ISLAMABAD: The Gulf region is entering a new phase of strategicfragmentation in which Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatarare increasingly guided by divergent national interests rather thancollective Gulf solidarity. While these states remain bound by geography,economic interdependence, and shared security concerns, their approaches toregional conflicts, political Islam, great-power competition, andespecially Israel have created growing fault lines. By 2026, thesedifferences are not only persisting but deepening, transforming the GulfCooperation Council from a coordination platform into a space of quietrivalry and managed tension.
Saudi Arabia’s position reflects a cautious recalibration of power ratherthan a rush toward alignment. Riyadh continues to see itself as the moraland political center of the Muslim world, a role that constrains itsfreedom of maneuver on Israel. While Saudi leaders recognize the strategicand technological value of engagement with Israel, particularly incountering Iran and enhancing security cooperation, they remain sensitiveto domestic opinion and broader Muslim sentiment regarding Palestine. As aresult, Saudi Arabia has adopted a conditional approach, using the prospectof normalization as leverage rather than embracing it openly. This cautiousstance increasingly places Saudi Arabia at odds with the UAE’s far morepragmatic and transactional foreign policy.
The UAE has pursued normalization with Israel as part of a broader strategyto position itself as a global commercial, technological, and diplomatichub. Abu Dhabi views Israel less through an ideological lens and more as astrategic partner that can accelerate economic diversification, defenseinnovation, and geopolitical relevance. Even amid regional outrage overIsraeli military actions, the UAE has largely maintained its diplomatic andeconomic ties with Tel Aviv, opting for symbolic criticism rather thanstructural disengagement. This posture signals a belief that long-termnational interests outweigh short-term reputational costs, a belief thatSaudi Arabia does not fully share and Qatar openly rejects.
Qatar’s role further complicates Gulf dynamics. Doha has long positioneditself as a mediator in regional conflicts, particularly between Israel andPalestinian factions, hosting political offices and facilitatingnegotiations that others avoid. This approach has earned Qatarinternational relevance but has also generated mistrust among its Gulfneighbors, who view Doha’s engagement with Islamist actors asdestabilizing. By 2026, Qatar’s mediation strategy increasingly clasheswith both Saudi Arabia’s desire for controlled regional leadership and theUAE’s preference for decisive alignment and state-centric order. Israel’sskepticism toward Qatar’s mediator role, combined with occasional directconfrontations, has amplified Doha’s sense of strategic vulnerability.
Israel functions as both a catalyst and a stress test for Gulf unity. Itsexpanding regional footprint, enabled by normalization agreements and quietsecurity cooperation, has forced Gulf states to clarify their priorities.For the UAE, Israel is a partner; for Saudi Arabia, a bargaining chip; andfor Qatar, an unavoidable interlocutor and occasional adversary. Thesediffering perceptions prevent the emergence of a unified Gulf position onIsrael, making coordination on broader regional crises increasinglydifficult. Each Israeli military escalation in Gaza or beyond deepens theseinternal Gulf divisions, as responses vary from diplomatic restraint tooutright condemnation.
Beyond Israel, competition for regional influence is also driving tensions,particularly between Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Once close strategicpartners, the two are now rivals in economic policy, energy strategy,regional diplomacy, and military positioning. Saudi Arabia’s push tocentralize regional business activity in Riyadh challenges Dubai’slong-held dominance, while disagreements over Yemen, Sudan, and Horn ofAfrica politics reveal contrasting visions of regional order. Israel’sadvanced military and intelligence capabilities have become part of thisrivalry, as access to Israeli technology and cooperation adds another layerof strategic competition between Gulf powers.
Read Top Stories
Qatar’s strained relations with its neighbors remain shaped by unresolvedtrust deficits from the earlier Gulf blockade period. Although formalreconciliation occurred, the underlying ideological and strategicdifferences were never fully addressed. Qatar’s independent foreign policy,strong media influence, and close ties with non-state actors continue toirritate Riyadh and Abu Dhabi. Israel’s occasional military or intelligenceactions linked to Qatari-hosted actors further complicate matters,reinforcing perceptions that Qatar’s strategy invites instability into theGulf rather than containing it.
By 2026, the cumulative effect of these tensions is an erosion ofcollective Gulf decision-making. The GCC increasingly struggles to act as aunified bloc on regional crises, from Gaza to Yemen to Red Sea security.External powers exploit these divisions, engaging Gulf states bilaterallyrather than collectively. Israel, in particular, benefits from thisfragmentation, as it allows Tel Aviv to deepen ties with willing partnerswhile sidelining critics without facing a coordinated Arab response.
The long-term implications are significant. A divided Gulf weakens regionaldeterrence, complicates conflict resolution, and increases the risk ofmiscalculation. While outright confrontation between Saudi Arabia, the UAE,and Qatar remains unlikely, strategic mistrust is becoming entrenched.Israel’s role, whether intentional or not, accelerates this process byforcing Gulf states to choose between ideology, pragmatism, and mediation.In 2026, the Gulf is no longer defined by unity under a shared vision butby parallel strategies that coexist uneasily, shaping a more fragmented andunpredictable Middle East order.og_image-image-name