• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Yasmine Farouk"
  ],
  "type": "commentary",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "MEP",
  "programs": [
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Middle East",
    "Iran",
    "Saudi Arabia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Security",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Commentary

How Saudi Arabia Could Make a Bold Strategic Move on Iran

Riyadh has far more to lose than Washington from escalation with Tehran. A policy of incremental Saudi engagement offers the kingdom a way out of the crisis.

Link Copied
By Yasmine Farouk
Published on Jun 28, 2019
Program mobile hero image

Program

Middle East

The Middle East Program in Washington combines in-depth regional knowledge with incisive comparative analysis to provide deeply informed recommendations. With expertise in the Gulf, North Africa, Iran, and Israel/Palestine, we examine crosscutting themes of political, economic, and social change in both English and Arabic.

Learn More

While visiting the Saudi capital on May 21, 2017, for his first official trip overseas, U.S. President Donald Trump called for an international effort to “isolate Iran, deny it funding for terrorism, and pray for the day when the Iranian people have the just and righteous government they deserve.”

Since then, Saudi Arabia has applauded the U.S. withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal and encouraged the U.S. maximum pressure campaign on Iran. Yet, as tensions mount dangerously in the Gulf, Riyadh has had little control over how U.S. policy is unfolding. Without leverage, Saudi Arabia must absorb the brunt of the fallout of U.S.-Iran military escalation. Saudi Arabia should use the crisis to revisit its own Iran policy.

Putting the Kingdom’s Interest Front and Center

The kingdom should start by asking if the U.S. approach is serving Saudi interests. Riyadh’s current all-or-nothing Iran policy matches with the U.S. view. It demands that Iran become a “normal state,” as the Saudi crown prince Mohammed Bin Salman put it, before Saudi Arabia re-engages.

But it is Saudi Arabia, not the United States, that will bear the costs of the Iranian response to the U.S. maximum pressure campaign. Limiting how this escalation plays out in Saudi waters and territory gives the kingdom a strong incentive for a more pragmatic approach. It is time for the Saudis to shift gears by de-escalating their role in the conflict and trying to prevent a U.S.-Iran war, which would harm the kingdom and its interests.

The attacks on Saudi ships in the Gulf and escalating Houthi attacks on Saudi territory are no coincidence. The Iranian regime has few cards to play to spark international pressure on the United States to de-escalate, but those it does have come at Saudi Arabia’s expense. Trump administration officials believe the maximum pressure policy is working, and they expect full Saudi support, regardless of the consequences. Maximum pressure may offer some short-term benefits to the kingdom, but the road to war is long. If the status quo continues, then more Saudi ships may be sunk, and more Saudi civilians and soldiers may be killed.

The crown prince said recently, “The Kingdom doesn’t want a war in the region.” But to stop one, the Saudi and Iranian governments must talk to each other. This might be the first step in a longer incremental process that would address the threats Iran poses to Saudi Arabia one at a time.

The Dangers of a Fickle U.S. Partner

The United States cannot blame Saudi Arabia if it chooses to engage. Trump has repeatedly made overtures to leaders of U.S. antagonists, and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo even said that the United States is “prepared to engage in a conversation [with Iran] with no preconditions.” A Saudi step in the same direction would give Riyadh leverage in subsequent U.S.-Iran negotiations. The Iranian minister of foreign affairs, Javad Zarif, has already suggested a non-aggression pact with the Gulf states that Saudi Arabia’s new friends in Moscow are ready to facilitate.

Even if there is an all-out war, Trump has proved himself a fickle friend. Trump’s Iran policy is a new testament to his “America First” mentality that sees allies’ security as collateral damage. His position is that other powers who are more heavily and strategically dependent on oil from the Gulf should be responsible for preserving their own interests. The United States will not invest in Gulf security beyond arms sales, unless there are significant attacks against narrowly defined U.S. interests. And it would take some serious convincing on Capitol Hill to get the U.S. Congress to allow military operations in defense of Saudi Arabia, given many lawmakers’ opinions of the kingdom’s human rights record. But bold Saudi diplomacy could enhance Saudi Arabia’s reputation on the Hill.

All Eyes on the Gulf

Saudi Arabia’s European and Asian partners are watching the situation closely. But some may be reluctant to provide significant assistance to prevent escalation, in the absence of a U.S. security guarantee. Direct talks between Saudi Arabia and Iran to find a safe exit ramp from the current crisis could patch the credibility of Riyadh’s claims not to want war with Tehran.

Saudi Arabia’s own regional allies would also welcome a new Saudi policy on Iran with incremental but realistic objectives. International and regional support for the kingdom’s security becomes more likely if Saudi Arabia shows credible signs of distancing itself from the current military escalation. Such a shift may also open the door to an honorable and regionally supported exit from Yemen and a realistic implementation of the U.S. project of a Middle East Strategic Alliance.

Saudi Arabia and Iran have attempted this kind of incremental engagement before. With the exception of the United States, the countries that signed the Iran nuclear deal are ready to consider that agreement as a first step toward a comprehensive form of engagement with Iran that deals with other Iranian threats to Saudi Arabia and the region one at a time. Such an incremental approach provides a next step that the current Trump policy hasn’t been able to supply. Saudi Arabia will pay a steep price for the U.S.-led campaign against Iran. The kingdom should choose a wiser path and seek to take its fate into its own hands.

About the Author

Yasmine Farouk

Former Nonresident Scholar, Middle East Program

Yasmine Farouk was a nonresident scholar in the Middle East Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Governing Gaza After the War: The Regional Perspectives
      • +3

      Marwan Muasher, Amr Hamzawy, Rain Ji, …

  • Commentary
    Riyadh’s Motivations Behind the Saudi-Iran Deal

      Yasmine Farouk

Yasmine Farouk
Former Nonresident Scholar, Middle East Program
Yasmine Farouk
Political ReformSecurityForeign PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesMiddle EastIranSaudi Arabia

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Article
    India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible Pathways

    A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.

      Rajiv Bhatia

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Pushing Beirut into an Armed Conflict With Hezbollah Is Insane

    The party’s domestic and regional roles have changed, so Lebanon should devise a disarmament strategy that encompasses this.

      Michael Young

  • Article
    Continental Asia and the Rise of Portfolio Politics

    “Central Asia” as an analytical category is itself part of the problem. The term is a Soviet administrative inheritance, drawn along lines that served the convenience of Moscow. The Central Asian states the Soviets named no longer see themselves through this category alone and are not aligning across political blocs but are instead building external partnerships sector by sector, assigning different partners to different functions.

      Jennifer B. Murtazashvili

  • Article
    Palestine’s Climate Change Planning Faces Its Limits

    Barriers ranging from weak legal frameworks to ongoing, occupation-related limitations are constraining Palestine from achieving its ambitious climate targets.

      Joy Arkeh, Nabil Nasser

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    In Russia, Private Companies Have Been Left to Pick Up the Tab for Ukrainian Drone Attacks

    The cost of air defense has become an unregistered tax on revenue for businesses. While military rents are consolidated in the federal budget, the costs of defense are being spread across the balance sheets of companies and regional governments.

      Alexandra Prokopenko

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.