Transforming the Middle Eastern Chessboard

A Surprising Pivot in the Sand

Transforming the Middle Eastern Chessboard. In May, U.S. President Donald Trump made a series of strategic maneuvers in the Middle East that confounded many geopolitical analysts. He met unexpectedly with Syria’s new leader, Ahmed al‑Shara—whose history includes leadership in an Islamist militant organization, and immediately lifted U.S. sanctions on Damascus. He skipped visiting Israel during the Middle East itinerary, even as Washington endeavored to negotiate a cease‑fire in Gaza.

Trump also surprised the region by negotiating a bilateral cease‑fire with Yemen’s Iran‑aligned Houthis, sidelining Israeli involvement. Most remarkably, he initiated direct negotiations with Iran, a move welcomed by Gulf Arab states but sharply criticized by Israel. These developments, unfolding just over twenty months after Hamas’s devastating October 7, 2023 assault on Israel, mark a tectonic shift in the regional balance of power, suggesting a new era in which Israel, Tehran, and Gulf Arab states are recalibrating their positions.

1. From Shared Enemy to Divergent Allies: How the War in Gaza Redrew Regional Lines

1.1 The Pre‑October 2023 Consensus: A United Front

Before the Hamas onslaught, Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and other Gulf nations perceived Iran and its vast network of proxy forces as their chief regional adversary. They backed Washington’s robust “maximum pressure” campaign on Tehran, culminating in the 2015 Abraham Accords, which cemented warming ties between Israel and several Arab nations. Riyadh and Abu Dhabi embraced this strategy, confident it would curb Tehran’s influence and amplify Arab–Israeli cooperation.

1.2 October 7 as the Catalyst of Change

Enter Hamas’s October 2023 attack—a dramatic pivot that unraveled the cohesion of that alliance. The conflict in Gaza transformed public opinion across the Arab world and derailed the normalization momentum. Suddenly, Gulf capitals found themselves wary of being drawn into escalating violence alongside Israel. The crisis coincided with mounting criticism of Israel’s military campaign, intensifying pressure to reassess regional alliances.

1.3 Israel’s Ascent: Military Triumph and Geopolitical Confidence

Over the latter half of 2024, Israel’s military scored significant strategic victories:

Elimination of Hezbollah’s upper echelons, including Secretary‑General Hassan Nasrallah, via precise airstrikes and covert operations.
The assassination of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, weakening the organization’s operational momentum.
The collapse of Bashar al‑Assad’s Syria regime, fracturing Iran’s regional foothold.
Intercepted drone and missile exchanges between Iran and Israel highlighted Israeli air superiority and dented Tehran’s aura of invincibility.

These events collectively diminished the so‑called “axis of resistance”—the Iran‑led coalition opposing Israeli and Saud‑led power—which shifted perceptions of Tehran’s influence dramatically.

1.4 Reversing Roles: Israel as Hegemon, Gulf States Seeking Pacification

In the wake of military success, Israel morphed from defensive posture into regional dominance—occupying Gaza, entering southern Lebanon and parts of Syria, and even contemplating airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. A growing wave of concern swept through Gulf monarchies. A military strike on Tehran might well escalate into a wide‑reaching conflict, jeopardizing oil infrastructure, destabilizing their economies, and plunging the region into turmoil.

2. The Gulf State Epiphany: From Iran Hostility to Diplomatic Engagement

2.1 Historic Contours: Gulf Apprehension of the 2015 JCPOA

Saudi Arabia and the UAE initially opposed the 2015 Iran nuclear deal—the JCPOA—for valid reasons. The agreement lifted sanctions on Iran while allowing it to maintain regional influence via proxy networks. Gulf states acknowledged that Tehran had deftly gained leverage from the Arab Spring’s turbulence, spread from Baghdad to Sanaa, and feared the deal would legitimize that power. Notably, the Saudis launched a military campaign against the Houthis in Yemen (2015) amid this anxiety, and Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu warned of Iran’s regional grip—hooks into Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut, and Sanaa—which galvanized Gulf‑Israeli lobbying in Washington .

