Gulf leaders face impossible choice amid Iran attacks

Gulf states are facing a critical turning point after Iranian missiles and drones struck major cities including Doha, Dubai, Manama, Riyadh, and Kuwait City, sources said. The attacks followed a joint US-Israeli operation in Iran that killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other senior military officials.

The strikes have presented regional leaders with what analysts describe as an "impossible choice" between remaining passive while their cities are targeted or retaliating and risking the perception of aligning with Israel. "The Gulf states are in a conundrum because both action and inaction carry severe risks," one analyst noted, reports Al Jazeera.

Reports indicate at least three people were killed in the United Arab Emirates, with dozens more injured across Qatar, Oman, Kuwait, and Bahrain. Significant damage and smoke were reported at key landmarks, including airports in Dubai and Kuwait.

Analysts warned of a potential "nightmare scenario" in which critical infrastructure, including power grids and water desalination plants, could be targeted, making parts of the region uninhabitable.

Experts said the strikes have damaged the Gulf states' carefully cultivated image as "oases of stability" and safe hubs for international investment and tourism. Analysts highlighted three primary areas of reputational risk:

• Damage to soft power and brand
  Attacks on cities like Dubai, Doha, and Manama undermine the perception of safety that these economies rely on. Experts described such strikes as "unimaginable" for major hubs, comparable to attacks on major US cities.
• Challenges to political legitimacy
  Leaders face a "conundrum" regarding their standing with citizens. Remaining passive could be seen as a failure to protect people and territory.
• Perception of agency vs. passivity
  Gulf states risk appearing as "just the people being bombed," and may feel compelled to act independently to demonstrate they are "in the driving seat" of their own security.

The situation also carries broader geopolitical implications. Experts say the crisis represents a shift from "grey zone" proxy warfare toward direct state-on-state conflict. Gulf states, which previously regarded Israel as a primary threat, are now recalibrating security priorities in response to Iran's "scattershot" attacks.

Potential responses could involve independent military actions through regional forces such as the Peninsula Shield Force, allowing Gulf states to protect their sovereignty while avoiding the perception of supporting US or Israeli operations. Analysts said this approach could help leaders maintain legitimacy and agency in a rapidly evolving conflict.

Sources identified several risks if Gulf nations enter the conflict, including:

• Loss of political legitimacy
  Striking back could create perceptions that leaders are "working for the Israelis," which is politically sensitive in the region.
• Infrastructure and survival risks
  Direct strikes on water and power systems could render parts of the region "essentially uninhabitable."
• Reputational and soft power damage
  Continued conflict threatens Gulf states' image as stable and predictable hubs for investment and tourism.
• Direct retaliation
  Iran may "choose fratricide before suicide," targeting neighbors to strike back at the US and Israel.
• Shift to total state-on-state warfare
  Engagement would signal a departure from proxy warfare to direct conflict, requiring recalibration of national security strategies.

"The Gulf states exerted a huge amount of effort to prevent this war," one expert said. "They correctly predicted that a cornered Iranian regime might 'choose fratricide before suicide,' effectively taking its neighbors hostage."

With cities' "glittering skylines" already scarred by missile fire, regional leaders must weigh the consequences of action versus inaction as the Middle East enters a new phase of direct conflict.