• Measured Gulf response: Despite condemning Iran’s missile strike on a U.S. base in Qatar, Gulf states avoided escalation, signaling a shift toward pragmatic diplomacy.
• Israel seen as destabilizer: Gulf analysts increasingly view Israel’s military actions — not Iran — as the primary source of regional instability.
• U.S. isolation strategy failing: Decades of U.S.-led efforts to isolate Iran have failed to curb its nuclear ambitions or proxy influence, pushing Gulf states to seek engagement.
• Diplomacy over deterrence: Countries like Qatar and the UAE are investing in dialogue with Tehran, even after direct provocations, prioritizing de-escalation and regional stability.

When Iranian missiles roared toward Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar this week — a direct response to U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites — the Persian Gulf’s fragile balance appeared to hang by a thread. Nineteen rockets were launched, but no damage was reported. The Gulf states, expectedly, condemned the attack. Yet in the same breath, Qatar’s Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani expressed hope for a return to normal ties with Iran. “The Iranian people are our neighbors,” he said, “and we wish them peace, growth and development.”

That sentiment, spoken just hours after the missiles flew, speaks volumes about the regional shift underway in the Gulf. Where once Iran was the axis of evil in the Arab imagination — a revolutionary, sectarian, and militarized threat — it is now viewed with increasing nuance, even sympathy. The rules have changed. And in this moment of escalating U.S.-Iran hostilities, the Gulf monarchies are making a calculated choice: stability through engagement, not confrontation.

China Seizes the Mantle of Global Trade Leadership Amid U.S. Volatility

The Gulf’s bet on Iran is not without contradictions. Iran’s missile attack was, on paper, an act of aggression — the kind that, a decade ago, might have triggered a rupture. But the Gulf’s condemnation was measured, more diplomatic theater than strategic pivot. That restraint is instructive. It reveals not just a desire to avoid escalation, but a recognition that isolating Iran has failed — and perhaps, always has.

From Riyadh to Doha, leaders are reevaluating their threat perceptions. Israel, once a potential strategic partner against Iran, is now viewed by many Arab rulers as an unpredictable and destabilizing force. After its military actions in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and even direct strikes against Iranian territory, Israel’s regional behavior has begun to fray its quiet partnerships with Arab regimes. The Abraham Accords, once seen as a path to Palestinian statehood and Gulf-Israeli cooperation, now feel like unfinished business clouded by Israel’s hardline policies and continued occupation.

READ MORE: BREAKING: Europe on Edge as North Korean Troops Prepare to Join Russian Forces in Ukraine

Mohammed Baharoon, director of the Dubai-based think tank B’huth, put it bluntly: “Israel does not look at peace, it looks at security — not only security but its perception of it.” That perception, he warned, is fueling a military doctrine that is regional in scope and indifferent to diplomatic timing — including missile strikes during active nuclear negotiations between the U.S. and Iran.

Indeed, what most alarmed Gulf leaders this week wasn’t Iran’s missiles — it was Israel’s perceived effort to sabotage talks in Oman that many believed could bring about a critical breakthrough. That negotiation, aimed at reviving dormant diplomacy between Washington and Tehran, was abruptly stalled. Gulf leaders, who have long feared a nuclear Iran, want diplomacy to succeed. But Israel’s intervention, analysts say, seemed more about disruption than deterrence.

The Gulf’s outreach to Iran reflects a broader change in strategic logic. The old American playbook — isolate Tehran, back Israel, contain Iran’s proxies — is no longer attractive. “That policy was supposed to stop Iran’s nuclear program. It’s increasing. It was supposed to curtail its missile program and proxy reach. It didn’t,” Baharoon explained. “We need Iran to deal with us in the same way we deal with other countries.”

ALSO READ: U.S. sees a new Middle East. Gulf allies fret about an unrestrained Israel.

That shift is not ideological. It is pragmatic. In 2019, when suspected Iranian drones hit Saudi oil facilities in Abqaiq, Riyadh realized Washington would not come to its defense. That was a wake-up call. In response, Saudi Arabia opened quiet talks with Tehran — culminating in a China-brokered deal to normalize ties. The UAE, long a hawk on Iran, also recalibrated its posture, choosing state-to-state diplomacy over militant confrontation.

Even after the attack on Al-Udeid, Qatar stepped up as a mediator. Rather than severing ties, it helped secure a ceasefire between Iran and the U.S., underscoring its role as a diplomatic bridge. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, meanwhile, was quick to assure Qatar that the strike was not a hostile act against a “brotherly neighbor.”

The road ahead is uncertain. Iran’s decision to suspend cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog signals a hardening posture. Yet Gulf leaders remain committed to engagement. “They really do believe that the right strategy is maintaining ties,” said Anna Jacobs of the Gulf States Institute, “especially when the region is in such a precarious position.”

This isn’t appeasement. It is strategy born of exhaustion — from endless proxy wars, unkept American promises, and spiraling regional militarism. The Gulf’s calculation is simple: talking to Tehran is not capitulation; it is survival.