SAEDNEWS: Once cast as a bulwark against Iranian influence, Israel is now viewed with growing suspicion by its Gulf neighbours. Benjamin Netanyahu’s latest military campaign has not only failed to advance normalization with Saudi Arabia—it may have shattered Tel Aviv’s diplomatic momentum across the region.
According to Saed News, Israel’s military confrontation with Iran has triggered an unexpected geopolitical backlash in the Gulf. Far from accelerating normalization with Arab states, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s campaign has strained ties with countries once seen as potential allies in reshaping the Middle East.
A recent Haaretz report highlights how Netanyahu’s direct engagement with Iran has upended regional dynamics and deepened uncertainty. Despite his repeated claims that Israel can simultaneously wage war on multiple fronts and expand diplomatic relations, the response from Arab capitals tells a different story. Netanyahu had hoped that a show of force against Tehran would bring Saudi Arabia into the fold of formal recognition, adding to the list of countries that normalized relations under the Abraham Accords. But Riyadh and others are pushing back.
Netanyahu’s vision of a “New Middle East” hinges on the assumption that military victories create fertile ground for diplomacy. Following the Iran campaign, he declared on X (formerly Twitter) that Israel’s actions would unlock new peace agreements. But this narrative, largely aimed at bolstering his domestic image ahead of elections, has faltered abroad.
In Riyadh, leaders reject Netanyahu’s framing. Where Israel seeks to redraw the regional order through military strength, Saudi Arabia insists on de-escalation and a return to the status quo. Netanyahu’s insistence on “total victory” over Hamas and Iran has paralyzed diplomatic efforts. Saudi officials remain incensed by his past suggestion that Palestinians could settle their state in Saudi territory—an idea met with fierce backlash after Netanyahu prematurely announced a normalization deal with the kingdom.
The repercussions are spreading. Sudan is reengaging with Iran. Bahrain has withheld appointing a new envoy to Tel Aviv since the Gaza conflict reignited in October. Even the United Arab Emirates—previously a vocal critic of Hamas—condemned Israel’s strikes on Iran and joined Saudi Arabia and Qatar in opposing U.S. involvement in the conflict.
Emirati foreign policy advisor Anwar Gargash remarked that the Israel–Iran war was a “watershed moment” with far-reaching consequences. After the ceasefire, he reiterated that Gulf Cooperation Council states unanimously opposed the war and had worked through international platforms to contain escalation.
Israel’s portrayal as the “guardian of regional security”—a cornerstone of its diplomatic outreach—now appears outdated. That narrative made sense when Riyadh and Tehran were rivals and Gaza remained a distant flashpoint. Today, with Saudi–Iranian ties thawing and Israeli airstrikes landing deep inside Iranian territory, Gulf states view diplomacy, not deterrence, as the preferred path.
Public sentiment has also shifted. Gulf populations, increasingly disillusioned by the devastation in Gaza, have turned sharply critical. Saudi media now openly attacks Netanyahu’s policies, reinforcing the perception that Israel has become a source of regional instability. Riyadh’s refusal to grant its airspace to Israeli or U.S. jets for operations against Iran reflects this break. In a telling move, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman swiftly contacted Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian after the ceasefire, reaffirming the policy of de-escalation.
Even among states that previously embraced normalization, disillusionment runs deep. Gulf leaders accuse Israel of treating normalization as a unilateral favour rather than a mutual agreement. Netanyahu’s finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, recently echoed this, claiming Arab states stood to benefit the most and should make no demands. This has been flatly rejected. For Riyadh, normalization is conditional and costly—it requires tangible Israeli concessions, particularly regarding Palestinian statehood and the 1967 borders.
The 2002 Arab Peace Initiative outlined these prerequisites, as did the UAE’s 2020 normalization, which was framed as “land for peace.” Netanyahu, however, declared it “peace for peace,” insisting Israel gave up nothing.
The result? A deepening chasm. Netanyahu’s rejection of the 2002 initiative in 2016 and Israel’s recent approval of 22 new West Bank settlements directly defy the UAE’s warning: “Annexation or normalization—you can’t have both.”
Even before the latest war, Saudi Prince Turki Al-Faisal publicly urged Israel to “fix its listening ears.” The message was clear: normalization is not free, and the region craves stability—not Netanyahu’s endless wars.
Now, with Israeli missiles having struck Iranian soil, the prospects for normalization have not just diminished—they’ve been derailed. Should the Gulf ever return to the table, the cost for Israel will likely be higher than Tel Aviv is prepared to pay—if such a deal remains possible at all.
