I believe that Arab countries should give a strong push to dialogue and openness with Iran.
I believe that Arab countries should give a strong push to dialogue and openness with Iran.
By Mohamed Sabreen, from Cairo / Egypt
The Middle East is once again awakening to the wisdom of American political maestro Henry Kissinger: “To be an enemy of the United States is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal.” Middle Eastern countries must now cope with developments in the international landscape, the harbingers of a shifting and shifting alliance map, and the inability to comprehend Donald Trump’s agenda and his desire to distance his country from hotspots of conflict.
Amid intense negotiations with Iran to reach a settlement, American security officials informed their Israeli counterparts that the gradual withdrawal of American military forces from Syria would begin within two months, according to the Israeli website Ynet.
An American flight from Syria would be bad for Israel and the Kurds. Once again, the limits of Washington’s commitment to its commitments and this administration’s commitment to putting America’s interests first are evident. This is a costly lesson learned by the Gulf states, especially Saudi Arabia.
At the same time, the Middle East is once again demonstrating how economic interests, especially oil, can bring adversaries together. The adage “My enemy’s enemy is my friend” has become a prevailing one in the Middle East. Following this logic, Saudi Arabia and its allies quietly, and sometimes openly, sided with Israel against Iran for a period of time. But this has changed. Caught between two opposing powers, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states have begun hinting at adopting a neutral stance toward Iran. These overt diplomatic moves, sometimes conducted behind the scenes, reflect a lack of trust in US administrations, particularly the Trump administration, and partly due to the inability to influence the crisis between Tehran and Tel Aviv and to exert tangible influence over both Iran and Israel. These moves also partly reflect a fear of being harmed by the ongoing conflict. One of the most prominent outcomes of meetings between Arab and Iranian diplomats over the past period has been a trend toward avoiding direct conflict between Iran and Israel. This trend began several years ago due to fears of the “catastrophic consequences” of a major conflagration in the Middle East. After years of hostility and estrangement, the region is witnessing changes in diplomatic, economic, and military relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, the region’s most prominent, competitive, and conflicting poles. This raises questions about the nature of the “rapprochement” between them and whether it will end the “proxy wars” that have plagued the Middle East for years. The rapprochement, brokered by China, comes amid tense geopolitical circumstances, ahead of the start of a new US administration that has pledged to achieve peace in the region, amid questions about Tehran’s position in the equation. Arab and Gulf experts are discussing the Saudi-Iranian relationship and whether we are witnessing a new phase of relations, or whether the hostility and competition between them will continue. Has the relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran moved from proxy wars to “strategic containment”?
Coexistence Without Illusions
The Arab elite and the two sides in the Washington-Tehran negotiations over the Iranian nuclear issue have no major illusions. I believe that what is unfolding before us is part of a conflict related to Iran’s role in the balance of power in the region, and a more intense conflict related to a major question: Will the West be satisfied with changing the regime’s behavior or overthrowing the Iranian regime? So far, it appears that “understanding with the Tehran regime” is the prevailing approach until further notice, as are the proponents of dialogue within the Iranian ruling establishment. The Arab world, particularly the Gulf states, are closely following the negotiation process, while proponents of confrontation, war, and mistrust are disrupting the negotiations, anticipating any misstep that could turn the tables and ignite a major conflagration.
The second round of talks between the United States and Iran was held in Rome on April 19. The third meeting is scheduled for April 26. It should be emphasized here that there is still no unified position within the US negotiating team regarding the future of the “Iranian nuclear file.” While Witkoff is cautious and even optimistic in some places, Marco Rubio is more inclined to support the force scenario.
According to the Eurasia Review analytical website, Iran still has more cunning negotiators than many of its counterparts, especially since its nuclear program has reached advanced stages.
Iran achieved four important accomplishments through these negotiations:
First, the United States had insisted on holding the talks in the UAE, but Iran succeeded in moving them to Oman.
Second, despite the Americans’ threat to not participate if the talks were not direct, they proceeded indirectly as Iran wanted.
Third, the talks were limited to the Iranian nuclear program alone, without addressing any other issues.
