Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani has declared the ongoing US-Israeli war against Iran a significant “wake-up call” for regional powers. Speaking at the Qatar Economic Forum during the 81st UN General Assembly in New York, Al Thani argued that the conflict has shattered existing assumptions about regional stability, particularly in an area heavily reliant on American military infrastructure. He stressed the urgent need for a cooperative security arrangement where no nation views its neighbors as a threat.
The push for a new security architecture follows a major escalation that began seven months ago with the death of Iran’s supreme leader and the subsequent US-Israeli military campaign. In response, Iran has launched over 7,000 missile and drone strikes against various Gulf states. These hostilities have brought maritime transit through the Strait of Hormuz to a near-standstill. As a critical artery that previously facilitated one-fifth of the world’s energy supplies, the current blockage has halted gas and oil exports from major producers including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain, and Iraq, triggering global economic instability.
Geopolitical analyst Ozcan Akinci notes a “genuine interest” among regional players in reconciliation, though he cautions that establishing a functional framework remains an immense challenge. While the war has highlighted the inherent limitations of relying on external powers to resolve localized disputes, Iran remains a persistent reality that neighboring states cannot ignore. According to Akinci, the conflict has forced Gulf nations to seek diversified security insurance rather than moving away from the United States. He points to the recent Mecca agreement—a trilateral pact involving Türkiye, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan—as proof that the region is already attempting to build a multi-layered defensive system.
The feasibility of a Gulf-Iran security deal is further complicated by the divergent interests of the region’s monarchies. Experts suggest that Qatar and Oman are the most logical backers for the initiative, given their long history of maintaining open diplomatic lines with Tehran. Kuwait may also support a collective approach under the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). However, the UAE and Bahrain remain wary, especially as they have been primary targets in the current conflict. Saudi Arabia’s position remains the most pivotal; while Riyadh desires de-escalation, it is simultaneously seeking robust protections following repeated attacks by Iranian-backed Houthi forces.
Mustafa Caner, an Iran expert at Sakarya University, expresses skepticism regarding a unified GCC consensus. He argues that as long as the war persists and Iranian strikes continue, Gulf states lack the necessary footing to pivot away from the American security umbrella to form a new architecture with Tehran. Caner notes that the UAE, for instance, has recently tightened its alignment with the US-Israel axis while imposing trade sanctions on Iran. Similarly, he does not expect Riyadh to initiate diplomatic normalization while it blames Tehran for ongoing Houthi aggression.
Despite the skepticism, some analysts believe that if the proposal is packaged alongside broader security deals like the Mecca pact, it might gain traction among more hesitant nations. Nevertheless, Tehran would need to offer tangible concessions, particularly regarding the security of the Strait of Hormuz and the curbing of regional proxy activities. For now, the US remains deeply embedded in the region, maintaining extensive military installations in Qatar, the UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. Because these bases provide specialized air and missile defense capabilities that the Gulf states currently cannot replicate, a complete detachment from Washington’s military support remains unlikely in the near term. The report also notes that but express doubt whether ground realities would permit it, experts say that the need for a regional security framework is urgent and undeniable. The report also notes that “The war has exposed the limits of relying on outside powers to manage a problem that is ultimately regional,” he said. The report also notes that at the same time, Gulf nations are increasingly looking for extra security insurance. The report also notes that “Doha’s proposal, therefore, comes at a time when the regional security map is already being redrawn,” he says. The report also notes that particularly around Hormuz and proxy activity, he adds, the unanswered question is whether Iran will convert the language of dialogue into practical restraint. The report also notes that an Iran specialist and assistant professor at Sakarya University’s Middle East Institute, said that neither side benefits when Gulf and Iranian geopolitical visions diverge, mustafa Caner. The report also notes that he says, a security framework that reduced that divergence would certainly benefit both sides and contribute to regional security more broadly. The report also notes that akinci names Qatar and Oman as the “obvious candidates” to back Al Thani’s idea.
