Gulf leaders meet Trump with two fears: more war and less US protection

US President Donald Trump’s Gulf Arab allies will meet him in New York on Tuesday as he weighs whether to “annihilate” Iran’s regime. They talked him out of a major escalation once before. This time, they fear being drawn deeper into the war just as Washington looks for a way out.

In early August, Trump said he called off a major attack on Iran at the behest of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, whose leaders believed a deal with Tehran was within reach. More than a month later, no such deal has emerged, oil prices remain high and the US midterm elections are approaching.

The US president told Axios on Thursday that he faced a “big decision” on the war and wanted to hear directly from Gulf leaders. Their challenge is to give him a way forward that protects them from further attacks without drawing them deeper into the war.

Houthi Military Media/Handout/Reuters

Frustration grows as Houthis widen Middle East conflict with US unwilling to intervene

“Trump’s planned meeting with (Gulf leaders) could be one of the most important diplomatic meetings of this phase of the conflict,” Danny Citrinowicz, an Iran analyst at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, wrote on X. “The central question for Washington will be how they view the choice between renewed escalation and a diplomatic off-ramp.”

Last month, a coordinated appeal by Gulf leaders helped persuade Trump to hold fire. Now they meet as the war widens and Iran’s proxies target Saudi energy infrastructure from Yemen and Iraq, raising the specter of a global energy shock.

Saudi Arabia faces what may be its most far-reaching security threat since the 1991 Gulf War , even as Trump shows little appetite for intervening directly on its behalf and Washington discusses a longer-term reduction in its military presence in the Gulf. It is a test of the US-led security bargain that took shape after that war: Gulf states host American forces and buy US weapons, counting on Washington to help deter threats.

Win McNamee/Getty Images

Whether Trump intends to act on his threat to “annihilate” the regime remains unclear. He has reasons to think twice: US missile stockpiles are severely depleted , while another escalation in an already unpopular war could hurt Republican candidates in midterm elections just weeks away.

If the US escalates militarily with Iran, Gulf states could once again bear the brunt of Tehran’s retaliation, which they have little appetite for. Riyadh already faces a two-front assault, while Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait continue to face major disruptions to trade due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. The UAE, meanwhile, has stepped up engagement with Iran. The two sides agreed on the need to “turn the page,” according to Anwar Gargash, diplomatic adviser to the UAE president. But Gargash has warned that trust could take decades to rebuild and said dialogue must be paired with deterrence.

Gulf leaders will only be able to persuade Trump if they speak with “one united voice” and bring him “very, very specific asks,” Bader Al-Saif, an assistant professor of history at Kuwait University, told CNN.

Beyond Trump’s next move on Iran, Gulf leaders face a longer-term fear: a diminished US military presence in the region.

Senior Pentagon officials have privately made clear they want to scale back the US military’s troop presence in several Gulf countries as part of a broader effort to shift more of the defense burden onto regional partners, three sources familiar with the discussions told CNN earlier.

For Gulf governments, even discussing a US military drawdown while attacks spread across the region risks handing Iran a victory and leaving them more exposed.

US Navy/Handout/Reuters

Iran war has cost $45.1 billion, Pentagon tells Congress

“This is not the time to have these conversations at all,” an official familiar with Saudi thinking told CNN, adding that this has been conveyed to the Trump administration. “The Gulf Cooperation Council is really trying very hard to project a united front against Iran.”

Just two weeks into the Iran war, Trump questioned why the US should shoulder so much of the burden of protecting Gulf energy routes as Iran began pummeling Gulf states in retaliation for US and Israeli strikes.

“You could make the case that maybe we shouldn’t even be there at all,” Trump said in March, referring to the US’ military presence in the Gulf.

