Gulf countries fear Israel-Iran spillover
"Gulf states are very much caught between a rock and a hard place," Sanam Vakil, director of the Chatham House think-tank's Middle East and North Africa Programme told AFP.
While "they are quietly applauding the further weakening of Iran they face real risks and have to play their cards carefully", she said.
Their close ties to Israel's protector Washington, which maintains military bases in the region, and their proximity to Iran -- and its missiles -- pose risks.
Vakil said that "Saudi diplomats are distancing themselves from Israel and condemning the strikes as a means to stay out of this conflict".
The unfolding situation is playing out against a recent diplomatic rapprochement Riyadh has been building with Tehran ever since China in 2023 brokered an agreement aiming to restore ties.
"This is a notable difference with the situation that prevailed in the region 10 years ago, when Saudi Arabia was sort of inciting the United States to strike Iran, calling it the 'head of the snake'," said Karim Bitar, a lecturer in Middle Eastern studies at Paris's Sciences Po university.
Indeed, as Tehran reeled from Israel's attacks and planned retaliation, Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan called his Iranian counterpart and "stressed the importance of dialogue to address disputes".
- Stability at risk -
"Gulf countries realise that this Israeli attack will jeopardise their economic interests as well as the entire stability" of the region, Bitar said.
That is a major preoccupation of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has been focusing on economic growth, giga-projects at home and diversification away from oil.
During Donald Trump's first US presidency, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates had pushed for a stronger stance against Iran.
Gulf countries supported Trump's decision to pull the United States out of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal.
But Gulf sentiment began to change after the United States failed to provide significant backing following attacks blamed on Tehran, analysts said.
A 2019 attack -- claimed by Yemen's Huthis but blamed by Riyadh and Washington on Tehran -- hit Saudi Arabia's Abqaiq processing plant and Khurais oil field, temporarily halving the kingdom's crude output. Tehran denied involvement.
The UAE too has been targeted by attacks from the Huthis that hit Abu Dhabi in 2022.
Seeking to avert attacks by Iran and its proxies, especially as they host US bases that could become targets in the wake of a broader conflict, Gulf monarchies have pursued a detente.
"The greatest concern in the Gulf now will be to what extent the United States will have to rely on their bases to assist in the defence of Israel," said Middle East analyst Andreas Krieg.
- US 'red line' -
While Trump's administration has distanced itself from Israel's operation, it has warned Iran not to hit US targets in the Middle East.
"It has... drawn a firm red line, warning that any attacks on US personnel or military installations will provoke a response," Vakil said.
She added, however, that "for now, Iran is unlikely to target Gulf infrastructure or assets".
The leaders of Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar last month had urged Trump, as he visited the region, to not order US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities and to pursue a deal instead, according to the US news outlet Axios.
"The Gulf states had hoped that Trump would show strong leadership and would contain (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu's neo-conservative tendencies to escalate," said Krieg.
Negotiations on Iran's nuclear programme had been going on between Washington and Tehran, although with little headway.
Oman had been readying to host a sixth round of talks on Sunday, before Israel's attack threw that into doubt.
For Bitar, the Israeli strikes seemed to be trying to "torpedo" the US-Iran talks.
"What will be the US reaction? Will they maintain their blind and unconditional support for Israel, or will they try to go back to the negotiating table and reach a new deal?" he asked.
