Gulf states’ scepticism over alleged US-Iran talks signals a distrust of Trump

 

Analysis

Gulf states’ scepticism over alleged US-Iran talks signals a distrust of Trump

 

Hannah Ellis-Petersen

in Dubai

Reluctance to cheerlead alleged US ceasefire efforts reflects suspicion talk of peace could be another foil for escalation

 

Thu 26 Mar 2026 05.00 GMT

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/26/gulf-states-scepticism-over-alleged-us-iran-talks-signals-a-distrust-of-trump

 

Not long after Donald Trump said the US was engaged in “strong talks” to bring the war with Iran to an end this week, Qatar took the unusual step of distancing itself from the alleged diplomatic negotiations.

 

Qatar was not involved in any mediation efforts, said government spokesperson Majed al-Ansari at a briefing on Tuesday night, before adding as a telling aside: “If they exist.”

 

It signalled a notable break from Qatar’s historic and recurring position as chief mediator in Middle East and wider regional conflicts. Whether for negotiations between Israel and Hamas, talks between the US and the Taliban or attempting to broker peace deals in Lebanon and Sudan, orchestrating diplomatic summits has formed a cornerstone of the small Gulf state’s international heft.

 

Yet this time, over the past three or more weeks, Qatar and fellow Gulf countries have found themselves on the frontlines of the war, after their mediation efforts to try to prevent the conflict were ultimately spurned by the US.

 

The US has attacked Iran twice during negotiations aimed at halting the Iranian nuclear programme, which were championed and led by the Gulf state of Oman. Discussions last June were halted as the US and Israel conducted strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Revived talks this February were also quickly rendered useless when US president Donald Trump began bombing Tehran with Israel before the final round of meetings.

 

Since the war began, Gulf states have been forced to spend billions rebuffing a daily onslaught of Iranian missiles and drones, their economies and sovereignty taking an increasingly substantive hit.

 

Analysts said their reluctance to cheerlead the alleged ceasefire efforts reflected both the heavy toll they continued to suffer from the war, as well as a lingering suspicion over whether Trump’s talk of peace was genuine or another foil for escalation.

 

“They’ve been burned by their previous experience,” said Bilal Saab, senior managing director of advisory group Trends US and former Pentagon official in the first Trump administration.

 

He added: “They previously thought they played a useful mediating role – until they realised that it was all for naught. Not to mention that they have been directly implicated in the war and are still being attacked by the Iranians. So there’s a lot of pent-up frustration and disappointment that is affecting their willingness, and perhaps even ability, to mediate anything.”

 

The lack of clarity around the current alleged negotiations between the US and Iran, and a deep mistrust of the Trump regime, have left Gulf leaders reluctant to put themselves on the frontlines of talks for the time being, said analysts.

 

It is still unclear exactly who the US is talking to in Iran to put forward their proposal for peace. Fundamental questions remain over who in the Iranian regime is calling the shots, after the assassination of multiple senior Iranian regime figures and with newly appointed supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei still hidden from public view.

 

By Wednesday night, the Iranian regime had outright rejected Trump’s 15-point plan to end the war, submitted to Tehran via Pakistani generals, as “extremely unreasonable” and put forward their own strikingly different proposal.

 

The concern of offering legitimacy to talks that ultimately become a front for escalation, or even the assassination of more Iranian leaders, was also acknowledged to be a regional concern. Even as Trump insisted progress was being made in negotiations, thousands of US troops were being deployed to the Middle East, and there remained a potent fear among the Gulf states of being played as pawns in the US and Israel’s Middle East game.

 

Saab said: “There is still a strong possibility that this is a ruse in preparation for another military operation or that the US wants to hold negotiations under the threat of a ground invasion.”

 

Iranian diplomatic sources voiced similar fears. One source said “there’s a high degree of scepticism” about the potential of peace talks being hosted in Islamabad. “As we saw, in previous negotiations we had with the US, they used it to attack and kill our leaders. Mistrust is very high.”

 

Bader al-Saif, professor at Kuwait University and fellow at Chatham House, said it was hard for Gulf states to ignore that “whenever the word negotiation was used by the Trump administration, we unfortunately ended up under the rubric of war”.

 

“Trump has his own long-winded, loosely defined notion of negotiations,” he added. “Right now, it’s still very volatile. I think the Gulf states will come into the negotiations when they feel that there is something real they can offer.”

 

However, he emphasised their reluctance to get embroiled in a possible Trumpian charade was counterbalanced by a recognition of the critical importance of shaping and influencing any realistic peace negotiations which could put the Gulf’s future at stake.

 

The prospect of Trump ending the war with the current Iranian regime still in place less than 100 miles away from some Gulf capitals – potentially angrier and more vengeful than before and with an acute awareness of the damage its missiles and drones can do to multi-billion-dollar infrastructure and industry – is widely viewed as an existential threat to future economic ambitions.

 

There is also still no clear solution on how to end Iran’s highly successful stranglehold over the strait of Hormuz, through which most of the Gulf’s oil and gas is exported to the world, which remains a sword of Damocles over the region.

 

Yet a protracted US-led war fighting for the elusive goal of regime change in Iran also risked bleeding the Gulf economies dry and putting vital energy and water infrastructure in danger of being debilitated, which would have a heavy civilian cost. There also remained the omnipresent threat of Tehran activating sleeper cells and armed factions loyal to Iran, in countries such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Kuwait, with the potential to trigger a destabilising internal proxy war.

 

Al-Saif said that not only was it vital that Gulf states be at the table of any peace talks if they did take place, but called for the countries of Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) – the political grouping of the Gulf states – to instigate their own separate negotiations with Iran, to ensure their interests were protected in the long run.

 

“They shouldn’t only count on the US to do the negotiation,” said al-Saif. “They should go and strike a deal with Iran for themselves. This was not our war, and if we can shield ourselves from being impacted any further, we should do it to protect our own national interests.”

 

The suggestion of Pakistan – an Islamic country that has a defence pact with Saudi Arabia and close ties to other GCC countries – as the most likely venue to host and orchestrate the peace talks was one relatively favourable to the Gulf states, said al-Saif. However, others questioned whether Islamabad had the same economic leverage and heft over Iran as Gulf countries such as Qatar and the UAE, which are holding billions of dollars of Iranian funds in their banks.

 

Alex Vatanka, senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, emphasised that beyond securing the flow of trade through the strait of Hormuz and dismantling the nuclear programme, there was no reason to expect Trump would prioritise the needs of the Gulf in any negotiations with Iran, despite their longstanding security agreement.

 

Iran meanwhile was highly unlikely to agree to give up the missiles that had done so much damage to the Gulf states and could prove an effective tool for future leverage.

 

“The Gulf states could easily be thrown under the bus again by Trump; he doesn’t care that deeply about them beyond sources of personal commercial opportunity,” said Vatanka.

 

While he emphasised it would take seismic feats of diplomacy to rebuild trust between Iran and the Gulf states, Vatanka said he expected them to ultimately forge their own path with Tehran, as they had done before the war broke out.

 

“No matter what happens, they’re still going to be frontline states. Iran is just across the waterway and they’re not a fortress,” added Vatanka. “So once the shooting ends, the Gulf states will need to decide: are there ways they can push this regime in a different direction?”