For the official familiar with Saudi thinking, talk of a reduced US military footprint serves Tehran’s interests. “The Iranians want headlines like the one that came out about the US drawing down or withdrawing from Kuwait,” the official told CNN, referring to a Wall Street Journal report in late June that the US military was considering reducing its presence in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

Brian Snyder/Reuters

Iran has long cast US bases in the Gulf as a threat on its doorstep. Throughout the war, Tehran has repeatedly demanded their closure, and Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei has turned the argument on Gulf leaders, saying the bases have made their countries targets without delivering the security Washington promised.

“By now they must have realized that the United States’ claims of providing security and peace have been nothing more than a lie,” he said in a March statement.

For Bader Al-Saif of Kuwait University, the war is testing something larger than the future of US bases. The 1991 Gulf War made the region a proving ground for American dominance at its global peak. Now, he said, the Gulf is a “test case” for a shift in the opposite direction.

“We’ve had three decades of a US-led order. That order is over,” he said. “Does that mean the new order is not going to have the US? No. But it’s going to have a different type of relationship between the US and the Gulf.”

For Riyadh, the limits of that changing US relationship were put to a stark test this month. Attacks on Saudi oil facilities and export routes threatened to choke off supplies, drive up global oil prices and raise the cost of gasoline for Americans.

Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthis have struck Saudi oil facilities and declared a blockade of ships traveling to and from Saudi ports through the Red Sea. Iran-backed militias in Iraq have also been accused of attacking the kingdom’s East-West pipeline, a crucial route that bypasses the Strait of Hormuz.

Yet when Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman asked Trump to strike the Houthis, the president declined, CNN reported earlier. The decision came less than a year after Washington signed a defense agreement with Riyadh and designated Saudi Arabia a major non-NATO ally, though the US continues to provide Saudi forces with intelligence and targeting support.

The Saudi episode captures the dilemma Gulf leaders may bring to Trump on Tuesday: they want American help against impending attacks, but fear another major escalation with Iran could make them less secure.

Most Gulf governments would prefer stability to another round of war, wrote Citrinowicz. That doesn’t mean turning away from Washington, he said: “American power is indispensable, yet relying exclusively on Washington carries risks of its own.”

Eva Marie Uzcategui/Reuters

Trump admin approves sale of stealth F-35 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia. Here’s why it’s controversial

For Al-Saif, that case should begin with something less ambitious than a sweeping peace deal: freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, potentially in exchange for limited relief on Iranian oil sales and access to goods. Gulf leaders need specific demands, he said, before a war of attrition becomes “the new norm for the Gulf.”

But even a narrower bargain may be hard to reach. In August, Gulf leaders allegedly told Trump a deal with Iran was close; this time, Qatar’s own assessment as mediator sounds far less hopeful.

At a conference in Abu Dhabi this month, Qatar’s foreign ministry spokesman Majid Al Ansari cast doubt on the prospects for a deal. Iran could withstand a long war, he said. Washington may hope further pressure weakens Tehran, while Iran may hope the conflict changes the political calculus in the US. For now, both sides may see more to gain by waiting.

Even if they return to talks, Al Ansari sees no clear agreement that both would accept as a win. “What is the desired outcome for both parties in this war?” he asked. “If anyone can answer that, I am willing to pay a million dollars – from my own money.”

CNN’s Katie Bo Lillis, Zachary Cohen, Mostafa Salem, Jennifer Hansler and Kylie Atwood contributed to this article.

美国总统特朗普的阿拉伯海湾盟友将于周二在纽约与他会面，届时他将权衡是否要“摧毁”伊朗政权。他们此前曾劝阻他避免局势大幅升级。这一次，他们担心在华盛顿寻求脱身之计之际，自己却会被卷入更深的战争泥潭。

8月初，特朗普表示，他应沙特阿拉伯、阿联酋和卡塔尔的要求取消了对伊朗的大规模军事打击，这三个国家的领导人认为与德黑兰达成协议指日可待。然而，一个多月过去了，这样的协议仍未达成，油价居高不下，而美国中期选举也即将到来。

