The Gulf’s patience with Iran is being “tested” by the Islamic Republic’s continued attacks on Gulf states and maritime shipping, potentially pushing regional governments to consider “limited strikes” against the Iranian regime, Bahraini analyst Ahmed Alkhuzaie told The Jerusalem Post on Monday.
Alkhuzaie, Managing Partner at the Washington-based Khuzaie Associates LLC consultancy firm, said that “while outright offensive operations are not their default posture, the possibility of limited strikes, heightened maritime patrols, or covert actions cannot be ruled out if provocations continue.”
Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) acknowledged on Monday they had attacked Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman and Jordan, claiming to have targeted US military facilities and assets in the countries. Iran has continued to launch attacks since signing the now effectively defunct Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Washington, significantly escalating its attacks in recent days.
The attacks came as Iran’s efforts to assert its control over the Strait of Hormuz, attacking vessels transiting through the Omani route and pursuing diplomatic talks promising favorable terms to those who accept its status, largely failed.
With the failed MoU and a deadlock over Iran’s attempted Hormuz grab, Alkhuzaie said that Gulf nations would calibrate their next steps “to avoid uncontrolled escalation” while also demonstrating their unwillingness to have their security concerns ignored.
“The strategic imperative for these states is to balance deterrence with stability, ensuring that Iran understands the costs of continued aggression,” he noted.
The Peninsula Shield Force, the joint military arm of the Gulf Cooperation Council, would likely be the key instrument of any collective action, he continued.
Shared military capacity, political solidarity in Gulf
“It represents not only shared military capacity but also political solidarity among Gulf states," he said. "The force has been modernized over time, with capabilities ranging from ground troops to air and naval support, designed to respond to regional threats. Its existence means that Gulf states are not acting in isolation; they can mobilize a coordinated response that amplifies their deterrent power and signals unity in the face of external challenges.”
Outside the shield, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates also possess “leading military powers” capable of adopting a “collective deterrent posture,” while Kuwait, “though traditionally cautious in its foreign policy,” maintains a capable defensive force.
The US military presence across the Gulf further strengthens the states’ overall security architecture, Alkhuzaie highlighted. Oman can also leverage its geographic proximity to the Strait of Hormuz, while Bahrain provides pivotal maritime security support by hosting the US Fifth Fleet.
“Together, these nations form a layered security network that extends beyond sheer military might. Their collective geography, commanding chokepoints, coastlines, and airspace, adds strategic weight to any potential response,” he stressed. “Their political cohesion within the GCC, reinforced by the Peninsula Shield Force, ensures that even smaller states can amplify their influence through collective action.
"This unity, combined with external partnerships, means that the Gulf’s deterrent posture is not solely dependent on its largest members but is strengthened by the contributions and strategic positioning of all six states,” he added.
Though Yemen’s defense ministry admitted that its forces targeted a runway at the Houthi-controlled Sanaa International Airport to prevent an Iranian plane from landing, reports initially surfaced claiming Saudi Arabia had been responsible for the attack. Saudi Arabia is not among the countries targeted by Iran during the latest outbreak, though it had previously suffered civilian losses as a result of Iran’s aerial assaults.
Asked whether an attack on one of Iran’s proxies would strike a sufficient balance of responding to Iran without escalating, Alkhuzaie said Gulf states were “heading that way.”
“Our economies suffered enough… we can’t keep getting hit forever,” he reasoned.
Additional analyst speaks to 'Post'
Mojtaba Dehghani, an Iranian analyst on Middle Eastern affairs, told the Post that he thought Gulf states would be more willing to “tolerate” Iranian attacks than their public statements would suggest, but their main concern is “preserving stability, investment confidence and the image that the Persian Gulf is still relatively insulated from a wider war” rather than their own personal image.
“I don’t think an open, unilateral military response by the Persian Gulf states themselves is the most likely scenario right now,” he said, predicting that a more likely outcome would be an “indirect and layered response” involving more coordination with the US, more air defense integration, intelligence sharing, and maritime security.
Dehghani added that Gulf states would likely continue to channel diplomatic pressure through Oman and Qatar, but would largely avoid being seen as leading a war against Iran.
“The threshold for a direct response would likely be much higher: large-scale casualties on Persian Gulf soil, a major hit on Saudi or Emirati energy infrastructure, a prolonged closure of Hormuz, or a clear sense that US deterrence is no longer working,” he outlined. “Until then, I would expect them to let Washington carry most of the visible military burden while they strengthen their own defenses.”
Though he acknowledged Gulf “tolerance is shrinking,” he said that it was unlikely that the Gulf would yet lead a response, preferring to continue to back the US actions in private.
“The difficult balance for them is that they need protection from Iran, but the more visibly they align with a harder US-Israel security posture, the more exposed they may become to Iranian retaliation,” he concluded.