On November 11, 2024, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, commonly known as MBS, delivered a stark warning to Israel during a significant summit of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation held in Riyadh. This warning, aimed at deterring Israel from launching attacks against Iran, underscored the complexities of regional geopolitics. MBS urged the international community to compel Israel to “respect the sovereignty of the sisterly Islamic Republic of Iran and not to violate its lands.” The message was clear—Saudi Arabia would not remain a passive observer in the face of escalating tensions involving Iran, especially when the stability of the region hung in the balance.

MBS’s remarks reflect an intricate interplay of regional alliances and rivalries. To fully comprehend the magnitude of this warning, it is essential to delve into the underlying motivations, implications, and broader context of this diplomatic move. Mehran Kamrava, a professor of government at Georgetown University Qatar, described the development as “certainly interesting.” This sentiment, though understated, captures the shifting sands of Middle Eastern diplomacy. It is indicative of Saudi Arabia’s evolving stance in a region where historic enmities and emerging partnerships converge, often in unpredictable ways. Kamrava offered a nuanced perspective, suggesting that MBS’s actions may be an attempt to curb an escalation that could engulf the entire region.

Event / Theme	Details
Summit of Arab League and OIC	Held on November 11, 2024, in Riyadh. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) issued a warning to Israel to respect Iran’s sovereignty, aiming to deter Israeli aggression toward Iran. MBS emphasized Saudi Arabia’s proactive stance on regional stability.
MBS’s Diplomatic Warning to Israel	MBS called on the international community to pressure Israel to refrain from attacking Iran, stating that Saudi Arabia would not remain passive. His statement highlighted Saudi Arabia’s intent to maintain regional stability and avoid unnecessary escalations.
Expert Commentary by Mehran Kamrava	Described MBS’s warning as “certainly interesting” and noted Saudi Arabia’s attempt to control potential escalations that could destabilize the Middle East. Kamrava sees MBS’s stance as a diplomatic maneuver to prevent the spread of conflict.
Regional Shifts in Alliances	Saudi Arabia is recalibrating its foreign policy under MBS, balancing traditional alliances (like the US) with evolving regional dynamics, particularly those involving Iran and Israel.
US Foreign Policy Impact	The previous Trump administration emboldened Israel with anti-Iran policies. The perceived US support encouraged Israel’s aggressive posture toward Iran, raising regional tensions. MBS’s warning indirectly communicates Saudi displeasure with this aggressive stance.
Saudi-Iran Diplomatic Thaw	In recent years, Saudi Arabia and Iran have shown signs of cooperation, exemplified by joint naval drills in October 2024 and high-level diplomatic engagements, including a call between MBS and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian prior to the summit.
Joint Military Exercises	Saudi Arabia and Iran conducted joint naval drills in the Sea of Oman, signaling growing cooperation between the historically rival nations. This engagement suggests a shared interest in maritime security and stable trade routes, benefiting both nations economically.
Arab Street & Public Sentiment	MBS’s support for Iranian sovereignty aligns with the broader Arab public’s views. His stance bolsters Saudi legitimacy in the Arab world by addressing popular opposition to Israel’s actions, especially given Iran’s reputation as a staunch opponent of Israel since 1973.
Implications for US Relations	MBS’s message reflects Saudi Arabia’s interest in asserting its foreign policy independently of US influence, particularly under the Biden administration’s more measured approach toward Iran. This shift demonstrates a departure from total alignment with US policies.
Regional Stability and Vision 2030	Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030, which seeks to diversify the economy and reduce reliance on oil, is contingent on a stable Middle East. MBS’s approach reflects a desire to maintain peace, ensuring favorable conditions for trade, investment, and economic growth.
Historical Saudi-Iran Rivalry	Saudi-Iran tensions stem from sectarian divisions and competing regional influence since the 1979 Iranian Revolution. Over the years, conflicts in Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen intensified their rivalry, though recent diplomatic moves suggest an interest in cooperation.
US Influence on Saudi-Iran Relations	Traditionally, Saudi Arabia aligned with US policies, particularly against Iran. The recent rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran, facilitated by China, indicates a shift toward regional autonomy.
Israel’s Ambitions and Saudi Response	Israel’s aggressive stance towards Iran, supported by past US policies, and its containment efforts in the region prompted MBS’s warning. Saudi Arabia maintains a cautious position on normalization with Israel, contingent on progress on Palestinian issues.
China’s Role as Mediator	China’s mediation between Saudi Arabia and Iran exemplifies a growing trend where external powers facilitate regional diplomacy. China’s neutral stance contrasts with the US’s historical partisanship, reshaping the Middle East’s geopolitical landscape.
Future of Saudi-Iran Relations	While historical animosities remain, Saudi Arabia and Iran are moving towards rapprochement driven by economic and regional stability considerations. Continued cooperation and dialogue are seen as steps toward a sustainable Middle Eastern security paradigm.

Background Context

In the dimmed hall of Riyadh’s palatial summit room, a ripple of tension had already settled across the crowd before Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman even began to speak. Representatives from nearly every Arab and Islamic nation were present, each aware that the gathering would address issues far weightier than routine diplomatic protocol. But no one expected the declaration that would follow.