美国总统周四告诉Axios新闻网，他面临着关于这场战争的“重大决定”，并希望直接听取海湾国家领导人的意见。他们面临的挑战是，如何为他找到一条既能保护他们免受进一步袭击，又不至于让他们更深地卷入战争的道路。

胡塞武装媒体/供稿/路透社

随着胡塞武装扩大中东冲突，而美国又不愿介入，民众的沮丧情绪日益加剧。

“特朗普计划与（海湾国家领导人）会面，这可能是冲突这一阶段最重要的外交会晤之一，”以色列国家安全研究所的伊朗问题分析师丹尼·西特里诺维奇在X网站上写道。“华盛顿面临的核心问题是，他们如何看待在局势再次升级和寻求外交解决途径之间的选择。”

上个月，海湾国家领导人的联合呼吁成功说服特朗普暂缓军事行动。如今，随着战争扩大，伊朗的代理人从也门和伊拉克袭击沙特的能源基础设施，引发全球能源危机，他们再次举行会晤。

沙特阿拉伯正面临着自1991年海湾战争以来可能最为深远的安全威胁，尽管特朗普似乎并无直接干预的意愿，而华盛顿方面也在讨论长期削减其在海湾地区的军事存在。这考验着美国主导的、在海湾战争后形成的安全协议：海湾国家驻扎美军并购买美国武器，指望华盛顿帮助其遏制威胁。

Win McNamee/Getty Images

特朗普是否会兑现“消灭”该政权的威胁仍不明朗。他有理由三思而后行：美国的导弹储备已严重不足，而这场本已不得人心的战争若再升级，可能会在几周后举行的中期选举中损害共和党候选人的选情。

如果美国在军事上升级与伊朗的冲突，海湾国家可能再次首当其冲地承受德黑兰的报复，而它们对此毫无兴趣。利雅得目前已面临两线作战的困境，而卡塔尔、巴林和科威特则因霍尔木兹海峡的关闭而持续遭受贸易严重中断。与此同时，阿联酋加强了与伊朗的接触。据阿联酋总统外交顾问安瓦尔·加尔加什称，双方同意“翻过这一页”。但加尔加什警告说，重建信任可能需要数十年时间，并表示对话必须与威慑相结合。

科威特大学历史系助理教授巴德尔·赛义夫告诉 CNN，海湾国家领导人只有以“统一的声音”向特朗普提出“非常非常具体的要求”，才能说服他。

除了特朗普下一步对伊朗的举措之外，海湾领导人还面临着一个更长远的担忧：美国在该地区的军事存在可能会减少。

三位熟悉相关讨论的消息人士早些时候告诉 CNN，五角大楼高级官员私下里已经明确表示，他们希望缩减美国在几个海湾国家的驻军规模，这是将更多国防负担转移给地区伙伴的更广泛努力的一部分。

对于海湾国家政府而言，在袭击事件蔓延至整个地区的情况下，即使讨论美国撤军也有可能让伊朗取得胜利，并使自身处境更加危险。

美国海军/供图/路透社

五角大楼向国会报告称，伊朗战争已耗资451亿美元。

一位熟悉沙特想法的官员告诉CNN：“现在根本不是进行这些对话的时候。”他还补充说，沙特方面已经将此情况传达给了特朗普政府。“海湾合作委员会正竭尽全力展现其在对抗伊朗问题上的团结一致。”

伊朗战争爆发仅两周后，特朗普就质疑，为什么美国要承担保护海湾能源航线的如此重担，而此时伊朗正开始猛烈攻击海湾国家，以报复美国和以色列的袭击。

“你甚至可以说，我们根本就不应该在那里，”特朗普在三月份谈到美国在海湾地区的军事存在时说道。

一位熟悉沙特想法的官员表示，有关美国减少驻军的讨论符合德黑兰的利益。“伊朗人希望看到类似美国从科威特撤军或撤离的新闻头条，”这位官员告诉CNN，他指的是《华尔街日报》6月下旬的一篇报道，该报道称美军正在考虑减少在科威特和沙特阿拉伯的驻军。