Finally, while the United States had spoken before the talks about completely dismantling the Iranian nuclear program, the talks ended up focusing solely on the weapons aspect of the program, without touching on its substance. The negotiations are fraught with tensions, as many in Tehran view them as part of a concerted campaign by the West and Israel to destabilize the region. The raging war in Gaza, repeated Israeli raids on Syria and Lebanon, and the repositioning of US aircraft carriers in the Gulf have all contributed to a significant escalation in the threat level. Mohammad Marandi, a prominent political analyst, stated, “Iran has been patient in the face of the maximum pressure policy. Now, the Americans have realized that no security system in West Asia can be built without Iran’s participation.
Despite the deep mistrust between Tehran and Washington, the two sides have made a “strategic decision to initiate a diplomatic effort based on a common denominator: avoiding war.”
Some Western writers conclude that “on the surface, this war is a unilateral threat by the United States and Israel against Iran, but it is possible to conclude from US President Donald Trump’s statements that the threat is bidirectional.”
Writer Zvi Barel explains his opinion in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, saying, “Trump, who seeks to disengage his country from global war zones, has begun withdrawing US forces from Syria and has clearly announced his abandonment of mediation efforts in Ukraine.” He adds, “According to the New York Times, Trump has obstructed Israeli plans to strike Iran.”
Based on the above, Barel asserts that Trump is not currently enthusiastic about a new war against Iran. Unlike the Russian-Ukrainian war, the United States is likely to be an active party in a war against Iran, and could suffer losses, according to the writer.
Barel points out that “these bilateral negotiations are unique in that they bring together the Trump administration and the Iranian regime, without inviting the European partners who signed the original nuclear agreement in 2015. China and Russia also did not participate in the negotiations.” Most importantly, “Israel is not even an observer in the talks,” and that it “has to make do with sending Mossad Director David Barnea and Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer to Rome to meet with US envoy Steve Witkoff, in a semi-secret capacity, to try to present its demands.” According to Barel, the author concludes that “these talks are expected to serve as a platform for showcasing Trump’s achievements, while highlighting the key differences between the original nuclear agreement signed by his arch-rival, former President Barack Obama, and the Trump deal, which will pave the way for the grand prize.” But according to the author, Iran also “needs a model to emulate, and will strive to present any agreement as no different in substance or detail from the original agreement, and will receive, as an additional reward, a guarantee of its implementation and adherence to commitments this time from Trump himself, who withdrew from the original agreement.”
Riyadh Online
The region has witnessed numerous diplomatic movements, the most prominent event of the past week being the visit of Defense Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman to Iran. This visit gains great significance from the current circumstances under which it took place, the special message he conveyed from the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques to Supreme Leader Khamenei, and the officials he met, including the President and military leaders.
It is well known that relations between the two countries have begun to gradually recover after the famous Beijing meeting, and the Kingdom, as always, seeks normal relations with all countries, based on mutual respect and cooperation, resolving disputes, defusing crises, and consolidating peace and stability. This visit comes at a time of extreme sensitivity regarding regional security. We have burning issues on multiple fronts, exacerbated by the threatening specter of a crisis between the US and Iran regarding the nuclear issue, and Trump’s threats to possibly use military force if Iran does not comply with his demands. We can only imagine the devastation that could occur in the region and the additional global crisis that would arise if the negotiations fail. Saudi writer Hamoud Abu Talib revealed in Okaz newspaper that “it is not unlikely that the Saudi defense minister’s visit is related to calming the confrontation between Iran and the US, among other objectives. The indirect negotiations have not achieved much so far and require effective action by an expert and capable party to make the mission a success, and no one other than the Kingdom can do that.” He emphasized that the Kingdom is not far from hosting talks on the most important global crisis between Russia, Ukraine, and the US, in what is considered the most significant breakthrough in the crisis since its inception. The Kingdom was not merely a host of the talks, but a partner in them, with the presence of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the National Security Advisor, and under the sponsorship and supervision of the Crown Prince. Just as the Kingdom is a trusted strategic partner of the United States, Iran is well aware that the Kingdom is the best mediator in a crisis like this, and that it is keen to avoid escalation between itself and the United States, out of concern for itself and for regional security. Furthermore, the Kingdom’s experience as a successful mediator in other crises qualifies it to address a potential major crisis.