As MBS took the podium, his demeanor was composed, yet there was an unmistakable undercurrent of resolve. With careful precision, he delivered a warning directed unmistakably at Israel. He called on Israel to “respect the sovereignty of the sisterly Islamic Republic of Iran and not to violate its lands.” The words hung in the air, seemingly defying decades of Saudi foreign policy rooted in tacit opposition to Iran’s influence in the region. Yet here was MBS, speaking not of rivalry but of respect, issuing a stark warning that Israel’s actions would not be tolerated if they jeopardized the delicate fabric of regional stability.

This pronouncement was more than a diplomatic stance. It was a signal to the world that Saudi Arabia would no longer remain passive in the face of escalating regional tensions. For seasoned analysts, MBS’s words hinted at a strategic recalibration—a move that suggested Saudi Arabia might be stepping out from the shadow of U.S.-aligned policy and forging a path aligned with its own regional interests. In a single statement, MBS had invoked the complex history and shifting dynamics of Middle Eastern geopolitics, signaling to Israel, Iran, and the world that Saudi Arabia was ready to play a more active role in regional stability.

The ripples of MBS’s statement extended far beyond the summit room. Diplomatic circles buzzed with speculation. Was this a warning to Israel, a signal of solidarity with Iran, or a calculated maneuver aimed at reshaping Saudi Arabia’s alliances? In Washington, Tel Aviv, and Tehran, intelligence agencies pored over the statement, searching for hidden messages and potential shifts in Saudi foreign policy.

For years, Saudi Arabia had been a staunch U.S. ally, aligning itself with American interests and, by extension, supporting Israel’s security ambitions in the region. The Trump administration had particularly reinforced this alignment, fostering an anti-Iran coalition that emboldened Israel’s containment efforts. Yet MBS’s recent warning seemed to challenge this alignment, suggesting that Saudi Arabia’s priorities were evolving. This shift hinted at a redefined foreign policy—one that could reshape the alliances and rivalries that had long defined the Middle East.

But beneath the surface, Saudi Arabia’s strategy was driven by a more pragmatic ambition: Vision 2030. This economic plan, championed by MBS, sought to transform the Saudi economy, reducing its reliance on oil and fostering sectors like tourism, technology, and entertainment. For Vision 2030 to succeed, stability was paramount. The last thing Saudi Arabia needed was a regional war, especially one that might disrupt vital oil routes or deter foreign investors. To MBS, stability wasn’t just a foreign policy goal; it was an economic imperative.

Behind closed doors, Saudi diplomats worked tirelessly to navigate this precarious balance. While Saudi Arabia had paused its official normalization talks with Israel following the Israel-Hamas conflict in October 2023, informal communications continued. Some speculated that Saudi Arabia was using these pauses strategically, leveraging Palestinian statehood as a bargaining chip to satisfy regional allies and appeal to popular sentiment across the Arab world. To the public, MBS’s warning seemed like a nod to regional solidarity with Iran, but to those in intelligence circles, it hinted at a complex balancing act, where Saudi Arabia was simultaneously positioning itself as a defender of the Islamic world and as a stabilizing power willing to mediate between traditional adversaries.

Behind these overt moves, intelligence agencies were deeply engaged. Israeli Mossad and Saudi Arabia’s General Intelligence Presidency had maintained quiet backchannels, despite public tensions. Intelligence sharing focused primarily on countering Iranian cyber threats, which both countries viewed as a pressing concern. Israel’s Mossad had cultivated a sophisticated network capable of identifying and preempting Iranian cyber operations, while Saudi intelligence had increasingly relied on Israeli expertise in cybersecurity. Together, they worked to counter Iranian influence across cyberspace, a hidden layer of cooperation that underscored the complexity of their relationship.

Even as Saudi Arabia pursued this covert cooperation, it engaged Iran in unprecedented military exercises. The joint naval drills conducted in the Sea of Oman were a clear signal that Saudi Arabia was prepared to engage Iran on shared security interests. For both nations, ensuring safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz was essential, as this vital maritime route carried the bulk of their oil exports. Yet these exercises were not merely about securing trade; they were a rare opportunity for both Saudi and Iranian militaries to observe each other’s capabilities, assessing strengths and vulnerabilities in a controlled setting. This strategic transparency was a gamble, but one that underscored Saudi Arabia’s commitment to a more balanced approach, where diplomacy could coexist with defense readiness.

Key Players and Alliances

At the heart of this geopolitical framework are the three central players: Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Israel, each with distinct but overlapping regional goals. Their relationships are influenced by external powers such as the United States, China, and Russia and by influential regional organizations like the Arab League and Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Let’s examine each of these entities in the context of this situation.

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia, under the leadership of MBS, is navigating a complex web of alliances and rivalries:

• Vision 2030: The ambitious economic plan aims to diversify Saudi Arabia’s economy beyond oil, creating a need for a stable regional environment.
• Strategic Positioning: Saudi Arabia seeks to act as a mediator in the region, balancing its relationships with both the West (primarily the U.S.) and its regional neighbors, including former adversary Iran.
• Alliance with the U.S.: Traditionally, Saudi Arabia has been a close U.S. ally, relying on American support for security. However, MBS’s recent actions suggest a more autonomous foreign policy, with a focus on regional stability over alignment with U.S. or Israeli interests.