By Sahar Al Attar
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
4 hours ago
- The Citizen
Dirco reviewing ministerial report on Hajj and Umrah for SA pilgrims
President Cyril Ramaphosa addressed the issue of the annual Hajj quota with Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammad bin Salman al Saud in 2022. The Department of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco) is reviewing the recommendations contained in a report about the annual Hajj and Umrah pilgrimages to Saudi Arabia for South African citizens. Dirco referred to its previous media statement dated 10 February 2023, 'Establishment of the Ministerial Committee on the Efficient Management of the Annual Hajj and Umrah Pilgrimages'. Ministerial committee In that statement, former international relations minister Naledi Pandor said the mandate and role of the ministerial committee was to provide strategic direction to support the efficient management of the annual Hajj and Umrah pilgrimages. Pandor said it was also to ensure that the South African pilgrims may enjoy a well-organised pilgrimage in an appropriate system under the auspices of the relevant ministry of Hajj and Umrah in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. ALSO READ: King Salman invites Ramaphosa for state visit to Saudi Arabia Ramaphosa and MBS Pandor also informed the ministerial committee that President Cyril Ramaphosa addressed the issue of the annual quota during his state visit to Saudi Arabia on 15-16 October 2022 with Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammad bin Salman al Saud. Pandor also followed up with her counterpart, Faisal bin Farhan, Minister of Foreign Affairs. The ministerial committee at the time was chaired by ambassador Ebrahim Rasool and members included Fatima Chohan, professor Mathole Motshekga, professor Anil Sooklal, ambassador Ashraf Suliman and Zeenat Adam. Final Report Dirco spokesperson Chrispin Phiri said the ministerial committee submitted its final report to Dirco on 30 June 2025. 'The department is currently reviewing the recommendations contained in the report and is engaging with the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities (CRL Rights Commission) to ensure alignment with constitutional and community-based principles,' he said. New framework The Ministry of Hajj and Umrah of Saudi Arabia recently announced a new operational framework for the facilitation of Hajj from South Africa, effective from 2026. 'Under this new model, the traditional use of licensed tour operators will be discontinued. Instead, all service contracts will be signed directly with Saudi service providers, who will assume full responsibility for service delivery within the kingdom. Coordination will be managed through the Nusuk Masar electronic platform, under the oversight of the Saudi Ministry of Hajj and Umrah,' Phiri said. Phiri said Dirco remains committed to providing consular support to South African nationals undertaking their religious obligations, including Hajj and Umrah and to 'maintaining the positive reputation of the Republic of South Africa in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia'. ALSO READ: More than a million pilgrims prepare for start of Hajj on 4 June
Daily Maverick
5 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Investing in What Matters – And Avoiding What Doesn't
Recent global investor discussions have tended to focus on macro challenges, Trump tariffs, and the concentration of market value in a small number of technology companies. In addition, our Laurium Capital global equity team has spent a lot of time highlighting to investors the runway of growth benefiting electrification stocks as well as select pharmaceutical companies. In the case of the electrification investment thesis, the companies in our portfolio remain ongoing beneficiaries of positive demand growth as well as the need to renew and upgrade the existing electricity grid infrastructure as new generation sources are added and load management becomes more complex. In the pharmaceutical arena, we have been confronted with the opportunities presented by significant advances in oncology treatments as well as weight-loss drugs – the GLP-1 (or 'Ozempic') boom. These specific areas have provided for much of the content of our investor debates and discussions, and we have often expanded on this in our written market commentaries. However, there is another aspect of our work that we have hardly mentioned. This is what has been the 'missing' element from our global equity portfolio in recent periods – the areas of the global economy and stock market that we have actively avoided investing in, and why. In our case, the most noteworthy of these has been in consumer goods. In recent times, we have generally steered clear of companies that produce discretionary consumer goods and even those involved right through the fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) value chain, save for some Coke bottlers and Heineken (we will touch on those later). This underweight is unusual for a fund that follows a 'quality' style-bias, as we do, where a company's strong financial health, pricing power, and enduring end-demand for the underlying product or service usually appeals to us as investors. These characteristics have often been closely associated with the large, successful FMCG and consumer blue-chips. So, what has kept us from investing a greater proportion of the portfolio in