Hamoud emphasized that the region and the world cannot tolerate further tensions. Political and economic wars have left the world on edge. The world needs, on an unprecedented scale, to use reason and to act on the part of countries committed to security, peace, and stability, such as the Kingdom, which is doing so with integrity and competence.
Saudi Arabia Offers Its Services
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian made a phone call to the Prime Minister and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman on April 4 to congratulate him on Eid al-Fitr. Of course, this was not the first phone call between the two sides, but it is a remarkable call, placed within the context of the political and security changes and developments in the region. This is especially true given that Iran has recently taken clear positions, sending reassuring messages to its neighbors, particularly the Arab Gulf states, as well as to Washington and the new US administration.
According to the official Saudi statement, the call between Pezeshkian and Bin Salman discussed developments in the region and reviewed several issues of mutual interest.
The Iranian statement, however, was more comprehensive, and included an Iranian affirmation that Tehran does not seek to use non-peaceful nuclear energy and that it is prepared to allow full verification of Iranian nuclear activities, “as has happened in all previous years,” the statement stated. The Iranian statement also stated that Tehran is “ready to interact and negotiate to resolve some tensions, based on mutual interests and respect.” It does not seek war with any country, but it will not hesitate to defend itself, as its readiness and capabilities in this regard are at the highest level, according to the statement.
What is striking about the Iranian statement is that it addressed the position of the Saudi Crown Prince, who stated that cooperation between Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other countries in the region can “effectively contribute to strengthening stability and establishing peace, and that Riyadh is ready to play a role in helping resolve any tension or destabilization in the region.”
Non-participation in the conflict
The trend toward non-participation in the conflict has been ongoing for years and has had a significant impact on global financial markets. It reduces the likelihood of a series of tit-for-tat attacks on oil facilities in the region.
How has the oil market digested the Saudi-Iranian rapprochement?
Oil markets have yet to digest the shift in Saudi-Iranian relations, evident in the restoration of diplomatic relations between them last year, mediated by China, in addition to ongoing regional efforts. For Beijing, the largest importer of Saudi and Iranian oil, stability in relations between the two influential countries in the Middle East is crucial. This makes the Middle East in 2024 very different from what it was five years ago. Consequently, oil prices may be less vulnerable than many bulls’ hope.
Among the most important of these diplomatic encounters was the rare visit of Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi to Saudi Arabia on October 9, where he was received by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, along with his Saudi counterpart. Photos published by Saudi media showed a friendly atmosphere between the two sides, conveying a clear message: we may not be friends, but we don’t need to be enemies. Araghchi had previously met with the foreign ministers of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries on October 3, a meeting that Abdulaziz Aluwaisheg, a senior diplomat in the council, described as “potentially marking the beginning of a new phase in relations” between Iran and its Arab neighbors.
This shift reflects two main trends: the first is the détente between Saudi Arabia and Iran that began in mid-2021 and expanded in 2023, and the second is Saudi frustration with the White House and the right-wing Netanyahu government.
During the US-led “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran between 2017 and 2021, Saudi Arabia supported US President Donald Trump and, implicitly, Israel. This changed in 2019 when Saudi Arabia was subjected to a major drone attack on its most important oil facility in Abqaiq by pro-Iranian groups. Trump failed to take retaliatory action against Tehran, disappointing Riyadh.
“Saudi Arabia First”
Since then, Riyadh has reassessed its national security interests. It does not seek friendship with Tehran, but it is no longer interested in supporting the United States and Israel in confronting Iran as it once did. Protecting its oil cash flow is of paramount importance to the Kingdom, so it is working to mitigate the risks that could arise from spending billions of dollars on tourism projects as part of its Vision 2030 program. Indeed, it is the luxury hotels on the Red Sea that attract foreigners to the Kingdom; not the conflicts. This is another part of what I call the “Saudi Arabia First” policy.
The decline in Iranian-backed Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia in recent months has also contributed to the calming of tensions. The Houthi groups have not targeted any Saudi oil facilities, a clear decline from the series of attacks witnessed in previous years (2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022).