Iran

Iran’s role is defined by its regional ambitions and ideological leadership:

• Regional Influence: Iran has established itself as a regional power, exerting influence in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Iraq through both diplomatic and military means.
• Conflict with Israel: Iran’s stance against Israel, especially in supporting groups like Hezbollah and Hamas, positions it as a counterbalance to Israel in the region.
• Rapprochement with Saudi Arabia: The recent warming of relations with Saudi Arabia, symbolized by the joint military exercises in the Sea of Oman, indicates a shift in Iran’s approach, potentially aiming for a cooperative balance rather than confrontation.

Israel

Israel’s priorities are heavily security-focused, particularly regarding Iran:

• Containment of Iran: Israel has long viewed Iran as an existential threat due to its nuclear ambitions and support for anti-Israel factions. Israel has frequently carried out covert operations targeting Iranian interests.
• Regional Partnerships: Israel has strengthened ties with some Arab states through the Abraham Accords, fostering a network of allies. However, Saudi Arabia has remained hesitant about fully normalizing relations with Israel.
• Alignment with U.S. Policy: Israel’s foreign policy has traditionally been closely aligned with U.S. interests, especially under administrations with a hardline stance on Iran.

Influential Global Powers

These regional dynamics are further shaped by the involvement of the United States, China, and Russia.

United States

The U.S. has historically played a leading role in Middle Eastern affairs, with mixed approaches:

• Trump vs. Biden Policies: The Trump administration’s hardline anti-Iran stance aligned closely with Israeli interests, while the Biden administration has taken a more moderate approach, attempting to balance the region without escalating conflicts.
• U.S.-Saudi Relations: While the U.S. remains a key ally of Saudi Arabia, MBS’s recent moves indicate a willingness to diverge from U.S. policy when it suits Saudi interests.
• Support for Israel: The U.S. has been a steadfast ally of Israel, providing substantial military aid and diplomatic backing, which influences the regional power dynamics.

China

China’s emerging role in the Middle East presents a new dimension to the Saudi-Iran rapprochement:

• Mediator Role: China’s brokered deal to re-establish Saudi-Iran diplomatic relations in 2023 exemplifies its strategic engagement in the region.
• Economic Interests: China’s economic dependence on Middle Eastern oil and desire for stable trade routes aligns with its investment in diplomatic solutions rather than conflict escalation.
• Geopolitical Influence: China’s involvement challenges the U.S.’s traditional role, promoting an alternative, non-aligned path for Middle Eastern nations.

Russia

Russia’s interests in the Middle East align with its broader geopolitical ambitions:

• Syrian Influence: Russia has been heavily involved in Syria, supporting the Assad regime alongside Iran, which strengthens its ties with Iran and creates an indirect alignment with Saudi interests in stabilizing Syria.
• Diplomatic Leverage: Russia seeks to increase its diplomatic clout in the Middle East, leveraging its relationships with Iran and Saudi Arabia to establish itself as a critical player in regional affairs.

Regional and International Organizations

Organizations like the Arab League and OIC provide Saudi Arabia with platforms to influence regional opinion and shape its diplomatic image:

• Arab League: The Arab League summit in Riyadh where MBS delivered his warning demonstrates Saudi Arabia’s use of the organization to consolidate Arab opinion and assert a unified stance against Israeli aggression towards Iran.
• Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC): As the leader of the OIC, Saudi Arabia can rally support among Muslim nations, enhancing its legitimacy and positioning against Israel while highlighting shared concerns about regional stability.

Connections and Conflicts of Interest

This intricate web of alliances and rivalries reveals both points of cooperation and tension. Saudi Arabia’s approach represents an attempt to balance these connections:

• Saudi-Iranian Collaboration: Despite historical enmity, Saudi Arabia and Iran have found common ground in recent years, both desiring stability and less dependence on external powers.
• Saudi-Israeli Tensions: While Saudi Arabia has shown interest in a strategic alignment with Israel through conditional normalization talks, MBS’s recent warning demonstrates a willingness to oppose Israeli aggression when it threatens broader regional stability.
• China-U.S. Influence Tug-of-War: The Middle East has become a stage for Sino-American competition. China’s mediation role between Saudi Arabia and Iran contrasts with the U.S.’s unwavering support for Israel, signaling a shift towards multipolarity in regional politics.

Hidden Agendas and Covert Diplomatic Tactics

With the geopolitical framework set, our goal now is to unearth motivations and strategies beyond public statements and diplomatic summits. This deeper analysis will focus on intelligence, covert operations, and strategic backchannels that may influence Saudi Arabia’s relations with Israel, Iran, and other regional powers.

