Gulf states couldn't bear cost of another war, pressured Trump to avoid attacking Iran

Senior officials in Gulf states and Israel held divergent views on U.S. President Donald Trump's intentions regarding Iran, with the Gulf consensus leaning towards de-escalation. While many Israeli officials believed a U.S. strike was inevitable, Gulf counterparts argued that Trump would ultimately seek an agreement, partly to avoid disrupting oil prices just months before the U.S. midterm elections.

This assessment proved accurate as of Sunday, suggesting Trump had little desire for military action. The Gulf states' reasoning was compelling: a regional energy crisis, potentially spiking oil prices to $250 per barrel, would be detrimental to U.S. electoral prospects. Avoiding such a scenario remained a top priority for the administration.

Furthermore, the Gulf nations understood they would disproportionately bear the immediate costs of any conflict. Unlike Israel, which possesses advanced missile defense systems like the Iron Dome and Arrow, the Gulf states lack comparable defenses. They feared potential Iranian missile and drone attacks targeting critical infrastructure, including energy facilities and water desalination plants.

An informal coalition of Gulf states, including Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, reportedly conveyed a clear message to Trump: do not attack. Their concern was that even a limited strike would not topple the Iranian regime, leaving them to manage the aftermath and potential retaliation while the U.S. could claim victory and move on. This shared understanding led to pressure on Trump to avoid military engagement.