Gulf states have tolerated Iranian strikes so far — but their 'defensive' stance won't last forever

Iran's strikes are pushing Gulf states toward a breaking point, forcing a choice between restraint and retaliation.
Iran's Gulf neighbors have been repeatedly targeted and hit by Iranian drones and missiles as part of the Islamic Republic's retaliatory strikes against the U.S. and Israel's bombardment since late February.
The latest and perhaps most significant escalation in attacks on Iran's neighbors came this week when Tehran launched retaliatory missile attacks on Qatar's Ras Laffan liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal following Israel's attack on Iran's South Pars gas field.
Gulf states — from Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to Bahrain, Oman and Kuwait — have responded to Iran's repeated attacks on their energy infrastructure by saying "a price must be paid" and that the attacks "cannot go unanswered," but, so far, they have not retaliated.
That diplomatic and defensive position can't and won't last forever, analysts say, noting that the Gulf states are now likely weighing up when, where and how they might shift from a neutral stance to an offensive one.
Patience among the Gulf states is obviously wearing thin, with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud warning early Thursday that tolerance of Iranian attacks on his country and neighboring Gulf states is limited.
"I think it's important for the Iranians to understand that the kingdom, but also its partners who have been attacked and beyond, have very significant capacities and capabilities that they could bring to bear should they choose to do so," he said.
"The patience that is being exhibited is not unlimited. Do they [the Iranians] have a day, two, a week? I'm not going to telegraph that," he added. CNBC has requested further comment from the foreign ministry.
Gulf leaders face a difficult dilemma as Iran continues to target their critical infrastructure across the region, analysts told CNBC.
"Despite extensive diplomatic efforts over the last two years to remain neutral, the Gulf states find themselves right in the centre of Iran's firing line," Torbjorn Soltvedt, principal Middle East Analyst at risk intelligence company Verisk Maplecroft, told CNBC Wednesday.
"Active steps to remain neutral – like limiting U.S. access to bases in the region – have done little to shield the Gulf states from Iranian attacks. But any decision to take military action against Iran could spark an even worse Iranian retaliation," he noted.
The decision facing Gulf leaders is between two main options, both of which carry significant risks: "Double down on diplomacy and defensive measures or pivot to an offensive stance aimed at reducing Iran's ability to carry out attacks," he added.
While the rhetoric against Iran is increasingly assertive, agreeing on a coordinated response will be difficult, with some states affected more than others.
The UAE says it has been targeted with more than 2,000 Iranian drones and missiles since the war began in late February, while Oman, which has traditionally had friendlier relations with Iran, has been targeted to a much smaller extent. Israel, on the other hand, has been targeted by Iran, but its multiple layers of air defenses have protected it to a large degree.
Caught in the crossfire
While Iran's targeting of its neighbors might seem illogical and self-defeating at first glance, experts say the Islamic Republic seeks to cause maximum damage in the wider region as part of a strategy designed to get Gulf states to pressure Trump to end the war quickly.
Trump has also tried to coax the Gulf states to enter the war to beef up U.S. and Israeli operations, but they have tried to maintain a largely neutral stance.
Iran appears to be walking a fine line between provoking its neighbors while stopping short of a full escalation. Iran's president had apologized to neighbors for strikes earlier in March, before they resumed in earnest, and Tehran had warned Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE to evacuate their energy facilities ahead of the Ras Laffan strike.
Read more
Nonetheless, renewed Iranian threats to target several energy facilities in neighboring countries after the Israeli strikes against South Pars underscore that they could face more damaging attacks.
Gulf states will have to consider the extent to which Iran is able to retaliate more severely, and the likelihood of the Islamic Republic surviving in the longer term.
A purely defensive posture may be unsustainable in the event of an extended conflict, according to Hasan Alhasan, senior fellow for Middle East Policy at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.
This is particularly true as breaches of air and missile defenses, limited interceptor stockpiles and "the exorbitant cost of defense relative to offence" start to weigh heavily on the Gulf states, he said.
"If they fail to respond to Iranian aggression, moreover, they risk losing the ability to establish deterrence, emboldening future Iranian attacks. After all, further cycles of conflict are likely if the Iranian regime survives this war," Alhasan noted in IISS analysis this week.
The Gulf states have "multiple options" available to them, including allowing the U.S. full operational access to their airspaces and bases to carry out offensive operations against Iran. They also have a range of precision-strike capabilities that could take out Iran's missile or drone launchers in a defensive response to Iran's missile and UAV attacks against them.
Such maneuvers could prove difficult operationally, however, "and would require active intelligence collection to detect and neutralise launchers, many of which are mobile or concealed, and coordination with the U.S. and Israel, already active in Iranian airspace."
Another option would be for the Gulf states to focus on easing the economic pain arising from the conflict, and they could choose to deploy alongside the U.S. to secure shipping through the largely-blocked Strait of Hormuz, given that the Gulf states have a vital economic interest in resuming oil and gas shipments.
Catastrophic retaliation?
Analysts are wary that any retaliation could have unintended and potentially catastrophic outcomes, noting Iran's reaction could extend to strikes on critical civilian infrastructure.
"Iran likely retains considerable inventories of UAVs that it could continue to deploy against the Gulf states and which have proven costly and difficult to intercept. Iran may escalate by prompting the Houthis, who have so far stayed out of the war, to resume attacks against the Gulf states and maritime traffic in the Red Sea, enforcing a dual blockade in the Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb straits," Alhasan said.
"Iran could also ratchet up its attacks against vital civilian infrastructure such as power plants or water-desalination units. By doing so it would run the risk of achieving catastrophic success, inflicting damage so large as to thrust the Gulf states into a no-holds-barred offensive," he warned.