Saudi-Iranian Understandings
In light of the current crisis, Iran appears to be seeking two goals from Saudi Arabia. The first is assurances that Saudi territory will not be used to facilitate any Israeli attack. The second is for Riyadh to pressure Washington to persuade Israel to enter into ceasefire talks in Gaza and Lebanon. If Israeli warplanes were barred from flying over Saudi airspace (and also over the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, and Bahrain), they would have to take longer routes through Syria and Iraq (neither of which have air defenses to stop the Israelis), fly over Türkiye (which is highly unlikely, as Ankara would oppose it), or fly in a long arc over the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.
In return, Saudi Arabia wants a promise that it will not be a potential target in any Iranian retaliation against Israel. Until very recently, it was concerned that if Tehran were to suffer a devastating Israeli strike, Tehran might respond by attacking the Kingdom’s oil fields, either directly or using one of its regional proxies.
Although no formal agreements have been revealed, there appears to be a tacit understanding between the two sides. Accordingly, Saudi Arabia is unlikely to open its airspace to Israeli forces, and Iran is unlikely to target Saudi oil facilities.
Ultimately, the Middle East is once again demonstrating how economic interests, especially oil, can bring together former adversaries.
Irreversible
In an exclusive interview with Okaz, Iranian Ambassador to the Kingdom Alireza Enayati stressed that the development and strengthening of relations between Tehran and Riyadh came in response to the directives and determination of the leaders of both countries to continue this fraternal journey between the two peoples and bring them closer together. Ambassador Enayati emphasized that the new path pursued over the past two years to develop and expand communication and interaction between the two countries is irreversible, and that the benefits of deepening and consolidating bilateral relations will not be limited to Iran and the Kingdom alone but will extend to the development of regional cooperation and solidarity among Islamic countries in general.
He said, “Over the past two years, we have taken tangible and deliberate steps to strengthen and consolidate relations, and there is ongoing communication and coordination between leaders and officials. The two countries possess enormous potential and resources and are capable of cooperating in several areas that contribute to achieving growth and prosperity for the entire region.”
The Iranian ambassador expressed his gratitude to the Kingdom’s officials for facilitating the affairs of Iranian pilgrims and Umrah performers and providing them with services. He noted that the number of pilgrims during the last season reached 90,000, while approximately 100,000 Iranians have performed Umrah so far. “We are working to increase this number to meet our citizens’ desire to visit the holy sites.”
A Good Step Surrounded by Doubts
Some view the Saudi-Iranian rapprochement as a “positive step,” even though it is “long overdue.” Saudi military and political expert Mohammed bin Saleh al-Harbi spoke about the course of the negotiations between Tehran and Riyadh, which took place over several months and were hosted by several Arab capitals. The negotiations concluded with Chinese mediation and guarantees. The implementation of the agreement signed in March 2023 is likely to accelerate in the coming period, which is expected to lead to a kind of “strategic rapprochement and containment,” highlighting its importance at this stage the region is experiencing. Al-Harbi stated that after the signing of the agreement, we witnessed its impact even on “Iran’s terrorist arms” in the region, as we saw its “diminishment” through successive events, not to mention that Tehran is in a “very stressed economic situation.”
Lessons from the Saudi-Iranian Rapprochement
Although the Saudi rapprochement with Iran is a positive step, it reveals that developments in the region are “accelerating,” referring to the estrangement that existed between the two countries. In previous periods, when voices were calling for and supporting rapprochement between Riyadh and Tehran, hardliners were declaring that “an understanding with Iran is impossible,” while voices from within Tehran were saying that Riyadh could not be trusted. For his part, political expert Al-Harbi believes that amid the changes taking place in the global order, everyone needs to reevaluate their relations. He points out that there is a Chinese guarantee that Riyadh can rely on to trust Tehran, noting that Beijing is the primary trading partner for both countries.
He believes that Iran now “has no options with the Israeli strikes on its proxies and the collapse of its main arm, Hezbollah, in fatal blows. Therefore, Iran needs to return and become a major player in the region,” especially in light of the anticipation of the new US administration.
Al-Harbi emphasized that everyone in the region is “anticipating the situation,” and that so far, Iran is committed to all the terms of the agreement with Saudi Arabia.
Normalization with Israel
Political expert Al-Harbi asserts that Saudi Arabia has emphasized in its statements at all levels that there will be no normalization with Israel from the “two-state solution” countries.
