Executive Summary

This report analyses the strategic and security implications of Israel-Iran ongoing conflict for the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), highlighting a significant escalation in regional hostilities.

It examines the shifting geopolitical alignments in the Middle East, including growing solidarity among Muslim-majority states and increasing concern over Western support for Israeli actions. The report also assesses the risks to energy security, maritime stability, and the potential for broader regional conflict.

Key Takeaways

1. The reciprocal high-level strikes between Iran and Israel have pushed the situation from a proxy-based conflict towards direct state-to-state warfare.
2. Regional alignments are shifting—Sunni-Shia divide is blurring under shared threat perception;
3. Energy and maritime domains have become explicit battlegrounds;

Information Background

On June 13, 2025, Israel launched a deliberate and coordinated strike across multiple Iranian provinces, targeting key military, scientific, and energy infrastructure. This marked a significant escalation and signalled a strategic shift in Israeli doctrine, from pre-emptive containment to overt strategic degradation.

Subsequent developments included Israeli airstrikes on critical Iranian energy assets, notably the South Pars gas field, the world’s largest natural gas reserve, jointly operated with neighbouring Qatar. In response, on the fifth day of hostilities, Iran reportedly launched ballistic missiles at Israel, striking the Mossad-affiliated Unit 8200 headquarters in Herzliya. Such actions have directly challenged Israel’s sense of internal security and may reshape its domestic threat perception.

Concurrently, Israeli Ambassador to the United States, Yechiel Leiter, stated that Israel is preparing a “surprise” for Thursday and Friday, operations that, according to him, would make the previous attacks against Lebanon appear “simple” by comparison.

The 48^th extraordinary meeting of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Foreign Ministers condemned the Israeli offensive, characterising it as a blatant violation of the UN Charter and international law. GCC described the breach of Iranian sovereignty as a grave threat to regional stability and further warned of the humanitarian and environmental dangers posed by potential strikes on nuclear facilities. The Council expressed support for the ongoing nuclear negotiations between Iran and the United States, mediated by Oman, and underscored the critical need to secure maritime routes and protect oil infrastructure from escalating threats.

Adding to the complexity, Turkey issued a strongly worded declaration accusing Israel of acting with unlimited support from Western powers. President Erdogan announced plans to significantly increase Turkey’s medium- and long-range missile stockpiles to reach a “deterrent level”.

Geopolitical Scenario

The Saudi Crown Prince’s public support to Iran, unprecedented since the 1979 Revolution, signals a radical shift in Gulf alignment. This is likely temporary and tactical, but it highlights Riyadh’s calculation that Israeli aggression now threatens broader regional stability and their economic vision (Vision 2030).

The kingdom is positioning itself as a regional stabiliser rather than a Western-aligned actor. In a statement, Saudi Arabia described Iran as a brotherly country, while in a phone call with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman declared that the entire Islamic world currently stands united in support of Iran.

Pakistan also voiced strong backing for Iran. Islamabad’s call for Muslim unity reinforces an emerging bloc identity that transcends Sunni-Shia divides. This could lead to ad-hoc multilateralism among Muslim-majority states in international fora, undermining US and Israeli diplomatic efforts.

Saudi Arabia’s alignment with Iran de facto suspends the normalisation track with Israel, already tied to any progress to a credible ceasefire and meaningful steps toward Palestinian statehood, and creates friction with Washington’s Middle East policy. The Trump Administration’s alignment with Israel might erode US credibility as a neutral broker.

Israel launched the attack on Iran just before the final round of talks, aiming to achieve its long-standing objectives: dismantling the revolutionary government, destroying Iran’s nuclear program, and compelling the United States to enter the war.

GCC members are increasingly alarmed by the potential expansion of the conflict across the broader region. Israel’s operations—marked by airstrikes in four Arab League countries and the conduct of what many view as a campaign of ethnic cleansing in Gaza—have raised serious concerns in the Middle East regarding Tel Aviv’s expansionist ambitions and the perceived unconditional backing it receives from Western powers.

Moreover, the Israeli strike on the South Pars gas field has particularly unsettled major oil and gas exporting countries. This action, coupled with Iran’s threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for global oil shipments, has significantly heightened the risk of a major energy market shock.

Meanwhile, Turkey’s increasingly vocal condemnation of Israeli actions in Gaza, though not yet accompanied by substantive measures such as suspending bilateral energy or trade agreements, signals a potential pivot in Ankara’s regional posture. Such developments could strain NATO cohesion, particularly as Brussels appears reluctant to apply international legal standards to strategic allies like Israel.

Turkey’s criticism of Western support for Israel may presage reduced cooperation with NATO on certain intelligence or security matters, especially maritime and eastern Mediterranean surveillance. This weakens alliance cohesion and complicates Western strategic calculations in both the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

As for Muslim-majority US partners, they face a strategic dilemma: comply with Washington’s regional agenda or maintain legitimacy domestically and within the OIC bloc.

Conclusion

Many regional actors view Israel’s foreign policy posture as inconsistent with international law and detrimental to their strategic interests. Targeting a shared Qatari-Iranian field represents a major escalation in the energy domain, threatening global LNG supply chains and heightening the risk of retaliatory sabotage against Gulf energy infrastructure.

Iran’s renewed threats to close the Strait of Hormuz must be treated as plausible, especially if further high-value infrastructure is targeted. A temporary disruption could spike global oil prices and trigger emergency responses from the International Energy Agency (IEA) and NATO navies.

Western, especially US, regional credibility is under significant stress. The West’s unconditional support for Israel has raised serious concerns among regional states, which now fear they could become the next targets of Tel Aviv’s military actions.

The situation demands close monitoring of GCC military postures, Iranian retaliatory capability, Turkish defence production, and US diplomatic-strategic recalibration.