Eman Arshad
The June 17 MoU was supposed to guarantee Gulf security and put an end to the longstanding US-Iran conflict. Instead, the continued violation of the ceasefire and the resumption of hostilities on July 11 have introduced new security ambiguity regarding the ultimate endgame of the conflict. With the US attacking Iran directly, Iran, due to its lack of ICBMs, responded by targeting US bases in neighboring countries. This highlights a critical security paradox: the US bases that were originally installed to guarantee security have now become vectors of vulnerability for Gulf countries.
Iran conducted targeted attacks on Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Iraq with over 6,413 missiles and drones over the course of 41 days, with attacks on Bahrain and Kuwait reportedly continuing. These attacks caused billions of dollars in damage to US military assets. Instead of retaliating, these seven Gulf countries opted for de-escalation and participated in peace initiatives. As efforts to end the conflict continue, the central question remains whether the Gulf countries will continue to tolerate these security repercussions after witnessing US bases become security flashpoints while being inadvertently drawn into the conflict.
Between February 28 and June 28, Iran launched attacks across the Persian Gulf against US military installations in the region. Notable bases included Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait, Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, the US Fifth Fleet Headquarters in Bahrain, Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, and Al Dhafra Air Base and Al Minhad Air Base in the UAE. The attacks resulted in an estimated $5 billion in repair costs. An expected response would have been retaliatory strikes by these countries; however, in reality, they only utilized their militaries to intercept missiles and maintained a defensive posture.
Instead, most countries initially viewed the US as bearing responsibility for these attacks because the security guarantees they expected from Washington failed to materialize. Countries such as Qatar emerged as key mediators between the US and Iran, alongside Pakistan, in an effort to stabilize the region.
Meanwhile, the UAE experienced significant disruptions to its tourism and business sectors. These developments prompted Gulf states to recalibrate their approach to alignment with the West. With Iran emerging as a significant regional power, underscored by its uncompromising stance during the conflict, these countries now need to reassess the implications of hosting US military bases while remaining in Iran’s immediate strategic neighborhood.
Saudi Arabia’s grounding of 43 US warplanes in May, Kuwait’s restrictions on US access to its bases, and Qatar’s diplomatic distancing from Washington during the Lake Lucerne Summit reveal a subtle yet significant shift. These are not merely diplomatic gestures but structural constraints on US military operations.
Despite its vulnerabilities being exposed during the conflict, the US still maintains a formidable military posture and advanced capabilities, including ICBMs, making it significantly superior to Iran in conventional military power. Under such circumstances, any attempt by Gulf countries to sever ties with the US could itself trigger regional instability. Consequently, the current strategy of Gulf states appears to be one of strategic restriction and selective hedging, continuing to rely on the US as a security partner while simultaneously reducing their own vulnerability.
President Trump officially declared the ceasefire over on July 7–8. The US subsequently launched attacks on Iran, to which Iran responded by striking US targets in neighboring countries, as sirens sounded across Bahrain and Kuwait. The war re-escalated on July 17–18, when Iran launched ballistic missiles toward US military bases in Jordan, Kuwait, and Bahrain.
As the third phase of the conflict unfolds, characterized by a US naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and Iranian attacks across the Middle East, Gulf countries have once again found themselves at the center of the conflict. The war is already placing immense strain on their economies, while their geographical proximity to Iran and their role as hosts to US military bases create a profound strategic dilemma. Amid this uncertainty, Gulf countries, which initially pursued a strategy of strategic hedging, are now shifting toward active crisis containment.
The GCC Secretary-General publicly condemned Iran’s strikes, warning that they could further strain relations with Tehran. Given the enormous economic and military stakes involved, this conflict has already evolved into one of the most structurally destabilizing wars of the modern era. If the conflict continues to escalate at its current pace, peace negotiations may become a luxury that neither side can afford, while Gulf countries are increasingly forced into survival mode despite their limited direct involvement.
The author is pursuing a Bachelor’s in International Relations at National Defense University, Islamabad. Her research interests include geopolitics, climate diplomacy, International and regional security, and foreign affairs.