Intelligence Operations and Security Backchannels

Intelligence and security agencies often play a critical role in managing tensions and fostering covert alliances, even when diplomatic relations appear tense. Here’s how covert operations and intelligence sharing may be shaping this intricate geopolitical web:

• Israel-Saudi Arabia Covert Cooperation:
  • Despite the official pause on normalization, Israeli and Saudi intelligence agencies (notably Mossad and GIP, Saudi Arabia’s General Intelligence Presidency) have reportedly maintained covert communications channels.
  • Cybersecurity and Anti-Iran Intelligence Sharing: Israeli intelligence, well-regarded in cybersecurity, may be discreetly supporting Saudi Arabia in countering Iranian cyber threats, sharing intelligence on Iran’s activities in Syria, Yemen, and other proxy zones.
  • Targeted Information Leaks: Intelligence sharing likely includes controlled leaks intended to signal or counter specific narratives, allowing both Israel and Saudi Arabia to align on security matters without formal diplomatic acknowledgment.
• Iran-Saudi Arabia Surveillance and Intelligence Assessment:
  • The joint naval drills in the Sea of Oman allowed both Saudi and Iranian militaries to gain intelligence insights into each other’s operational capabilities, potentially serving as a strategic means to monitor each other’s defenses.
  • Mutual Counter-Terrorism: While officially adversaries, there is speculation that Saudi Arabia and Iran may share limited intelligence on extremist threats that destabilize both nations, especially concerning ISIS or al-Qaeda factions operating in shared zones of influence.
• U.S. and External Intelligence Involvement:
  • U.S. and Israeli Cooperation: The U.S. and Israel’s intelligence communities maintain close ties, particularly in countering Iranian influence. U.S. intelligence may indirectly share updates with Saudi Arabia through diplomatic channels.
  • Russian Intelligence in Syria: Russia’s intelligence presence in Syria has significant implications, with Moscow potentially serving as a quiet intermediary between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Russian intelligence may mediate information exchanges to prevent direct confrontation between Iranian-backed militias and Saudi interests.

Economic and Strategic Motivations

Beyond military intelligence, economic drivers heavily influence Saudi Arabia’s strategic actions. The drive for regional stability is deeply connected to MBS’s Vision 2030 plan, a transformative economic agenda aiming to diversify the Saudi economy. Here are the core economic motivations underpinning Saudi Arabia’s regional diplomacy:

• Vision 2030 and Regional Stability:
  • Investment-Friendly Environment: A stable Middle East is essential for Saudi Arabia to attract foreign investment in sectors like technology, tourism, and renewable energy. Escalating conflicts, especially between regional heavyweights like Israel and Iran, threaten to derail these ambitions.
  • Diversification Imperatives: MBS understands that conflict and political instability jeopardize the tourism and economic partnerships critical to Vision 2030’s success. Saudi Arabia’s outreach to Iran and cautious approach to Israel reflect an economic imperative to reduce volatility and ensure a predictable business climate.
• Oil Market Stability and Energy Politics:
  • Maintaining Oil Flow and Pricing Stability: Saudi Arabia’s economy remains heavily dependent on oil, and disruptions caused by military conflicts near strategic waterways like the Strait of Hormuz or the Red Sea could severely impact oil flow and prices.
  • Chinese and Russian Influence on Energy Security: With China as a significant energy consumer, Saudi Arabia’s diplomatic alignment with Beijing on security matters aims to safeguard energy exports, thus providing the kingdom with leverage in negotiations with Western allies.

Recent Diplomatic Moves and Under-the-Radar Dialogues

Several high-level engagements, largely unpublicized, add depth to the complex Saudi-Iran-Israel triangulation. Here are some diplomatic strategies and behind-the-scenes interactions shaping this narrative:

• Saudi-Iranian Diplomatic Engagements:
  • High-Level Communications: Reports indicate that MBS and Iranian President Pezeshkian held a private conversation a day before the Riyadh summit, likely addressing mutual concerns about Israel’s increasing military posture.
  • Defense Coordination and Military Exercises: Saudi Arabia’s military drills with Iran are both symbolic and strategic, suggesting a temporary de-escalation to counter potential threats from other state actors, such as Israel, without direct confrontation.
• Saudi-Israeli Conditional Diplomacy:
  • Normalization Talks Paused, Not Terminated: While Saudi Arabia paused its public normalization talks with Israel after the Israel-Hamas war, diplomatic insiders suggest that conditional engagement remains active, with Saudi Arabia using Palestinian statehood as a condition for re-engagement. This tactic is a nod to popular Arab sentiment and a potential counterbalance to Iranian influence in pro-Palestinian circles.
  • Backchannel Messaging through Third Parties: Saudi Arabia is believed to communicate indirectly with Israel via the U.S. and possibly Jordan, maintaining a channel for dialogue without public acknowledgment.
• China as a Mediator and Influencer:
  • China’s Role in Saudi-Iran Rapprochement: By brokering the 2023 Saudi-Iran diplomatic agreement, China positioned itself as a neutral power capable of reducing tensions. Beijing’s influence promotes a non-confrontational framework, aiming to secure energy supply routes critical for its Belt and Road Initiative.
  • Alternative Diplomatic Pathway: China’s involvement provides Saudi Arabia with a diplomatic alternative to the U.S., signaling Riyadh’s potential pivot toward a more multipolar foreign policy.

Covert Operations and Speculative Theories

Speculative theories based on recent intelligence activity and geopolitical behaviors shed light on possible covert actions that are shaping this situation in unseen ways.

