Is Trump Yielding to Netanyahu by Entering the War with Iran?

posted on: Jun 18, 2025

By: Ghassan Rubeiz / Arab America Contributing Writer

In the pretext of responding to an “existential threat”, Israel attacked Iran on June 12. The targets included nuclear infrastructure, military leadership, defense capabilities, and oil and natural gas sites. The initial result is a dramatic tactical advantage for Tel Aviv. However, Iran has so far responded with a significant retaliatory force. On day five of this war, it is too early to draw precise conclusions; more importantly, it is hard to figure out how the US and its Arab allies will react as the hostilities unfold.

Ignoring the shameful historical record of US and Israeli hegemonic intervention in the region, many are already celebrating the US-backed Israeli victory over Iran, a victory following the devastation of Gaza, the neutralization of Hezbollah, and the facilitation of the overthrow of the Assad regime in Syria. Yet many others are sobered by the following assessment from Brookings expert Suzanne Maloney: rapid American victories in Afghanistan and Iraq succumbed to bloody insurgencies and protracted instability. Israel’s early success in Iran today should not blind the world to the risks of overreach and unintended consequences, particularly for a US president determined to extricate Washington from two decades of costly, messy Middle East conflicts. 

In making the choice to enter this war, responding to Israel’s need for additional support, President Donald Trump must respect the opinion of his Arab allies. He may not; he is too weak and seems confused and unable to have a steady course of action.

While Arab states condemned Israel’s recent attack on Iran, they lacked the courage to warn the Jewish state against its rush toward war. More critically, they have failed to challenge Washington’s tacit support of Tel Aviv in escalating the conflict.

The Arab Gulf countries now possess their best opportunity in decades to influence both Israeli and American foreign policy in the Middle East. Several factors distinguish the Gulf states’ unique position in this regional crisis. Two Gulf nations, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain, have recently normalized relations with Israel. All six are major importers of American weapons. Most provide shelter for the US military presence in the region. Saudi Arabia has promised to normalize relations with Israel if Tel Aviv opens a political path for Palestinians. For over two decades, Saudi Arabia has led the 22-member Arab League toward justice-based peace with Israel.

The Arab Gulf states could courageously confront both Washington and Tel Aviv at this pivotal moment in Middle Eastern history. The oil-rich nations should immediately challenge Trump’s diplomatic failures by publicly expressing dismay that President Donald Trump has failed to pressure Israel into giving diplomacy a chance in negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran.

They could have advocated for regional integration by affirming that Iran’s security and integration into the Middle East are integral to the entire region’s security, including Israel’s.

The Gulf states need to acknowledge strategic realities by asserting that, regardless of who bears responsibility for the Israel-Iran conflict, Israel appears unlikely to defeat a strategically located nation of 90 million people with 5,000 years of history occupying territory five times the size of Italy. A ceasefire is urgently needed to avoid unintended, catastrophic consequences. Harvard’s Steven Walt asserts that Israel cannot sustain the role of an aggressive, dominant state in a vast region such as the Middle East. 

These royalties must work to prevent American military intervention by urging Washington to avoid entering the war to support Israel, as it did during the 1967 Six-Day War and the 1973 October War against Arab forces.

They should demand authentic partnership by clarifying to Washington that if America truly cares about Gulf state security, the US must listen to the Arab suffering and political demands. The significance of America’s regional presence is counterproductive if there is a lack of domestic respect for rulers.

The Gulf states need to address the legitimacy crisis by pointing out that by helping Israel continue occupying Arab land while providing diplomatic cover to Tel Aviv, the US exposes Arab Gulf governments to national insecurity, public distrust, and shame. As Thomas Friedman argues, ending the war with Iran cannot be separated from ending the war with the Palestinians. 

They must consider long-term consequences by reminding Washington that as Israel continues expanding its territorial occupation of Arab land, justifying the presence of tens of thousands of US military personnel and America’s largest marine and air defense assets in the Arab Gulf may become increasingly difficult.

The Gulf states should remind Israel that normalization with Tel Aviv is politically costly for Arab rulers. They have to justify their relations with a state that has inflicted tremendous suffering on the Arab and Muslim world, particularly over the past two years.

These nations should warn against victory psychology by cautioning Washington that if Israel believes it has won this war, it will continue avoiding an end to the Gaza conflict while deprioritizing the return of remaining hostages.

They must highlight future instability by reminding Israel that Gaza will soon become a source of permanent anxiety and insecurity for the Jewish state and even the global Jewish diaspora. Adding the damage expected to emerge from the ongoing war with Iran will burden Israel for generations.

It is the moment of truth. The Arab Gulf states stand at a crossroads. They can continue their passive approach, watching the region descend into prolonged conflict while their legitimacy erodes, or they can leverage their unique position to demand accountability from both Washington and Tel Aviv. Their economic influence, strategic partnerships, and regional standing give them unprecedented power to shape Middle Eastern diplomacy.

The choice is clear: Lead now, or watch helplessly as the region burns, taking down their own stability and credibility with it.

About the author: Ghassan Rubeiz is the former Middle East Secretary of the World Council of Churches. Earlier he taught psychology and social work in his country of birth, Lebanon, and later in the United States, where he currently lives. For the past twenty years, he has contributed to political commentary and delivered occasional public talks on subjects related to peace, justice, and interfaith. You can reach him at rubeizg@gmail.com

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Arab America. The reproduction of this article is permissible with proper credit to Arab America and the author.

Want more articles like this? Sign up for our e-newsletter!

Check out our blog here!