Gulf states have stopped short of calling for a full-scale US war with Iran, but several are now urging Washington to continue hitting Iranian targets, according to multiple sources familiar with regional deliberations.
Three Gulf sources, alongside five Western and Arab diplomats who spoke to Reuters, said the United States has also been pressing Gulf governments to join the US-Israel campaign.
According to three of those sources, President Donald Trump is seeking to demonstrate regional backing in order to bolster both the campaign’s international legitimacy and domestic support.
Abdulaziz Sager, chairman of the Saudi-based Gulf Research Center and a figure closely aligned with government thinking, said there is now a widespread perception across the Gulf that Iran has crossed every red line with regard to its neighbors.
“At the outset, we defended them and opposed the war. But the moment they began launching attacks against us, they became an enemy. There is no other way to describe them,” Sager said.
Tehran has already demonstrated its reach, disrupting maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz while launching missile and drone strikes on airports, ports, oil installations and commercial hubs across the six Gulf states.
The waterway functions as a critical artery for the global economy, carrying roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil and underpinning Gulf economic stability.
The attacks have reinforced fears in the region that leaving Iran with significant strike capabilities or weapons production capacity would embolden it to hold the Gulf’s energy lifeline hostage whenever tensions escalate.
As the war enters its third week, one Gulf source described the prevailing mood among regional leaders as unequivocal: Trump must comprehensively degrade Iran’s military capabilities.
The alternative, the source said, is to live under a constant threat, arguing that unless seriously weakened, Iran will continue to “hold the region hostage.”
For Gulf leaders, the report added, inaction now carries greater risks than escalation.
The impact of Iran’s attacks this month has gone far beyond material damage. Beyond disrupting oil flows, they have undermined the carefully cultivated image of stability and security that Gulf states rely on to expand trade, attract tourism and reduce dependence on fossil fuel exports.
“If the Americans withdraw before the job is done, we will be left to face Iran alone,” Sager said.
Responding to questions about these concerns, the White House said the United States had “crushed (Iran’s) ability to launch these weapons or produce more,” adding that Trump remains in close contact with partners in the Middle East.
Among Gulf states, only the United Arab Emirates has formally responded to US calls. The country said it does not wish to be drawn into conflict or escalation, but reaffirmed its right to take “all necessary measures” to safeguard its sovereignty, security and territorial integrity and to protect its citizens.
Regional sources said unilateral military intervention is not under consideration, as only collective action could shield individual states from retaliation.
Even so, consensus remains elusive. The six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council — Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Oman and the UAE — have held only a single Zoom meeting, and no Arab summit has been convened to coordinate action.
Gulf leaders remain deeply concerned about triggering a broader, uncontrollable conflict.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said last week that Gulf partners had “leaned forward” and were ready to “go on offense,” adding that they are already working with Washington on integrated air defense, though he did not specify what further steps they might take.
A senior UAE official said the country prefers restraint after Iran claimed that the US military used the UAE to launch strikes on Kharg Island, Iran’s main oil export terminal.
Sager said Saudi Arabia, Iran’s principal regional rival, could be forced to retaliate if Tehran crosses further red lines — particularly by striking key oil infrastructure or desalination plants, or causing heavy casualties.
“In that case, Saudi Arabia would have no choice but to intervene,” he said, while adding that Riyadh would likely seek to calibrate any response to avoid further escalation.
Fawaz Gerges of the London School of Economics said Gulf states face a fundamental strategic dilemma: balancing the immediate threat posed by Iranian attacks against the far greater risk of being drawn into a US- and Israel-led war.
Joining the campaign would add little to Washington’s military advantage, he said, but would sharply increase exposure to Iranian retaliation.
The result is a posture of calculated restraint: defending sovereignty and signaling red lines without entering a war they neither initiated nor control.
For now, Iran retains a decisive lever. It is effectively determining which ships can pass through the Strait of Hormuz — a situation no state in the region considers acceptable.
Bernard Haykel of Princeton University said the Gulf now faces a fundamentally different kind of threat after Iran demonstrated it could shut the strait.
“If this danger is not addressed, it will have long-term consequences,” he said.
Haykel added that while the global economy depends heavily on Gulf oil and gas, most of those exports flow eastward to China, Japan and other Asian economies — implying they, too, should shoulder responsibility.
“China helped secure sea lanes off Somalia. It may be willing to intervene here as well,” he said.