• Cyber Espionage and Intelligence Warfare:
  • Saudi and Israeli Cyber Cooperation: Though officially distant, Saudi and Israeli cyber units may be collaborating to track Iranian cyber threats, such as infrastructure-targeted cyberattacks. Intelligence sharing in this area could be a sign of unpublicized cooperation based on mutual security interests.
  • Iran’s Cyber Offensive Capabilities: Iran has been known to use cyber espionage against Israel and Saudi Arabia, targeting critical infrastructure as a form of asymmetrical warfare. Both Saudi Arabia and Israel might share countermeasures, with support from international cybersecurity firms and the U.S.
• Influence Operations via Media and Public Sentiment:
  • Influence on the “Arab Street”: Saudi Arabia’s strategic rhetoric regarding Palestinian statehood is partly aimed at winning favor across the Arab world. This tactic serves to offset Iran’s influence among pro-Palestinian factions and bolster Saudi legitimacy within the OIC and Arab League.
  • Controlled Media Leaks: Both Saudi Arabia and Israel may release carefully timed information through media channels, influencing public opinion on issues like Iran’s nuclear activities or Saudi-Israeli relations.
• Proxy Conflicts and Hidden Military Movements:
  • Yemen and Proxy Battles: Saudi Arabia’s ongoing involvement in Yemen is linked to Iran’s backing of Houthi rebels, which could be a covert means of pressuring Saudi interests. Saudi Arabia might use third-party militias to counter Houthi advancements without direct military escalation.
  • Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Influence: Saudi Arabia might leverage its position in the GCC to build a coalition against Iranian influence, using covert funding and support for anti-Iranian groups in Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon.

The Strategic Context Behind MBS’s Warning

The regional context is pivotal in understanding the broader implications of the Saudi Crown Prince’s statement. In recent years, the Middle East has witnessed a transformation of alliances, characterized by both rapprochement and conflict. Under the leadership of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia has sought to recalibrate its foreign policy, striking a delicate balance between its traditional partnerships and the evolving dynamics within the region. The warning to Israel was more than a mere diplomatic statement—it was a signal to multiple stakeholders, including the United States, Iran, and Israel itself.

One significant factor that may have motivated MBS’s warning is the foreign policy shift in the United States under the administration of former President Donald Trump. During his tenure, Trump appointed a number of anti-Iran politicians to key foreign policy positions. This emboldened Israel, which viewed the Trump administration’s support as a green light for a more aggressive stance towards Iran. Israel’s increasing readiness to take unilateral action against Iranian targets, coupled with its perception of unwavering U.S. backing, has heightened the risk of a broader regional confrontation. According to Professor Kamrava, Saudi Arabia’s warning is an attempt to signal displeasure and disapproval of any potential expansion of the conflict, which could threaten the fragile stability of the region.

MBS’s cautionary message also served to establish a platform for de-escalation. By explicitly advocating for respect for Iranian sovereignty, Saudi Arabia provided Tehran with an opportunity to diplomatically “back out” of the ongoing tensions with Israel. This maneuver highlights Saudi Arabia’s pragmatic approach to conflict resolution—acknowledging Iran’s role in the region while avoiding direct confrontation. In this sense, MBS’s comments were not merely about opposing Israel’s actions; they were also aimed at facilitating a face-saving exit for Iran, thereby reducing the chances of a prolonged conflict.

The Complexities of NATO’s Military Infrastructure Expansion in Poland, Romania and Slovakia

A Shift in Saudi-Iran Relations

The relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran has long been marked by rivalry, primarily fueled by sectarian differences and competing geopolitical ambitions. However, recent developments suggest a shift towards a more cooperative dynamic. In October 2024, Saudi Arabia and Iran conducted joint naval drills in the Sea of Oman—a significant gesture given the historical animosities between the two nations. The joint exercises symbolized a thaw in relations, suggesting a willingness on both sides to explore avenues for cooperation in areas of mutual interest. This newfound cooperation is further evidenced by the communication between MBS and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, who spoke on the phone a day before the Riyadh summit. Their conversation, occurring at such a critical juncture, signaled a coordinated approach to managing regional tensions.

Iran, Russia, and Oman conducted joint naval exercises in the Indian Ocean.

Saudi Arabia, India, Thailand, Pakistan, Qatar, and Bangladesh also participated. pic.twitter.com/OMDPLg9Qu3

— Globe Eye News (@GlobeEyeNews) October 21, 2024

Additionally, on November 10, Saudi Arabia’s top military official visited Tehran to meet with his Iranian counterparts. Such high-level military engagements are significant, as they indicate a strategic dialogue aimed at fostering mutual understanding and potentially aligning their security interests. These diplomatic and military exchanges reflect a broader regional realignment, one in which Saudi Arabia and Iran appear to be exploring a detente to collectively address shared challenges, including regional instability, security threats, and economic concerns.

MBS’s public warning to Israel must be viewed in the context of these broader developments. By taking a stand in favor of Iranian sovereignty, Saudi Arabia is signaling its intent to play a more balanced role in the region—one that is not solely defined by rivalry with Tehran but also by a pragmatic recognition of shared interests. Professor Kamrava emphasized the importance of these signals, describing them as “important” and “significant.” The evolving Saudi-Iranian relationship has the potential to reshape the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East, particularly if both nations continue to engage in dialogue and cooperation.

