Two billion dollars a day. That is what the six Gulf Cooperation Council nations began losing the moment Iran blocked the Strait of Hormuz. By June, estimates showed GCC GDP growth had collapsed to roughly a quarter of its previous year’s value. For the families, workers, and communities whose livelihoods depend on the region’s trade arteries, those numbers are not abstractions. They are the texture of daily life getting harder.
Saudi Arabia’s recent posture captures the human cost of this tension. Earlier this month, the Kingdom joined the U.S. in launching precision strikes against Iran’s proxies in Iraq. Almost simultaneously, Saudi officials were urging President Trump to “prioritize dialogue” and seek a diplomatic resolution. The apparent contradiction reflects something real: the mounting costs of alignment with Washington have begun to outweigh the security benefits these partnerships once promised to ordinary Gulf residents.
The six GCC states (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE) share a common mistrust of the Iranian regime rooted in clashing ethnic and religious identities and decades of Iranian interventionism through proxy networks. They have long relied on U.S. security guarantees, counter-terror cooperation, and robust economic ties. But hosting American forces and backing U.S. policy has made them targets. Iran has responded by launching thousands of drones at Gulf territory while simultaneously choking off critical maritime passages. The message to Gulf populations is blunt: alignment with America carries a price tag their leaders must now weigh against the protection it provides.
The Trump administration’s approach has deepened that calculation. The war began without meaningful consultation with regional partners who had been working toward their own normalization efforts with Tehran. More troubling, the U.S. has failed to shield Gulf states from Iranian retaliation despite being the architect of the conflict. Trump promised the war would defang Iran and stabilize the region. Iran remains capable of pressuring its neighbors and increasingly willing to do so. His inconsistent rhetoric and apparent lack of a coherent strategy have amplified Gulf leaders’ concerns about American reliability, concerns that filter down to the communities depending on stable governance and open trade routes.
Meanwhile, a strategic reorientation that predates the current war has now accelerated sharply. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman began pursuing closer ties with China in 2019, aligning with Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative and Saudi Vision 2030. Since then, the two countries have completed arms deals worth billions, conducted joint maritime military exercises, and signed currency swap agreements that threaten the dominance of dollar-denominated transactions. The UAE and China have engaged in joint air force drills. Qatar has agreed to strengthen security cooperation with Beijing. Pakistan, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia recently signed a defense pact, signaling a broader diversification of security partnerships across the region.
These moves reflect a deliberate hedging strategy, one the war has now validated in the eyes of Gulf decision-makers. The question is no longer whether to reduce dependence on the U.S., but how quickly and how far to go. A deeper analysis of these dynamics is available at https://www.americansecurityproject.org/how-the-iran-war-is-affecting-americas-gulf-partnerships/, which explores how regional partnerships are shifting in real time.
Complete dissolution of America’s Gulf partnerships remains unlikely. The economic and security relationships built over decades retain genuine value, and the GCC cannot easily abandon them. But the trajectory is clear: Gulf states will continue deepening ties with China and other partners to insulate themselves from American unpredictability. What was once a relationship of primary reliance is becoming one of balanced alternatives, with ordinary Gulf residents caught in the adjustment.
The damage could have been prevented. Had the Trump administration built consensus with its partners before launching military action, the effort might have been more coordinated and effective. Instead, the war has accelerated a decoupling that now appears irreversible in the medium term. Rebuilding trust will require the U.S. to reaffirm long-term commitments to allies, coordinate strategy across administrations, and abandon reactive decision-making in favor of genuine planning. Without those changes, the partnerships that once anchored U.S. influence in the Middle East will grow increasingly hollow, and the communities living inside them will keep absorbing the cost.