Gulf states reaffirm their security and regional priorities

The final communique of the 46th Gulf Cooperation Council Summit, held in the Bahraini capital Manama on Dec. 3, was a detailed political document in an exceptionally complex regional context, indicating a shift in how the governments of the Gulf perceive the structural changes that have affected the Middle East since Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on Oct. 7, 2023.

The communique’s emphasis on the fact that “the security of the GCC states is indivisible and that any aggression against any one of them is an aggression against all of them, in accordance with the GCC Charter and the Joint Defense Agreement” did not come this time as a repeated preamble without practical significance. Rather, it followed an extremely dangerous test, represented by the Israeli-Iranian war and the direct Iranian bombing that targeted the Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar, followed later by an Israeli strike deep inside Doha. These developments effectively ended the assumption of the Gulf’s geographic neutrality and pushed the GCC to reconsider its self-security as an existential matter, not merely a formal political solidarity among its states.

Within this context, the issue of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict occupied a central position in the Gulf communique, which held Israel “fully responsible for its violations and ongoing attacks on the Gaza Strip,” rejecting “any justifications or pretexts portraying the Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip as self-defense.” It also considered what is taking place to be “a crime of genocide,” accompanied by policies of ethnic cleansing and collective punishment.

This very explicit language represents a Gulf position that moves away from passive neutrality and political caution toward a clear legal stance and precise description of the extremist Israeli government’s violations of international law. However, this emphasis is not separate from a parallel practical approach, manifested in welcoming UN Security Council Resolution 2803, issued on Nov. 17, which adopted the US plan for peace in Gaza and established the “Board of Peace as a transitional administrative body with international legal personality tasked with coordinating funding and the redevelopment of Gaza.”

Here, Gulf policy operates on two parallel levels: first, a clear moral-legal position toward Israel; and, second, a pragmatic engagement in shaping the postwar phase through internationally viable mechanisms, with the aim of finding a lasting solution to end the cycle of violence that has persisted for decades.

Also addressed in the Gulf communique was the relationship with Iran, which represents the most sensitive challenge to Gulf security because it directly affects the essence of regional stability. This is especially so given the negative experiences over many years, when Tehran engaged in activities that harmed the security of several neighboring states.

The communique defined the political basis of the relationship when it stressed “the necessity of Iran’s adherence to the foundations and fundamental principles based on the United Nations Charter and international law, the principles of good neighborliness, respect for the sovereignty of states (and) noninterference in internal affairs.”

The issue of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict occupied a central position in the Gulf communique. 

Hassan Al-Mustafa

At the same time, it moved from general themes to specific sovereign issues, as it reiterated “the condemnation of Iran’s continued occupation of the three islands belonging to the United Arab Emirates” and stressed that the Al-Durra natural gas field lies “entirely within the maritime areas of the State of Kuwait and that ownership of the natural resources therein … is a joint ownership between the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the State of Kuwait only.” The communique “reaffirmed its categorical rejection of any claims of rights by any other party.”

This shift from general discourse to precise detail on specific contentious issues reflects that the crisis of trust with Tehran must be resolved. The GCC holds Iran responsible for undertaking this task, as it is the party that has committed transgressions in more than one issue, which is something that several Iranian politicians openly deny.

Despite this firm stance, the communique does not adopt a logic of severance with Iran. It commends the efforts of Oman in facilitating the nuclear dialogue between Iran and the US and affirms “the importance of continuing constructive negotiations to reach a comprehensive solution to this issue, one that includes all concerns and security issues of the GCC states.”

Likewise, in the closing press conference, Bahraini Foreign Minister Abdullatif Al-Zayani summarized this Gulf approach by saying: “Iran is a neighboring state and the Kingdom of Bahrain will not be an obstacle to the restoration of normal relations with it.”

This flexible stance from Manama does not mean unconditional normalization of relations, but rather points to a political openness conditioned on a fundamental change in regional behavior — namely, halting support for transnational militias, dismantling sleeper cells, respecting state sovereignty and refraining from conspiring against internal security.

All this makes it important to pause at the issue of military and security cooperation among the Arab Gulf states, as the communique reflected a desire to develop the coordination that has existed for decades and advance it through institutional work based on a long-term plan. It emphasized “the completion of the components of the joint defense and security systems” and reinforced the concept of expanded security.

Nevertheless, the regional landscape remains governed by simultaneous pressures: the Gaza war is open to escalation scenarios; uncertainty looms over the Iranian track and negotiations with the US; and maritime security in the Red Sea is fragile — not to mention the complications in arenas such as Sudan, Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon. These challenges make defense and integration projects operate under crisis pressure rather than in a stable strategic environment and, therefore, they require speed and precision on the one hand and a wise, strong and unconventional vision on the other.

• Hassan Al-Mustafa is a Saudi writer and researcher interested in Islamic movements, the development of religious discourse, and the relationship between Gulf Cooperation Council states and Iran. X: @Halmustafa