He pointed out that Saudi Arabia and its leadership have become “pivotal” in the region and the world, with the Crown Prince leading the Kingdom toward “sustainable development.”
He said that Riyadh is exerting considerable international pressure to de-escalate the situation in the region, noting a state of anticipation for the next US administration.
Al-Harbi believes that Iran, in the current circumstances, may also be “prepared to stop its wars,” as they have only achieved “destruction.”
The “Waiting Game”
Ali Nourizadeh believes that “the Iranian regime has benefited greatly from the reconciliation with Saudi Arabia, while the war in Yemen continues, and the Houthis continue their activities in the region, not to mention Tehran’s failure to make any concessions in Lebanon or Gaza.” He believes that this is what makes Riyadh so far “distrustful of Iran’s intentions,” which may prompt it to remain alert for “more time” to confirm this. Zadeh, director of the Center for Arab-Iranian Studies in London, stated that Saudi-Iranian relations were “distinguished” at certain points, but the situation has changed. Therefore, Saudi Arabia wants to “wait” to ensure that what is on paper in the agreement becomes a reality.
He emphasized that the Lebanese issue may be the first area where Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states are waiting for progress from the Iranian side, with Tehran’s withdrawal from the scene there. He noted that before Iranian interference, “Lebanon was a country of freedom and tourism, and now it is one of the poorest countries.”
Conversely, Zadeh emphasized that Saudi Arabia could pressure the UAE regarding the issue of the “Iranian islands,” referring to the Greater and Lesser Tunbs, and Abu Musa, emphasizing that they have “been Iranian islands since time immemorial.”
The American Position on the Rapprochement
Political analyst Nabil Mikhail, who resides in Washington, said that the United States is “committed to defending the Gulf region,” and that any attack on the region represents an attack on American interests.
He added that various American administrations are committed to defending the region, albeit with “different approaches.” Michael pointed out that there are two currents in Washington regarding the stance toward Iran: those who want to deal firmly with it and impose “maximum sanctions,” and those who want to appease it to push it toward cooperation, calm, and resolution of some regional conflicts.
He believes that Saudi-Iranian cooperation will continue and will not affect US-Gulf relations, noting that the USA administration “may conclude major arms deals” with these countries.
He asserts that what worries Washington about this rapprochement is that it was mediated by China, which may prompt Washington to send warning messages about Chinese economic policies that could sink the region’s economies.
Israel’s Worst Nightmare
Channel 12 reported that one of Israel’s worst nightmares may come true at the hands of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and US President Donald Trump.
Channel 12 reported that “in just one-week, Saudi Arabia has condemned the State of Israel at least five times and sharply criticized the government’s policies—no longer using the delicate diplomatic language it used in the past to get things done.”
Riyadh wants to enrich uranium
He pointed out that “the latest condemnation came in the wake of the Israeli attack on the Baptist Hospital in Gaza City. The Saudi Foreign Ministry said in a statement that the Kingdom strongly condemns the heinous crime committed by the Israeli occupation forces by bombing the Baptist Hospital in the Gaza Strip, and strongly opposes this attack, which constitutes a flagrant violation of all international and moral laws.”
According to Channel 12, “it is extremely difficult to understand the gap between the harsh tone taken by Saudi Arabia, under the leadership of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, towards Israel, and the same bin Salman who spoke less than two years ago about the largest historic agreement since the end of the Cold War regarding the normalization of relations with Israel.”
A Saudi-US Agreement Without Israel
Channel 12 noted that Israel has repeatedly tried to downplay the significant shift in Saudi Arabia’s statements and policy toward it, explaining that these positions have become entrenched in Arab public opinion in light of the war in Gaza. However, since Donald Trump entered the White House, the kingdom has begun to emphasize, not just in private, that the demand for a Palestinian state, or at least a “clear path to its establishment,” is a fundamental demand, and that King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman will not give up on it.
