While some Arab officials in the Region have admitted they hope Israel has succeeded in destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities, representatives from the three Gulf states have expressed concern about its growing military dominance and the Israeli prime minister’s willingness to use it. Speaking on condition of anonymity, one official said: “It seems to be rampant – in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and now in Iran.”
Following Israeli air strikes on Iran, Gulf states have become increasingly concerned, but not just because of fears of retaliation from Tehran. There are growing concerns that Israel, until recently seen as a key ally in defending against the Iranian threat, is now itself becoming a source of destabilization in the Region, the Telegraph reports. An Israeli attack on Iran risks causing a permanent rift with its allies in the Middle East, Gulf Arab officials are now warning.
Many officials from countries such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman admit that they secretly want to believe that Israel has stopped or at least significantly slowed Iran’s nuclear program with these attacks.
But concerns about Israel’s military might and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s willingness to use force without diplomacy are growing stronger by the day. While some Arab officials in the Region have admitted they hope Israel has succeeded in destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities, representatives from the three Gulf states have expressed concern about its growing military dominance and the Israeli prime minister’s willingness to use it. Speaking on condition of anonymity, one official said: “It seems to be rampant – in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and now in Iran. Rampant power is no longer an advantage for us. This is a problem.”
PARADOXES
This atmosphere threatens to undermine the foundations of the Abraham Accords, a historic series of agreements by the Trump administration that normalized relations with Israel between the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan. Hailed as a milestone for Israel’s integration into the Arab world after decades of hostility, the accords were the most significant foreign policy achievement of Donald Trump’s first term. US officials had hoped that Saudi Arabia would eventually follow suit, but expectations have diminished since the start of Israel’s war in Gaza, which was strongly condemned by Riyadh. The Gulf states withdrew from the accords in part because they allowed them to create a united front against Iran. Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, missile development and sponsorship of proxies were seen as major threats to the Region. And now a paradox is unfolding: Israel, which was supposed to help create a more secure Middle East, is increasingly seen as a threat to stability. “Israel today has the ability to attack any country in the Region,” said Mohammed Baharoon, director of the Dubai-based B’huth Institute. “If they could fly over Iranian airspace, why not also attack the interests of Qatar, with which they have long had tense relations because of Hamas’s political office in Doha?” Gulf states’ reactions to the Israeli attack were divided.
FEAR OF A NEW ESCALATION
However, caution prevails. Few believe that the ceasefire between Israel and Iran will last. There is a fear of a new round of escalation that could seriously threaten Regional security and economic growth. And while some quietly support the Israeli operations, at the same time they are deeply concerned about the potential consequences of unlimited Israeli military power, as the Telegraph writes. “Any weakening of Iran is desirable,” says Yasmine Farouk of the International Crisis Group.
“But if the price of this is new instability and additional violence, especially at a time when diplomatic dialogue was yielding results, then the price is too high.” Today’s Israel, with its military power that knows no bounds, is becoming a factor of insecurity, even for those who for years considered it a partner. “We said we wanted to be partners in peace, but Israel only wanted a security partnership,” Baharoon concludes. “Today they are no longer partners in security. Today they are a threat.”