The Arab Street and the Question of Legitimacy

Another critical aspect of MBS’s warning to Israel is its resonance with the so-called “Arab street.” Iran’s recent actions have bolstered its popularity across parts of the Arab world, particularly due to its stance against Israel. Since the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, Iran has positioned itself as a staunch opponent of Israeli policies, a stance that has earned it considerable support among those who view Israel as an aggressor. By calling for respect for Iranian sovereignty, MBS was, in effect, aligning Saudi Arabia with a sentiment that is widely held across the Arab world. This alignment is not without political calculations—Saudi Arabia, as the custodian of Islam’s holiest sites, has a vested interest in maintaining its legitimacy and influence within the broader Islamic community.

MBS’s statement can thus be seen as an effort to bolster Saudi Arabia’s standing in the region by demonstrating solidarity with Iran against a common adversary. This is particularly important given the shifts in public perception across the Middle East. Iran’s actions have been framed as a defense of the Palestinian cause, a deeply emotive issue that resonates with many in the Arab world. By voicing support for Iran’s sovereignty, Saudi Arabia is not only seeking to prevent an escalation of conflict but also attempting to position itself as a champion of broader Arab and Islamic interests. This strategic positioning is aimed at enhancing Saudi Arabia’s influence in the region, particularly at a time when its traditional alliances are being reevaluated.

The Broader Message to Washington

The warning issued by MBS to Israel also carries implications for Saudi Arabia’s relationship with the United States. Under the Biden administration, U.S. policy in the Middle East has been characterized by a shift away from the aggressive posturing that defined the Trump era. However, uncertainty remains regarding Washington’s long-term strategy in the region, particularly in relation to Iran. Saudi Arabia’s warning to Israel can be interpreted as part of a broader regional signal being sent to Washington—a signal that reflects the desire of Middle Eastern nations to have greater agency in determining the course of regional events, rather than being subject to the shifting priorities of external powers.

By taking a public stance against potential Israeli aggression towards Iran, Saudi Arabia is asserting its role as a key regional player that is capable of influencing outcomes independently of U.S. preferences. This is a significant departure from past practices, where Saudi Arabia often aligned its regional policies closely with those of the United States. The message to Washington is clear: Saudi Arabia is prepared to pursue a foreign policy that is guided by its own national interests, even if that means diverging from the path traditionally charted by its Western ally.

This development is indicative of a broader trend in the Middle East, where regional powers are increasingly asserting their independence and seeking to shape the geopolitical landscape according to their own interests. Saudi Arabia’s engagement with Iran, its warning to Israel, and its nuanced positioning vis-à-vis the United States all point to a more assertive Saudi foreign policy—one that seeks to balance relationships, reduce regional tensions, and maintain stability in a highly volatile environment.

The Implications for Regional Stability

The implications of MBS’s warning to Israel are far-reaching, particularly with regard to regional stability. The Middle East has long been a theater of competing interests, proxy conflicts, and shifting alliances. The potential for a direct confrontation between Israel and Iran represents one of the most significant threats to stability in the region. Such a conflict would not only involve these two nations but could also draw in other regional and global powers, leading to a wider and more destructive confrontation.

By advocating for respect for Iranian sovereignty, Saudi Arabia is positioning itself as a mediator that is committed to preventing such an escalation. This is consistent with MBS’s broader vision for the region, which emphasizes economic development, stability, and the reduction of conflicts that have historically impeded progress. The Saudi Crown Prince’s ambitious Vision 2030 plan, which aims to diversify the Saudi economy and reduce its dependence on oil, requires a stable regional environment. Any major conflict involving Iran and Israel would jeopardize these goals, as it would likely lead to disruptions in trade, energy supplies, and foreign investment—all of which are crucial for the success of Vision 2030.

Saudi Arabia’s efforts to de-escalate tensions are also reflective of a broader recognition that the era of zero-sum rivalries is increasingly untenable in a globalized world. The economic interdependencies that characterize the modern Middle East necessitate a more cooperative approach to regional challenges. By taking a stand in favor of dialogue and respect for sovereignty, MBS is advocating for a new paradigm in Middle Eastern relations—one that prioritizes diplomacy over confrontation and seeks to build a foundation for sustainable peace and prosperity.

Middle East necessitate a more cooperative approach to regional challenges. By taking a stand in favor of dialogue and respect for sovereignty, MBS is advocating for a new paradigm in Middle Eastern relations—one that prioritizes diplomacy over confrontation and seeks to build a foundation for sustainable peace and prosperity.

The Historical Rivalry Between Saudi Arabia and Iran

To fully understand the gravity of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s warning to Israel, it is essential to examine the historical rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran. The roots of this rivalry can be traced back to a combination of geopolitical ambitions, sectarian divisions, and the quest for regional dominance. Saudi Arabia, a Sunni-majority kingdom and the cradle of Islam, has long positioned itself as the leader of the Sunni Muslim world. Iran, on the other hand, is a Shiite-majority republic with aspirations of regional influence, which has often put it at odds with the Saudi kingdom.

