What Gulf States Need in a US-Iran Deal

Why It Matters

Excluding the Gulf states undermines regional security and jeopardizes the enforceability of any US‑Iran agreement, especially regarding the strategic Strait of Hormuz. Their participation is essential to create a durable framework that protects global energy flows and US strategic interests.

Key Takeaways

• GCC states were excluded from US‑Iran talks despite recent missile strikes
• UAE is pivoting away from Saudi‑led OPEC, seeking US dollar swap line
• Saudi Arabia demands comprehensive settlement, not just a cease‑fire
• Qatar balances US military hub with diplomatic ties to Tehran
• Any lasting Hormuz agreement must embed GCC monitoring to ensure compliance

Pulse Analysis

The abrupt end to the first direct US‑Iran dialogue since 2015 highlighted a glaring oversight: the Gulf states, which bore the brunt of Iranian missile and drone attacks, were not at the negotiating table. While Vice President JD Vance announced a continued blockade, the six GCC nations faced damaged airports, energy infrastructure, and civilian areas, underscoring their stake in any settlement. Ignoring these vulnerabilities not only alienates key regional partners but also risks a fragmented implementation of any future accord, especially concerning the heavily trafficked Strait of Hormuz.

Within the GCC, positions diverge sharply. The United Arab Emirates is charting an independent course, exiting OPEC, seeking a dollar swap line, and deploying Israeli Iron Dome systems, signaling a desire for new security architectures. Saudi Arabia, by contrast, pushes for a comprehensive deal that curtails Iranian proxy support while preserving regional stability for its Vision 2030 agenda. Qatar walks a diplomatic tightrope, hosting the largest US Central Command forward headquarters while maintaining functional ties with Tehran, making de‑escalation a practical necessity. Bahrain, Kuwait, and Oman each balance calls for accountability with varying degrees of alignment to Abu Dhabi’s stance. This mosaic of priorities means a one‑size‑fits‑all approach will likely fail.

Experts argue that any viable Hormuz framework must embed GCC participation as a non‑negotiable element. By granting Gulf states monitoring and enforcement roles, the agreement gains legitimacy, leverages local expertise, and creates a higher cost for future Iranian governments to abandon the pact. Such a structure would mirror successful regional security arrangements that blend multinational oversight with clear compliance mechanisms. Without this inclusion, the United States risks repeating the shortcomings of the 2015 JCPOA, where the absence of neighboring stakeholders left enforcement gaps and ultimately contributed to the deal’s erosion. Embedding the GCC could therefore transform a fragile cease‑fire into a durable, enforceable settlement that safeguards global energy markets and US strategic interests.