these consumer goods businesses, and why has this view been justified? The Concept of 'Over-Earning' Many consumer-focused businesses benefited from a unique, favourable confluence of events following the pandemic—boosted demand out of lockdown, limited competition, and enhanced pricing power. On this latter point, many companies used this strong inflation period to push prices up very meaningfully, in some cases well ahead of the level that customers are willing and/or able to pay. As a result, we believe that many of these discretionary goods companies (even in the luxury goods space) are now 'over-earning' relative to their long-term potential. This raises the risk of earnings normalization or even decline, which could leave valuations exposed. Cyclical and Macro Headwinds Consumers globally are grappling with higher interest rates, tighter credit, and renewed cost-of-living pressures. These factors weigh particularly heavily on discretionary spending and have started to challenge the revenue growth and margin stability of many traditional consumer goods companies. Meanwhile, elevated cost inflation continues to pressure input costs, making it more difficult for companies to maintain historical profitability levels. This pressure will be exacerbated by tariffs and trade barriers that raise the costs for the end-consumer. Structural Behaviour Shifts Consumer behaviour has been evolving. There is increasing demand for health-conscious, sustainable, and locally relevant brands, which challenges the dominance of traditional global FMCG giants. Digital-first and direct-to-consumer brands are growing in market share, and brand loyalty is no longer as dependable. Private label brands are of good quality, and easy to buy. As such, many of the previously 'defensive' brands in the consumer space may be less well-positioned for the next phase of consumer evolution. Hurdles to the Flow of Goods Ongoing global tensions have created several friction points in global trade, notably between producers in China and consumers in the US: Tariffs and protectionist policies, some originating during the first Trump administration as well as under Biden, remain in place and have expanded in scope. Strategic near-shoring and shifts in supply chains have increased costs and reduced efficiency. Immigration controls and labour shortages in certain markets have impacted production and distribution. Cultural fragmentation and regionalization are making global brand strategies more complex and costly. Taken together, these headwinds introduce structural challenges for global consumer businesses, especially those heavily reliant on scale and smooth cross-border logistics. Selective Exposure While we've generally remained underweight in consumer goods, we have made selective investments in companies like Coca-Cola bottlers and Heineken. These companies have demonstrated resilient demand, strong local execution models, and better ability to adapt to regional nuances and price ladders. Their exposure to emerging markets and beverages (a relatively defensive consumption category) makes them more attractive in the current environment and have helped the fund to deliver strong overall performance during a challenging period. DM About the Fund The Laurium Global Active Equity Fund is an actively managed, concentrated portfolio of global equities that aims to outperform the MSCI All Country World Index (ACWI). The Fund is managed by Rob Oellermann, who brings extensive experience in global markets, and is supported by Laurium's broader Investment, Trading, and Quants teams. The team follows a disciplined, quality-oriented investment approach, focused on long-term value creation while remaining highly attuned to macroeconomic shifts, sector dynamics, and structural changes shaping the global landscape. The Laurium Global Active Equity Fund was launched in August 2021 and has delivered excellent performance since inception. It is up 20.3% in USD for the 12 months ended 31 July 2025, versus the MSCI All Country World Index return of 15.9%. It is available for USD and ZAR investments either directly or via select platforms. For more information, visit Disclaimer: Laurium Capital (Pty) Ltd is an authorised financial services provider (FSP 34142). Collective Investment Schemes in Securities (CIS) should be considered as medium to long-term investments. The value may go up as well as down and past performance is not necessarily a guide to future performance. CISs are traded at the ruling price and can engage in scrip lending and borrowing. A schedule of fees, charges and maximum commissions is available on request from the Manager. A CIS may be closed to new investors in order for it to be managed more efficiently in accordance with its mandate. There is no guarantee in respect of capital or returns in a portfolio. Performance has been calculated using net NAV to NAV numbers with income reinvested. The performance for each period shown reflects the return for investors who have been fully invested for that period. Individual investor performance may differ as a result of initial fees, the actual investment date, the date of reinvestments and dividend withholding tax. Full performance calculations are available from the manager on request. Annualised performance shows longer term performance rescaled to a 1-year period. Annualised performance is the average return per year over the period. Actual annual figures are available to the investor on request. Highest and lowest is returns for any 1 year over the period since inception have been shown. NAV is the net asset value represents the assets of a Fund less its liabilities. Prescient Management Company (RF) (Pty) Ltd is registered and approved under the Collective Investment Schemes Control Act (No.45 of 2002). For any additional information such as fund prices, fees, brochures, minimum disclosure documents and application forms please go to