The rivalry intensified following the 1979 Iranian Revolution, which saw the overthrow of the Pahlavi monarchy and the establishment of an Islamic Republic under Ayatollah Khomeini. The revolution not only transformed Iran’s political landscape but also posed a direct challenge to the monarchies of the Gulf, particularly Saudi Arabia. The revolutionary ideology espoused by Iran sought to export its version of political Islam across the region, which threatened the legitimacy of the Saudi monarchy. This ideological competition became a cornerstone of the Saudi-Iranian rivalry, with both nations seeking to expand their influence through alliances, proxy conflicts, and the support of opposing factions in regional disputes.

The Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) further deepened the animosity between Saudi Arabia and Iran. During the conflict, Saudi Arabia, along with other Gulf states, provided significant financial support to Iraq under Saddam Hussein in an effort to counter the perceived threat from Iran. The war, which lasted for eight years and resulted in a devastating loss of life and resources, left a legacy of distrust and hostility between Saudi Arabia and Iran that persists to this day.

In the decades that followed, the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran played out across multiple theaters of conflict, including Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Bahrain. In Lebanon, Saudi Arabia supported the Sunni-led government and its allies, while Iran backed the Shiite militant group Hezbollah. In Syria, the Saudi government provided support to rebel groups seeking to overthrow the regime of Bashar al-Assad, a key ally of Iran. In Yemen, the Saudi-led coalition has been engaged in a protracted conflict against the Houthi rebels, who are believed to receive backing from Iran. These proxy conflicts have further entrenched the divisions between Saudi Arabia and Iran, contributing to the instability and violence that have plagued the region for decades.

Despite this history of rivalry and confrontation, recent developments indicate a potential shift towards rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran. The joint naval drills in the Sea of Oman, the high-level diplomatic engagements, and the public warning to Israel are all signs of a willingness on both sides to explore avenues for cooperation. This shift is driven by a recognition that the ongoing conflicts and rivalries are unsustainable and that regional stability is in the best interest of both nations.

The Role of the United States in Shaping Saudi-Iran Relations

The United States has played a significant role in shaping the dynamics of Saudi-Iran relations. For decades, the U.S. has been a key ally of Saudi Arabia, providing military support, security guarantees, and economic partnerships. The U.S. has also been a vocal critic of Iran, particularly following the 1979 revolution and the subsequent hostage crisis at the U.S. embassy in Tehran. The U.S. policy of containment towards Iran has been a major factor in the regional rivalry, with Saudi Arabia often aligning its foreign policy with that of Washington.

The relationship between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia was particularly close during the Trump administration, which adopted a hardline stance against Iran. The Trump administration’s decision to withdraw from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, and the subsequent imposition of harsh economic sanctions on Iran were actions that received strong support from Saudi Arabia. The so-called “maximum pressure” campaign was aimed at curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions and limiting its influence in the region. This policy emboldened Saudi Arabia and Israel, both of whom viewed Iran as a major threat to regional security.

However, the change in administration in the United States has brought about a shift in U.S. policy towards the Middle East. The Biden administration has signaled a desire to return to the negotiating table with Iran and revive the JCPOA, a move that has been met with mixed reactions in the region. While Saudi Arabia has expressed concerns about the potential lifting of sanctions on Iran, it has also recognized the need to adapt to the changing geopolitical landscape. The recent engagements between Saudi Arabia and Iran can be seen as part of a broader strategy to reduce tensions and prepare for a potential rapprochement between Iran and the United States.

The warning to Israel issued by MBS must also be understood in the context of the evolving U.S.-Saudi relationship. By taking a stand in favor of Iranian sovereignty, Saudi Arabia is signaling to Washington that it is willing to pursue an independent foreign policy that prioritizes regional stability over confrontation. This shift is indicative of a broader trend in the Middle East, where regional powers are increasingly seeking to assert their independence and reduce their reliance on external actors. Saudi Arabia’s engagement with Iran and its warning to Israel are part of a broader strategy to position itself as a key player in shaping the future of the region.

Israel’s Regional Ambitions and the Saudi Response

Israel’s regional ambitions have been a major factor in the ongoing tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Under the leadership of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel has pursued a policy of containing Iran’s influence in the region, often through military means. Israeli airstrikes against Iranian targets in Syria, as well as covert operations targeting Iran’s nuclear program, have been a source of significant tension. Israel views Iran as an existential threat, particularly given its support for militant groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which are committed to the destruction of the Israeli state.

The Abraham Accords, brokered by the Trump administration, marked a significant shift in the regional dynamics by normalizing relations between Israel and several Arab states, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco. The accords were hailed as a breakthrough in Middle Eastern diplomacy, as they brought Israel closer to its Arab neighbors and created a new axis of cooperation against Iran. However, Saudi Arabia, while supportive of the accords, has not yet normalized relations with Israel, citing the need for progress on the Palestinian issue as a precondition for any formal diplomatic ties.

The warning issued by MBS to Israel can be seen as a response to Israel’s increasingly aggressive posture towards Iran. By calling on the international community to ensure that Israel respects Iranian sovereignty, Saudi Arabia is seeking to prevent a further escalation of the conflict that could have disastrous consequences for the region. The warning is also a signal to Israel that its actions will not go unchecked and that Saudi Arabia is prepared to take a stand in defense of regional stability.