2.2 Trump’s 2018 Withdrawal and the Drive for Abraham Accords

President Trump campaigned on hostility to the JCPOA and, once elected, withdrew from it in 2018. He reinstated intense sanctions and demanded Tehran curtail its nuclear ambitions. This “maximum pressure” campaign aimed to undermine Iran’s regional proxy power. At the same time, his administration orchestrated the Abraham Accords (2020), forging normalization deals: UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan joined Israel, signaling a reshaped regional front anchored in U.S.–Arab–Israeli ties. The assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani in 2020 underscored America’s renewed willingness to confront Tehran head‑on .

2.3 Biden Era: Strategic Continuity Without a Deal

Expecting a reversal of Trump’s Iran policy, Gulf governments were surprised when President Biden initially refrained from rejoining the JCPOA. Instead, he intensified efforts to finalize an Israel–Saudi normalization agreement. But anticipating such success, he faced unforeseen backlash: continued Iranian nuclear advance and proxy support persisted, even as Gulf publics voiced concern over Gaza’s suffering and abstained from taking part in U.S. strikes, such as those in the Red Sea (January 2024).

2.4 GCC’s Separate Peace with Iran

Meanwhile, Gulf states began repairing ties with Tehran independently. In March 2023, Saudi Arabia normalized relations with Iran in a landmark deal brokered by China. This accord helped silence Houthi missile attacks and signaled a tangible shift in Gulf priorities—balancing threats through diplomacy rather than confrontation.

3. Israel’s Emerging Confidence and the Gulf’s Alarm

3.1 Dominance Operationalized

Following their 2024 military successes, Israeli decision‑makers were emboldened. The partnership with Trump’s potential return and a right‑leaning Netanyahu regime fueled optimism that Israel could roll back Iran’s nuclear capability militarily. Targeted operations in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria demonstrated that Israel was far from passive—it was proactive. Transforming the Middle Eastern Chessboard. How Shifting Alliances Are Redefining the Region

3.2 Gulf Realpolitik: Eager to Avoid War

Gulf leaders, acutely aware of the catastrophic economic and political fallout war with Iran would generate, began urging restraint. The specter of broader conflict in the region, especially regarding energy infrastructure and trade, made them advocates for diplomacy—especially nuclear restraint.

3.3 Shifting Calculations on the Deal

This shift crystallized Gulf state positions: a nuclear accord with Iran was no longer seen as appeasement but as a stabilizing mechanism. These states recognized their leverage. By acting as bridge-builders, they could shape a trilateral balance—between Tehran, Jerusalem, and Washington—that prioritized Gulf interests.

4. Trump’s U-Turn: From “No Deal” to Deal Advocacy

4.1 A Diplomatic Surprise

President Trump, expected by many to support Israeli pressure for military action against Iran, instead floated a return to diplomacy. His choice reflected Gulf concerns: a renewed nuclear agreement would avoid cataclysmic regional war, preserve energy trade, and check Israel’s unchallenged regional dominance.

4.2 Gulf States as Key Facilitators

Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE aligned with this shift. They:

Served as intermediaries relaying proposals between Washington and Tehran.
Suspended arms confrontations, showing tacit approval of Iran’s restrained nuclear posture.
Suggested post‑deal frameworks, like a Gulf nuclear consortium to regulate enrichment—a nod to shared oversight.
Positioned themselves as potential economic underwriters of reintegrating Iran. Transforming the Middle Eastern Chessboard. How Shifting Alliances Are Redefining the Region

5. From Rivalry to Pax: Toward a New Regional Architecture

5.1 Constructing a Balanced Prism

Gulf monarchies now aspire to be the fulcrum: linking Iran, Israel, and the U.S.

A re-envisioned nuclear deal—with regional safeguards—would reduce Iran–Israel direct threat vectors.
A broadened Abraham Accords, ideally including Saudi–Israeli normalization, buttressed by a clear political roadmap for Palestinians.
The Gulf would thus assert a triadic role: strategist, mediator, and strategic economic partner.

5.2 Normalization Reconfigured

Unlike past visions, Gulf normalization with Israel isn’t an all‑or‑nothing formula. Instead, it’s being framed as a continuum conditioned on progress in Gaza:

End the Gaza war.
Establish a credible future for Palestinians.
Embed any normalization within a regional security architecture, not leaving Israel as sole guarantor.