The Citizen
6 hours ago
- The Citizen
Trump to meet Putin in high-stakes Alaska summit
In their first meeting since 2019, Trump and Putin hold high-risk talks in Alaska with Ukraine's fate hanging in the balance. US President Donald Trump and Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin meet Friday in Alaska in a high-stakes, high-risk summit that could prove decisive for the future of Ukraine. Putin will step onto Western soil for the first time since he ordered the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, a war that has killed tens of thousands of people and on which Russia has not relented, making rapid gains just before the summit. Trump extended the invitation at the Russian leader's suggestion, but the US president has since been defensive and warned that the meeting could be over within minutes if Putin does not compromise. Every word and gesture will be closely watched by European leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who was not included and has publicly refused pressure from Trump to surrender territory seized by Russia. Trump has called the summit a 'feel-out meeting' to test Putin, whom he last saw in 2019. 'If it's a bad meeting, it'll end very quickly, and if it's a good meeting, we're going to end up getting peace in the pretty near future,' Trump said Thursday. ALSO READ: Ramaphosa speaks to Putin on Ukraine crisis, bilateral issues He gave the summit a one-in-four chance of failure. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov responded to a question from Russian state TV by saying that Moscow would not make guesses on the outcome of the meeting. 'We never make any predictions ahead of time,' Lavrov said after he reached Alaska, wearing what appeared to be a shirt with 'USSR' written across it in Cyrillic script. '… our position is clear and unambiguous. We will present it,' he said. Trump has promised to consult with European leaders and Zelensky, saying that any final agreement would come in a three-way meeting with Putin and the Ukrainian president to 'divvy up' territory. Trump's latest shift Trump has boasted of his relationship with Putin, blamed predecessor Joe Biden for the war and vowed before his return to the White House in January to bring peace within 24 hours. ALSO READ: Ukraine is becoming the wedge driving US and Europe apart But despite repeated calls to Putin, and a stunning February 28 White House meeting in which Trump publicly berated Zelensky, the Russian leader has shown no signs of compromise. Trump has acknowledged his frustration with Putin and warned of 'very severe consequences' if he does not accept a ceasefire — but also agreed to see him in Alaska. The talks are set to begin at 11:30 am (1900 GMT) Friday at the Elmendorf Air Force Base, the largest US military installation in Alaska and a Cold War base for surveillance of the former Soviet Union. Adding to the historical significance, the United States bought Alaska in 1867 from Russia — a deal Moscow has cited to show the legitimacy of land swaps. The Kremlin said it expected Putin and Trump to meet alone with interpreters before a working lunch with aides. Neither leader is expected to step off the base into Anchorage, Alaska's largest city, where protesters have put up signs of solidarity with Ukraine. ALSO READ: Ukraine war 'existential,' Kremlin says, launching revenge strikes Exiled Russian opposition figure Yulia Navalnaya — whose husband Alexei Navalny died in prison last year — urged the two leaders to strike a deal to 'release Russian political activists and journalists, Ukrainian civilians, (and) those who were imprisoned for anti-war statements and posts on social media.' A 'personal victory' for Putin? The summit marks a sharp shift from the approach of Western European leaders and Biden, who vowed no discussion with Russia on Ukraine's future unless Ukraine was also at the table. Putin faces an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court, leading him to curtail travel sharply since the war began. However, the United States is not party to the Hague tribunal and Trump's Treasury Department temporarily eased sanctions on top Russian officials to allow them to travel and use bank cards in Alaska. Zelensky said on Tuesday that the Alaska summit was a 'personal victory' for Putin. With the trip, Putin 'is coming out of isolation' and he has 'somehow postponed sanctions,' which Trump had vowed to impose on Russia without progress. ALSO READ: Russia signals severe retaliation after Ukraine's strikes Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also called for security guarantees for Ukraine — an idea downplayed by Trump at the start of his latest term. Daniel Fried, a former US diplomat now at the Atlantic Council, said Trump had the means to pressure Putin but that the Russian could distract him by seeming to offer something new. Putin, Fried said, 'is a master of the new shiny object which turns out to be meaningless.' – By: © Agence France-Presse
