Control of the Strait of Hormuz just became the Gulf's hottest issue. Gulf capitals are racing to reshape security ties after the US and Israel fought a short but intense war with Iran.

Why Gulf leaders are shifting alliances

Look, the damage from the war wasn't only military. Gulf governments now face the twin tasks of repairing battered economies and preventing another showdown with Tehran. Leaders in the region say American bases on Gulf soil — which helped the US and Israel operate during the campaign — also made host countries targets for Iranian missile and drone strikes.

The conflict lasted about five weeks, and Gulf air defenses largely intercepted the Iranian barrage, regional officials told reporters. Still, the threat from Iran's remaining missile arsenal didn't disappear. What governments in the Gulf are wrestling with is how to stop future flare-ups without relying solely on Washington.

Bader Mousa Al-Saif, a professor at Kuwait University, urged a rethink of the old security model. He recommended expanding partnerships beyond the United States to include countries such as Turkey and Pakistan, both of which have sizable militaries and could offer a different balance of influence in the region.

New partners — and new fractures

Some Gulf states are already moving. Saudi Arabia signed a defense pact with Pakistan in recent months. The United Arab Emirates announced a defense partnership with India. During the conflict, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar also concluded hurried defense agreements with Ukraine to shore up defenses against Iranian drones.

That scramble shows two things: one, Gulf governments want more hands on deck; two, they're not in lockstep about how to deal with Iran. A hawkish bloc led by the UAE and Bahrain favors a tougher stance. Other states hope renewed engagement with Tehran might bring stability.

Thing is — those divisions matter. If Gulf capitals pursue different security tracks, Tehran can exploit the gaps. That could leave shipping routes and oil facilities exposed to pressure campaigns short of full-scale war.

Calls for a larger Muslim security alliance — sometimes described in public debate as a "Muslim NATO" — have circulated. But regional analysts and officials say such a grouping is unlikely, given rivalries and mismatched priorities among potential members. Instead, a looser alignment that surfaced in March, named "Step" and involving Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt and Pakistan, points to one possible direction for cooperation.

Hormuz at the center

The Strait of Hormuz is a chokepoint. Most Gulf trade transits that narrow waterway, and during the ceasefire Tehran insisted it would keep the position it seized there during the fighting — a claim that could let Iran throttle traffic when it wants. Negotiations between Washington and Tehran on that point were due to begin in Islamabad as soon as Friday, diplomats said.

Control of Hormuz isn't just a regional worry. Global energy markets watch the strait closely because a disruption there can send oil prices spiking. Gulf economies themselves depend on steady export routes to rebuild after the conflict. Insurance and shipping costs rise when transit risk increases. And foreign investors get cautious when ports and oil terminals have been targeted.

And those economic aftershocks feed back into politics. Governments that can't protect trade corridors risk economic pain at home, fewer export revenues and harder budget choices. That in turn pushes some states toward tougher security postures and others toward diplomatic engagement — deepening the rift among Gulf capitals.

What role for the United States?

The war showed American military presence can be double-edged. US bases gave Tehran clear targets, critics say. Washington now faces a dilemma: maintain forward presence that reassures partners but also raises the risk of reprisals against host countries.

Gulf leaders are asking whether reassurance from Washington should come with more regional burden-sharing. Bader Mousa Al-Saif said countries must "rethink the model" and look for partners beyond the American umbrella. That suggests Gulf states want options — military ties that diversify risk and reduce the political cost of hosting foreign forces.

For US policymakers, that means recalibrating alliances. The United States could deepen engagement with emerging Gulf partners — such as Turkey or Pakistan — or support new multilateral arrangements that include outside powers. But any shift must balance deterrence against Iran with the political sensitivities of Gulf capitals wary of appearing to abandon the US security guarantee.

Military hardware, diplomacy and economics

During the five-week conflict, Gulf air defenses intercepted most incoming Iranian missiles and drones, officials reported. That defensive performance gave Gulf states confidence — at least publicly — that they could blunt some attacks without immediate ground escalation. But missiles and drones are only part of the picture.

Rebuilding economies will be costly. A region reliant on oil revenues and global trade sees its recovery tied to secure shipping lanes and investor confidence. If Iran retains leverage over Hormuz, the Gulf could face recurring supply shocks, higher shipping premiums and lower inbound investment.

So countries are signing new defense pacts fast. Those deals are meant to do two things: raise the bar for potential Iranian pressure campaigns and show domestic audiences that governments are protecting national interests. Some of the new partners — India, Pakistan, Turkey — come with large militaries but also different strategic agendas than Washington. That diversity could reduce single-point dependencies, but it complicates coordination.

Diplomacy is the other front

Despite the fighting, diplomacy hasn't stopped. Saudi Arabia and Iran held their first official contact since the conflict began — a phone call between the two foreign ministers aimed at lowering tensions and restoring stability. Iranian state media later suggested the UAE might have been behind an attack on its offshore facilities on Lavan Island hours after the ceasefire, and Iran mounted a response; the UAE hasn't publicly commented.

Diplomatic talks between the United States and Iran are due to start in Islamabad — and one of the key negotiable items will be the future of the Strait of Hormuz. Those talks could reshape whether Gulf states feel they have to build new security umbrellas or can risk reengaging Tehran for trade and calm.

Frankly, Balancing deterrence and diplomacy will determine how soon Gulf economies can recover. If talks yield a binding agreement on freedom of navigation, insurance markets might calm and investors could return. If Iran insists on keeping its wartime hold over Hormuz, the region will likely see drawn-out bargaining mixed with intermittent pressure campaigns.

A one-sentence pause.

The picture is still forming. Different Gulf capitals will race to protect national interests their own way — some with bigger militaries, some with new partners, some with old allies. But the shared urgency is clear: stopping another war without letting trade and growth collapse.

Related Articles

Iran insisted it would retain the hold it took over the Strait of Hormuz during the war.