The channel added: “The truth is that anyone who follows Mohammed bin Salman and his statements before and after his rise to power understands well that the Palestinian issue is not at the top of his list of priorities. Therefore, his statements raise questions. One statement this week succeeds in shedding light on the negotiations that Saudi Arabia is conducting with the United States, on a track separate from Israel, and also provides answers to the change in its position toward Tel Aviv.” This week, US Energy Secretary Chris Wright stated that the Trump administration is in talks with the Saudis to reach an agreement that would give the kingdom access to American nuclear technology and may even allow it to enrich uranium itself on its own soil. He said, “We haven’t reached the details of the agreement yet, but it certainly seems there is a way to achieve it. Are there solutions that include enrichment here in Saudi Arabia? Yes.”
According to the Hebrew channel, “The American statement, which did not receive much reaction in Israel, caused shock in the Arab Gulf states, which fear that Iran will no longer be the only nuclear state in the region.”
Previously, the administration of former President Joe Biden linked every deal with Saudi Arabia—whether a nuclear program for energy purposes or a defense alliance with the United States—to a normalization agreement with Israel. It noted that “the Biden administration made it clear to the kingdom that it would not allow enrichment on its soil or in the Middle East in general, so as not to harm Israel’s security interests. This condition became clear to the Saudis after a massive diplomatic effort led by the previous government, headed by Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid, against the previous US administration.” Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid quickly tweeted following the US Energy Secretary’s statement, urging Netanyahu to demand that his government demand that the United States not allow the Saudis to enrich uranium.
The concern within the Israeli security establishment is that any such move against Saudi Arabia could harm Israel. Once Washington allows any Islamic country to enrich uranium in the region, Israel will immediately lose its argument against Iran, and Tehran will use the Saudi precedent as a pretext to continue developing its nuclear program. They explain that the Islamic Republic will claim that it will act in accordance with US standards against neighboring Saudi Arabia.
Israel fears that the necessary linkage of any Saudi-US agreement to an agreement with Israel is no longer a necessary condition, and the Prime Minister’s Office continues to ignore this dramatic development.
The Hebrew channel noted that “the revelation published by the New York Times this week that Trump prevented an Israeli attack on Iran reinforces the new Saudi approach. Riyadh is aware that the Trump administration is now refraining from any military action—by the United States or Israel—against Iran. This effectively eliminates, to some extent, the need for normalization with Israel, the same normalization that Netanyahu has been promoting for years as a strategic necessity for coordination between Israel and the Gulf states against the Iranian enemy, especially with regard to military action.”
Saudi Arabia is preparing to receive US President Trump’s first foreign visit next month, when he will travel to Riyadh for some business.
The channel said: “Perhaps the $600 billion that Bin Salman promised to invest in America will convince Trump to agree to the dream deal that will bring stability and security to the Kingdom. According to the impression created by the Saudis, this deal will not pass through Israel, at the present time, and certainly not while the war in Gaza continues.” She added, “While Trump and Bin Salman are working on drafting agreements that could change the face of the Middle East, Tel Aviv is busy with negotiations of a different kind, which have yet to mature into a deal, even partially, to return prisoners in Gaza. It has become clear that time in the United States and the Arab world does not run according to the clock of Israel, headed by Netanyahu.”
Rapprochement with Iran is inevitable
What remains certain here is that war has not yet broken out, and that the beginning of negotiations has not begun as announced in Muscat recently. Rather, Tehran began communicating with the Trump team two years ago with the knowledge of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, as revealed by Mohammad Mehdi Shahriari, a member of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee.
In contrast, the New York Times revealed that Trump rejected a proposed Israeli military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities during a tense meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The Times reported that he told Netanyahu, “We do not support military action, and we are at the negotiating table.”
The other clear issue is the negotiation, primarily regarding uranium enrichment, which is one of the most controversial issues.
Tehran has indicated its willingness to return to the upper limit agreed upon in the agreement with Obama, but only on the condition that economic sanctions be lifted in return. One of its main demands is the unfreezing of Iran’s massive foreign assets, estimated at more than $100 billion.
Amid these successive developments, many countries in the region are unaware of Trump’s plans for negotiations with Iran. The assessment in the Gulf is that these negotiations may be unpredictable and short-lived.
I believe that Arab countries should give a strong push to dialogue and openness with Iran and should themselves conclude a “coexistence deal” with Tehran, given the improving atmosphere between the two sides, support the Iranian trend of openness, and allay the fears of some in Tehran.
However, good neighborliness has a price, and it is a two-way street, and the time has come to embark on it quickly.