Victor Davis Hanson
The Gulf
The Gulf nations of the Gulf Cooperation Council (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates) have two agendas—one stealthy and unknown to the public, and one transparent and well-recognized. That is, given their huge treasuries, their gigantic oil reserves, their vulnerable pipelines and refineries, their small populations, and their pathetic armed forces (albeit the six nations collectively could field 600 sophisticated combat aircraft), they are a natural target of their nemesis, nearby Iran.
So, the Gulf nations privately beseech the Americans to finally end the existential threat to their security by destroying the radical Shiite regime. But publicly the terrified Gulf council hedges its bets and professes a desire for peace and calm, so as not to antagonize a trigger-happy Iran.
As the war dragged on, and Iran sent over 5,000 missiles and drones into the Gulf nations and did billions of dollars of damage to their infrastructure and oil industries, they pressed the U.S. (and Israel) not to stop—not to merely wound the regime—but to destroy it utterly.
Yet even here they again hedge their bets. Despite suffering billions of dollars in damage from Iran?s drones and missiles, as of yet the Gulf nations have not replied with any of their missiles, nor sent a vast armada of combat aircraft into Iran to accelerate the Israeli and U.S. bombing.
To sum up: the Gulf sees win/win/win scenarios with an Iran flattened and the regime ended, as the Strait of Hormuz is no longer endangered and Iran may be out of the competitive oil market for a while. But it is desperately hoping that the surrogates, the U.S., and Israel will do precisely that: destroy the Iranian regime without their help.
In sum, the wily Gulf has an insurance policy (a foolish one too) that by not actively engaging Iran, should the U.S. and/or Israel desist without regime change, they wish to plead over the next decade to the revenge-minded Iranians that they received Iranian damage rather than dished it out to Tehran.
Israel
The strategy of Israel is near to, but not identical with America’s policies, given the U.S. homeland is distant and secure, while the Jewish state is near and vulnerable. So, while a wounded Iran, without military capability for a decade, might be fine for the U.S., for Israel it would mean living with a wounded savage animal, bent on nuclear revenge as soon as possible. Iran can hurt the United States, but with nuclear weapons, it could destroy Israel.
Just as Iran knows that no Democrat President would ever have tried to disarm the regime, so too it assumes no other government in Israel other than Netanyahu?s would ever repeat its recent preemptive attacks. So, this is a historic moment when both the will and capability line up to end Iran?s regime and might never arise again.
Moreover, Israel is surrounded by an Iran-fed ?ring of fire.? Well aside from October 7, it has suffered for years from the terrorist attacks by Iranian proxies in Gaza, Iraq, Syria, the West Bank, and Yemen—in a way not so true of the U.S.
Consequently, Israel sees a once-in-a-lifetime chance to utterly emasculate Iran, help overthrow the regime, and then help birth a true new Middle East, as all of Iran’s now broke terrorist subordinates—Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis—become inert and impotent.
And at the same time, given the Gulf was hit six times more often by Iranian rockets and missiles than was Israel, and given that Israel alone 1) poses no threat to the Gulf exporters, 2) alone in the region has the combat aircraft, expertise, competence, and experience to fly inside Iran, and 3) is the enemy of Iran?s Arab terrorist proxiesthe enemies—now also of the Gulf—then any further damage Israel can do with the U.S. to Iran is in its interest: as long as its bellicosity does not fuel the trope that Trump follows Netanyahu?s lead, as the anti-Semitic American Left and conspiratorial Right insist.
Verdict: Israel is the Co-Winner of the War; the Gulf emerges better off than it was prior to the war.
Discussion (2)
Join the conversation. Logged in subscribers avoid the Captcha verification and get priority commenting approvals. No vulgarity, links, or code allowed.
Victor, Why don't the middle eastern Iran neighbors defend themselves? I think they have the money, probably do have the technology, and could turn the tables, using the same tactics against Iran - couldn't they? Trump suggests we're the 'responsible one' for securing the middle east, however, they're 'there' and we're 'here', it seems like a huge drain on our resources (military & finances) to do the dirty work, for them. My brother flew for UAE for 2 decades, lived in Dubai most of that. He says they 'employ' 3rd world labor to do practically everything, wealth has disconnected them from their own defense & the USA is liken as mercenaries, hired to fight their battles. Could the Saudi's & neighbors, eventually defend themselves from regional thugs, like Iran, or, are they really hopelessly disconnected from patriotism to their own government?
Israel and the US are surrounded by cowards and traitors with the democrat party being a greater threat to the world than Iran.