Trump’s May visits showcased this logic:

Signed humanitarian cease‑fire agreements (e.g., with the Houthis).
Reprioritized nuclear negotiations publicly.
Broached Iran‑Israel talks, shifting away from military brinkmanship.

5.3 From Declaration to Architecture

For this vision to succeed, the U.S. must anchor its nuclear diplomacy within a strategic freeze on Israeli–Palestinian conflict, paired with economic and security compensations to Gulf nations. Simultaneously:

Gulf–Iran ties must mature beyond diplomatic gestures—into functional collaboration on energy, security, and trade.
Gulf–Israel normalization deals should scale upward but be tied to Palestinian statehood and sustainable peace.
A Gulf‑anchored regional nuclear nonproliferation consortium would institutionalize checks and balances.

6. Risks and Roadblocks on a Regional Tightrope

Despite this ambitious strategy, significant challenges loom:

Iranian domestic politics: Hard‑liners may reject a deal that de‑escalates nuclear tension.
Israeli skepticism: Nationalist elements and security-conscious leaders may resist constraints or perceive the deal as restraining Israel.
Palestinian disenchantment: Public opposition to normalization remains strong unless tangible Palestinian rights are delivered.
U.S. policymaking continuity: A return to a hawkish posture from American leadership could unsettle the delicate equilibrium.

If negotiations collapse or Israeli demands for a military solution gain traction, Gulf states would likely fracture from the U.S. and Israel, tilting toward strategic autonomy—even deeper alignment with Beijing or Moscow. Transforming the Middle Eastern Chessboard. How Shifting Alliances Are Redefining the Region

7. A Blueprint for a New Middle Eastern Order

To convert this moment of opportunity into durable architecture, stakeholders must coalesce around a multi-piece strategy:

7.1 Multilateral Nuclear Agreement

A robust U.S.–Iran deal—revived or retooled—with Gulf‑state-backed proxies ensuring compliance.
Gulf‑funded nuclear monitoring consortium to include neutral agencies and regional representation.

7.2 Conditional Normalization Expansion

Saudi–Israeli normalization intimately tied to cessation of hostilities in Gaza and measurable progress on a two‑state solution.
Mechanisms ensuring Israeli withdrawal from occupied territories and the facilitation of a Palestinian governance structure.

7.3 Institutional Regional Architecture

A strategic partnership forum linking the U.S., Gulf states, Israel, and Iran through interlocking platforms on energy, security, counterterrorism, and economic development—possibly under U.S. auspices.
Embedding Israel in regional frameworks that dilute hegemonic tendencies, supported by collective oversight.

7.4 Political & Economic Stabilizers

Gulf states leveraging their financial power to underwrite Iran’s reintegration, while supporting Palestinian economic institutions.
U.S. incentives—diplomatic, economic, security—calibrated to pressure Israel and Iran toward accommodation.

Conclusion: Toward a Tri‑Polar Middle East

The Middle East is caught in a swirl of redefined allegiances, alliance-building, and recalculated threats. The Gulf states, once fervent opponents of Iranian détente, are now the linchpin of a diplomatic backchannel that could yield a recalibrated regional order.

Israel, riding high on military and political ascendancy, is reframing its threat perception—but must temper its dominance to avoid diplomatic alienation.
Iran, hemmed in but with diplomatic leverage, is eyeing normalization and economic rejuvenation.
The Gulf monarchies have shifted from a passive, follow-the-U.S. posture to active orchestrators, shaping outcomes to suit regional stability and national self-interest.

If the tripartite deal—anchored by nuclear restraint, conditional normalization, and regional alliance building—materializes, the Gulf could emerge not just as a bridge, but as the architect of a new Middle Eastern peace. Their success, however, hinges on balancing the still-fragile aspirations of Palestinians, Israel’s security demands, Iran’s strategic depth, and U.S. political consistency.

What was once a chessboard dominated by binary rivalries is now a complex three-dimensional arena—one in which Gulf leadership and diplomacy may finally bring a sustainable regional peace within reach. Transforming the Middle Eastern Chessboard. How Shifting Alliances Are Redefining the Region

June 10, 2025