布莱恩·斯奈德/路透社

伊朗长期以来一直将美国在海湾地区的军事基地视为家门口的威胁。在整个战争期间，德黑兰多次要求关闭这些基地，最高领袖哈梅内伊则反过来指责海湾国家领导人，称这些基地使这些国家成为攻击目标，却没有兑现华盛顿承诺的安全保障。

“他们现在肯定已经意识到，美国声称提供安全与和平的说法不过是个谎言，”他在三月份的一份声明中说。

科威特大学的巴德尔·赛义夫认为，这场战争考验的远不止美国军事基地的未来。1991年的海湾战争使该地区成为美国在全球霸权鼎盛时期的试验场。如今，他表示，海湾地区正成为一场“试验场”，检验着局势是否朝着相反的方向转变。

“过去三十年都是美国主导的秩序。这种秩序已经结束了，”他说。“这是否意味着新的秩序中将没有美国？不。但美国与海湾国家之间的关系将会截然不同。”

对利雅得而言，本月美沙关系的变化极限受到了严峻考验。对沙​​特石油设施和出口路线的袭击威胁到石油供应，推高全球油价，并增加美国人的汽油成本。

也门胡塞武装（由伊朗支持）袭击了沙特阿拉伯的石油设施，并宣布封锁往返沙特港口的船只，这些船只均途经红海。伊拉克境内由伊朗支持的民兵组织也被指控袭击了沙特阿拉伯的东西输油管道，这条管道是绕过霍尔木兹海峡的关键通道。

然而，据美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）此前报道，当沙特王储穆罕默德·本·萨勒曼要求特朗普打击胡塞武装时，总统却拒绝了。这一决定距离华盛顿与利雅得签署防务协议并将沙特阿拉伯列为主要非北约盟友还不到一年，尽管美国仍在继续向沙特军队提供情报和目标定位支持。

沙特阿拉伯的事件反映了海湾国家领导人周二可能向特朗普提出的困境：他们希望美国帮助他们应对即将发生的袭击，但又担心与伊朗的冲突再次升级会让他们更加不安全。

西特里诺维奇写道，大多数海湾国家政府都希望保持稳定，而不是再次陷入战争。他表示，这并不意味着要背弃华盛顿：“美国的力量不可或缺，但完全依赖华盛顿也存在风险。”

伊娃·玛丽·乌兹卡特吉/路透社

特朗普政府批准向沙特阿拉伯出售F-35隐形战斗机。以下是此举引发争议的原因。

在赛义夫看来，这个问题应该从一些不那么雄心勃勃的方案入手，而不是达成一项全面的和平协议：例如，保障霍尔木兹海峡的航行自由，或许可以以此换取伊朗石油销售和货物运输方面的有限减免。他表示，海湾领导人需要提出具体的要求，否则消耗战将成为“海湾地区的新常态”。

但即便达成范围更窄的协议也可能困难重重。据称，海湾国家领导人在8月份曾告诉特朗普，与伊朗的协议即将达成；但这一次，作为调解人的卡塔尔的评估听起来却远没有那么乐观。

本月在阿布扎比举行的一次会议上，卡塔尔外交部发言人马吉德·安萨里对达成协议的前景表示怀疑。他说，伊朗能够承受一场旷日持久的战争。华盛顿可能希望进一步施压削弱德黑兰，而伊朗可能希望这场冲突改变美国的政治考量。目前来看，双方或许都认为等待更有利。

即便双方重返谈判桌，安萨里也看不到任何双方都能接受的、被视为胜利的明确协议。“这场战争中，双方究竟想要什么结果？”他问道，“如果有人能回答这个问题，我愿意自掏腰包一百万美元。”

CNN 的 Katie Bo Lillis、Zachary Cohen、Mostafa Salem、Jennifer Hansler 和 Kylie Atwood 对本文亦有贡献。