The Iran War Is Uncovering the Weakness in U.S.-Gulf Ties Neither the Abraham Accords nor the presence of large U.S. bases are enough to protect Arab Gulf states. The current agreement among the Arab Gulf states may not last. These countries’ approaches and choices moving forward will likely move them in different directions, making it even less likely that negotiations to end the war will meet regional security needs. The divergence is best seen in the likely paths of Saudi Arabia and the UAE, particularly over the issue of ties with Israel. A few years ago, Saudi Arabia—much like other Gulf states—viewed Iran as a major threat to the Gulf region, because of both its military action and its support for proxies in Iraq, Yemen, and Lebanon. Saudi leaders wanted U.S. protection against this threat in the form of advanced U.S. weaponry, a peaceful nuclear program, and a defense treaty that would commit Washington to protecting Saudi Arabia from external threats—mainly an Iranian one. But the American leadership demurred. The Joe Biden administration wanted Saudi officials to sign a peace treaty with Israel as a condition for accommodating these requests. When Tehran hit Saudi oil installations in 2019 without Washington coming to its rescue, Riyadh decided it was time to indirectly poke Washington by seeking closer ties with China. That got Washington to change its position and eventually commit to working with Saudi leaders on a peaceful nuclear program and selling them advanced U.S. weaponry. Riyadh also decided that if Washington was not going to come to its rescue, its best option was to try to reach some form of accommodation with Tehran. The past few years witnessed a serious thaw in the relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Whatever goodwill had been built up is now out of the window.#iran #united_arab_emirates #saudi_arabia #joe_biden #abraham_accords
