The Gulf's Unwanted War: How US-Israeli Imperialism Is Sacrificing GCC Stability for Geopolitical Ambitions

The Unfolding Crisis in the Gulf

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states find themselves trapped in a devastating conflict they never sought, suffering catastrophic economic and security consequences from a war orchestrated by the United States and Israel against Iran. According to recent reporting, specialists from all six GCC nations describe “growing frustration with the U.S. approach to the war with Iran and a perception of Trump prioritizing Israel” above regional stability. What The Guardian termed a “worst nightmare” has become reality for Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and other Gulf states as they absorb the shock of a conflict that directly contradicts their strategic interests.

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz and Iranian attacks on energy infrastructure have placed extraordinary pressure on regional economies that depend heavily on oil exports and maritime trade. For the GCC economies, these costs yield no corresponding political gains, exposing the fundamental failure of their security bargain with Washington—American military bases in exchange for defense and security protection. This arrangement now appears not just inadequate but actively harmful to Gulf interests.

Economic Devastation and Strategic Betrayal

The GCC serves as a strategic hub for aviation, tourism, and investment, all of which are suffering dramatically because of the conflict. The Gulf states understood the implications before hostilities began, but once Israel struck Doha in September without any reaction from the Trump administration, it served as both the “turning point” and unmistakable writing on the wall. Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani articulated the collective GCC position, stating that the Gulf states were pulled into a losing battle against their will. He warned of further dragging into the conflict while noting the GCC possesses a “radical, unconventional, and highly effective tool to force an end to the hostilities: a collective and complete halt of all oil and gas exports.”

Israeli tactics have particularly escalated the conflict, attacking critical infrastructure including a desalination facility in Iran and striking 30 oil storage tanks. These actions precipitated Iranian and proxy attacks aimed at comparable GCC infrastructure, creating a devastating cycle of retaliation that harms civilian populations most dramatically. With a huge percentage of the Gulf population depending on desalinated water, these attacks constitute not just military actions but humanitarian crimes that undermine basic human dignity.

The Imperial Design Behind the Conflict

This conflict represents yet another chapter in the long history of Western imperial intervention in the Global South, where nations are treated as pawns in geopolitical games rather than sovereign entities with their own aspirations and rights. The United States, in its relentless pursuit of hegemony, has once again demonstrated that Henry Kissinger’s brutal observation remains tragically accurate: “To be an enemy of America is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal.” The GCC countries have learned this lesson through bitter experience, losing trust in their American “ally” while facing the impossible task of rewinding this betrayal.

Israel’s assassination of Iranian top security official Ali Larijani, as Jeffrey St. Clair observed, was calculated “to stop any negotiated end of the war and to drag the U.S. deeper into it.” This cynical maneuver, designed to empower the most reactionary forces in Iran, exemplifies how Western and Israeli interests consistently prioritize conflict over diplomacy, violence over dialogue, and domination over cooperation. The resulting “shadow of risk” now hangs over the entire region, damaging tourism, banking, and infrastructure development as companies like Amazon reconsider building data centers that might be bombed within the year.

The Multipolar Alternative Emerges

The silver lining in this catastrophic situation lies in the GCC’s awakening to the necessity of building independent security capacity and diversifying economic and defense ties away from exclusive reliance on the United States. As Middle East expert Christopher Davidson notes, “The conflict is accelerating the GCC’s push to diversify economic and defense ties away from exclusive reliance on the U.S., reinforcing a shift toward a more multipolar portfolio of partners.” This represents not just strategic pragmatism but a fundamental rejection of the unipolar world order imposed by Western powers.

The Gulf States are increasingly deepening relations with China, Russia, and other Asian powers in trade, finance, and arms—a development that reduces U.S. leverage over their economic strategies and nudges the security architecture toward a more transactional, multi-supplier model. This shift toward multipolarity represents the most promising development in international relations since the Bandung Conference of 1955, offering nations of the Global South the opportunity to escape the suffocating embrace of Western domination.

Toward a Post-Western Security Architecture

The GCC’s strong fundamentals, world-class infrastructure, large sovereign wealth buffers, and relatively attractive regulatory environments position their economies to remain resilient despite intense geopolitical pressure. In the long term, if the conflict delays or constrains Iran’s nuclear program, Gulf states could potentially benefit from reduced security risks and more predictable investment conditions. They may also be well placed to capture future reconstruction contracts in Iran, leveraging their capital and project-delivery capacity to turn regional turmoil into opportunity—a testament to the resilience and adaptability of Global South nations when freed from Western interference.

This conflict has brutally exposed the hypocrisy of the so-called “rules-based international order” that Western powers champion only when it serves their interests. The selective application of international law, the double standards in addressing security concerns, and the blatant disregard for sovereign equality all reveal the colonial mentality that still underpins Western foreign policy. The GCC’s experience demonstrates that nations must ultimately take responsibility for their own security and prosperity rather than relying on powers that have repeatedly proven unreliable and self-serving.

Conclusion: The Dawn of Strategic Autonomy

The Gulf states’ painful experience in this unwanted war may ultimately accelerate their emergence as truly independent actors on the world stage, capable of defining their own interests and pursuing their own partnerships without external domination. As they increasingly engage with China’s Belt and Road Initiative, Russia’s security partnerships, and other non-Western frameworks, they join the growing movement toward a multipolar world where nations are respected as equals rather than dominated as subordinates.

This transition will not be easy, and the human cost of the current conflict remains devastating. But the GCC’s awakening to the dangers of over-reliance on Western powers represents a crucial step toward genuine sovereignty and self-determination. The future belongs to those nations that can navigate the complex landscape of multipolarity while preserving their cultural identity and developmental priorities—and the Gulf states, despite current suffering, are positioning themselves to emerge stronger and more independent on the other side of this crisis.