Source: Getty
To meet long-term domestic challenges, oil-producing Gulf States should focus on improving economic governance to better manage diminishing oil revenues and attract foreign investment.
Oil-producing Gulf states squandered the opportunity to make much needed economic reforms when high oil revenues would have made the task easier. Now, reduced oil revenues and global economic uncertainty make it imperative that they develop competitive, diversified economies, concludes a new paper from the Carnegie Middle East Center.
Ibrahim Saif explains that the top priority for the Gulf Council Cooperation (GCC) countries—Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and the UAE—should be improving economic governance to better manage existing oil revenues and attract foreign direct investment (FDI). With a comfortable cushion of foreign reserves, the risks for short-term instability is low; however, the current system of low taxes and generous public spending is unsustainable.
Recommendations for GCC countries:
Saif concludes:
“Despite nearly six years in which high oil revenues created favorable macroeconomic conditions in the GCC countries, they were still not able to tackle their long-term economic challenges. The oil windfall actually pushed back attempts to address these challenges, and the global financial crisis has reminded GCC policymakers that structural challenges must be addressed at a time when macroeconomic conditions are favorable and not when the economies are slowing down.”
Former Senior Associate, Middle East Center
Saif is an economist specializing in the political economy of the Middle East. His research focuses on international trade and structural adjustment programs in developing countries, with emphasis on Jordan and the Middle East.
Former Visiting Scholar, Middle East Center
Asseburg's current research focuses on the Middle East conflict, German and Middle East politics, the Euro–Mediterranean Partnership, and state building, political reform, and political Islam in the Middle East. She was previously with the Friedrich Ebert Foundation’s office in Jerusalem.
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.
The debate over AI and work too often centers on displacement. Facing aging populations and shrinking workforces, East Asian policymakers view AI not as a threat, but as a cross-sectoral workforce strategy.
Darcie Draudt-Véjares, Sophie Zhuang
In its version of an AI middle power strategy, Seoul is pursuing alignment with the United States not as an endpoint but as a strategy to build industrial and geopolitical leverage. Whether this balance holds remains an open question.
Darcie Draudt-Véjares, Seungjoo Lee
China’s rapid technological progress and its first-rate infrastructure are often cited as refuting the claim that China has been systematically overinvesting in non-productive projects for many years. In fact, as the logic of overinvestment and the many historical precedents show, the former is all-too-often consistent with the latter.
Michael Pettis
On March 10, 2026, India’s Union Cabinet approved amendments to Press Note 3, a regulation that mandated government approval on all foreign direct investment (FDI) from countries sharing a land border with India. This amendment raises questions primarily about whether its stated benefits will materialize and if the risks have been adequately weighed. This piece will address the same.
Konark Bhandari
The conflict is exposing the flaws and fissures of their domestic governance and social cohesion.
Frederic Wehrey, Charles H. Johnson
