3rd world country, Talk B/S with no honest commitment to anything !

I am a U.S. citizen and agree with the above though I feel "Talk B/S with no honest commitment to anything !" is more indicative of our president and not the majority of Americans.

12 minutes ago, 1duckyboy said:

I am a U.S. citizen and agree with the above though I feel "Talk B/S with no honest commitment to anything !" is more indicative of our president and not the majority of Americans.

In a representative democracy, citizens who actively participate in electing a candidate/or not are still inherently complicit in the consequences of that administration's actions. as citizens are part of that society Your president is your representative,

3 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

In a representative democracy, citizens who actively participate in electing a candidate/or not are still inherently complicit in the consequences of that administration's actions. as citizens are part of that society Your president is your representative,

Only 22.7% of the U.S. population voted for Donald Trump in 2024 but go ahead and paint with your broad brush.

Everything was fine until the US, spurred on my Israel, decided to violently overthrow Iran. The Gulf States allowed their countries to be the launching pads for those attacked.
They made their beds, now they'll need to sleep in them. It is 100% obvious that the US can't supply security guarantees for any of it's vassal-states.

4 minutes ago, 1duckyboy said:

Only 22.7% of the U.S. population voted for Donald Trump in 2024 but go ahead and paint with your broad brush.

That is a fault in your election system, and if you disagree do something about it !!

1 hour ago, 1duckyboy said:

Only 22.7% of the U.S. population voted for Donald Trump in 2024 but go ahead and paint with your broad brush.

He still got in, and he's still your President and representative on the world stage.

18 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

Can you blame them !! America is a spent force, totally lost the war with a 3rd world country, Talk B/S with no honest commitment to anything !

Iran's military was not 3rd world.

The USA did not commit itself to an all out war with Iran. The conflict was limited to US air and limited naval participation. Had the USA gone to war, Iran would have been levelled in 72 hours.

6 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

Iran's military was not 3rd world.

The USA did not commit itself to an all out war with Iran. The conflict was limited to US air and limited naval participation. Had the USA gone to war, Iran would have been levelled in 72 hours.

That is not the point, The USA Lost !! and as such your president rants and rages in front of the world ! lies constantly and the question is being asked can the Gulf States, Question US Security Guarantees and the simple asnwer NO the USA can not be trusted to Guarantee anything !!

44 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

Iran's military was not 3rd world.

The USA did not commit itself to an all out war with Iran. The conflict was limited to US air and limited naval participation. Had the USA gone to war, Iran would have been levelled in 72 hours.

Are you sure?

2 hours ago, connda said:

Everything was fine until the US, spurred on my Israel, decided to violently overthrow Iran. The Gulf States allowed their countries to be the launching pads for those attacked.
They made their beds, now they'll need to sleep in them. It is 100% obvious that the US can't supply security guarantees for any of it's vassal-states.

That's very much an oversimplification.

We all know that the Iranian regime is a major sponsor of global terrorism. We know the regime is fanatical. They are just troublemakers and a despotic regime.

Furthermore, we also know that refining uranium far beyond the needs and uses for peaceful purposes, that there must be a far more sinister motive.

This has been noted, recorded and closely watched by ALL ARAB STATES, as well as the USA, Europe, and Israel.

Iran does not give a damn about Gaza, they just want to be rid of Israel, and that thinking applies to Gazans as well.

This isn't about the history of Palestine or Israel, this is about the Arabs in the region, who were mostly tribesmen and nomadic, see it as an affront to Muslims to have Israel in their midst.

You can talk all you want about the dividing up and forming of an Israeli homeland. You can talk about Balfour declarations until you are blue in the face.

They aren't interested, and this dispute isn't about a Palestinian homeland. It's about the destruction of Israel, and the rest about poor Palestinian children is just window dressing to suit Hamas and the rest of the terrorist agenda.

The Arab states reject these people outright, they know they are bad news and troublemakers.

Muslims have taken over by violence far more countries, states, and land than anybody else.

Yet, these people now calling themselves displaced Palestinians want to scream about a tiny sliver in their midst because it's a reminder of Jewish success and Muslim failure.

Rumours had it that far too many munitions were used in this conflict at horrendous monetary cost to the USA. The Iranians fought back using very low tech drones etc acquired from Russia and others, wreaking havoc at negligible expense.

11 hours ago, 1duckyboy said:

I am a U.S. citizen and agree with the above though I feel "Talk B/S with no honest commitment to anything !" is more indicative of our president and not the majority of Americans.

Yeah, and that's great and good to know, but he was voted into power not once BUT twice. That says a lot about the majority as well....

He's the worst president you've had so far. One can only hope he won'tsurvive the midterm elections!

Of course they should question this as the US has likely become the least reliable ally, any nation could have with the circus clown presiding right now. He has done his best to trash allies and support despots and dictators whom he seems to adore.

Any nation should stay as far away as possible and be as free of dependency as they possibly can, from the ever unreliable America these days.

We have Ukraine security guarantees in exchange for giving up nuclear weapons.

We welched on that.

There are NO guarantees at state level.

America has lost all respect in the world because of the moron you have for president !! so why should the Gulf States trust America !! America is a failed country !