Targeting Gulf states by Iran may be a strategic mistake

Solly Rakgomo | Wednesday March 11, 2026 08:23

The missile retaliation from the Iranian military on the Gulf states has triggered some debates on whether Iran can achieve its strategic objective of putting the Gulf states under strain, which might compel them to pressure the US to halt the airstrikes. While some commentators believe that this Iranian strategy can work, the author of this piece strongly believes that this may become a serious strategic miscalculation from the Iranian regime. There are several reasons why the author holds this position.

Iran’s airstrikes on Gulf states may lead these countries to form a stronger coalition with the United States and escalate the conflict with Iran. The strikes targeted critical economic areas in response to US and Israeli actions against Iran. Analysts suggest that Iran intended to pressure Gulf states into pushing US President Donald Trump to cease military actions, but this may have backfired, aligning Gulf states more closely with the US

Gulf states are confronting tough decisions: to openly support the US military efforts or face increased risks of conflict on their territory. Abdulaziz Sager, from the Gulf Research Center, noted that Iran’s missile attacks have pushed these previously cautious states to ally more directly with the US as defensive measures become necessary. One catalyst for Iran’s attacks was the killing of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

This occurred alongside US and Israeli airstrikes intended to curb Iran’s nuclear weapons development. In response, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which includes Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, and Oman, convened an emergency meeting, emphasising their readiness for collective defence as they face security threats and energy disruptions. The GCC firmly stated that Iran’s strikes have united the Gulf states and warned that further attacks could escalate to broader military responses.

They activated joint air-defence systems and are conducting reconnaissance flights in the region. Officials have communicated threats to Iran regarding the severe consequences of continued attacks.

As the situation develops, Gulf insiders express uncertainty about who is leading Iran’s military actions. It remains unclear whether attacks are being strategically directed or carried out by independent factions. Potential outcomes suggest either a breakdown in command or continued coordination at a high level.

The situation has broader implications beyond the Gulf. Key oil exports and shipping routes are at risk, threatening global energy markets and trade stability. If attacks persist, leading to prolonged conflicts or disruptions, it may compel other nations to intervene due to the global impact. Analysts note that Iranian strikes have led to significant disruptions, such as the shutdown of major energy facilities, affecting around 20% of the world’s LNG supply. The logic for a wider coalition against Iran has strengthened, particularly as the UAE characterises the strikes as acts of terrorism. As Iran continues these attacks, it risks pushing the Gulf states deeper into opposition.

Strikes on Western-related sites raise the possibility of NATO becoming involved in the conflict. The UAE has particularly suffered from Iran’s aggression, with many strikes aimed at its critical infrastructure. In response, the UAE has taken diplomatic measures, including summoning Iran’s ambassador and closing its embassy in Tehran while raising concerns in the U. N. Gulf officials argue that Iran’s extensive missile attacks have changed the diplomatic environment, complicating negotiations with the US regarding Iran’s missile programme. This perspective is now shared by Gulf Arab neighbors and Western powers, indicating a significant shift in regional dynamics.