Saudi Arabia’s position is further complicated by the shifting dynamics within the Arab world. While some Arab states have moved towards normalization with Israel, public opinion across the region remains largely opposed to such moves, particularly in the absence of a resolution to the Palestinian issue. By voicing support for Iranian sovereignty, MBS is also aligning himself with the broader sentiment of the Arab street, which views Israel’s actions with suspicion and distrust. This alignment is crucial for maintaining Saudi Arabia’s legitimacy as a leader of the Islamic world and for bolstering its influence within the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

The Economic Imperatives of Regional Stability

The economic imperatives of regional stability are a major factor driving Saudi Arabia’s recent diplomatic engagements. The Vision 2030 plan, spearheaded by MBS, is an ambitious initiative aimed at transforming the Saudi economy by reducing its dependence on oil, diversifying its economic base, and promoting sectors such as tourism, entertainment, and technology. Achieving the goals outlined in Vision 2030 requires a stable regional environment that is conducive to foreign investment, trade, and economic cooperation.

The ongoing conflicts in the Middle East, including the war in Yemen, the Syrian civil war, and the tensions between Israel and Iran, pose significant challenges to Saudi Arabia’s economic ambitions. The threat of a major regional conflict involving Iran and Israel could lead to disruptions in energy supplies, increased security costs, and a decline in investor confidence—all of which would have a detrimental impact on the Saudi economy. By advocating for de-escalation and respect for sovereignty, MBS is seeking to create the conditions necessary for the successful implementation of Vision 2030.

The recent joint naval drills between Saudi Arabia and Iran in the Sea of Oman are also indicative of a desire to promote regional security and stability. Maritime security is of critical importance to both nations, given their reliance on the Strait of Hormuz for the export of oil and gas. Any conflict in the region that threatens the security of maritime routes would have severe economic consequences, not only for Saudi Arabia and Iran but for the global economy as a whole. By engaging in joint military exercises, Saudi Arabia and Iran are demonstrating a commitment to cooperation in areas of mutual interest, which is a positive step towards reducing tensions and ensuring the security of vital maritime corridors.

The Path Forward: Diplomacy and Dialogue

The path forward for Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the broader Middle East lies in diplomacy and dialogue. The warning issued by MBS to Israel is a call for a new approach to regional relations—one that prioritizes diplomacy over confrontation and seeks to build a foundation for sustainable peace and prosperity. The recent engagements between Saudi Arabia and Iran are a testament to the potential for dialogue to overcome historical animosities and create a more stable and cooperative regional order.

The challenges facing the Middle East are complex and multifaceted, ranging from sectarian divisions and geopolitical rivalries to economic challenges and social unrest. Addressing these challenges requires a comprehensive approach that involves all regional stakeholders and prioritizes the well-being of the people of the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, under the leadership of MBS, is taking steps towards such an approach by engaging with Iran, advocating for de-escalation, and promoting a vision of regional stability that is aligned with its national interests.

The international community also has a role to play in supporting these efforts. The United States, as a key ally of Saudi Arabia and a major player in the region, must recognize the importance of supporting regional initiatives aimed at reducing tensions and promoting dialogue. The revival of the Iran nuclear deal, if pursued in a manner that addresses the concerns of regional actors, could be a positive step towards reducing the threat of conflict and creating a framework for constructive engagement.

The warning issued by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to Israel on November 11, 2024, represents a significant moment in Middle Eastern geopolitics. It reflects Saudi Arabia’s evolving approach to regional diplomacy—an approach characterized by pragmatism, a desire for stability, and a willingness to engage with traditional rivals in the interest of broader regional peace. The message to Israel, Iran, and the international community is clear: Saudi Arabia will not stand idly by in the face of actions that threaten regional stability. Instead, it will actively seek to shape outcomes in a manner that aligns with its national interests and the aspirations of the broader Arab and Islamic world.

As Saudi Arabia continues to navigate the complexities of regional politics, its actions will be closely watched by allies and adversaries alike. The joint naval drills with Iran, the high-level diplomatic engagements, and the public warning to Israel all signal a new phase in Saudi foreign policy—one that is more assertive, independent, and focused on fostering a stable and prosperous Middle East. The implications of this shift are profound, not only for Saudi Arabia and Iran but for the entire region and the global community at large.

The path forward will not be without challenges, but the recent developments offer a glimmer of hope for a more stable and cooperative Middle East. By prioritizing diplomacy, dialogue, and respect for sovereignty, Saudi Arabia is taking steps towards a new paradigm in regional relations—one that has the potential to create a lasting foundation for peace, prosperity, and mutual respect among the nations of the Middle East.

Global Implications and the Emerging Multipolar Middle East

As the dust settled after MBS’s statement, the ripple effects extended far beyond the Arab League and OIC summit halls in Riyadh. The shifting dynamics within Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy framework signaled a potential transformation in the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East—one that could reshape alliances, recalibrate power structures, and redefine how regional and global powers interact.

For decades, the Middle East had been a region marked by polarized alliances. The U.S. maintained a dominant presence, shaping the course of events through military interventions, economic sanctions, and alliances with key regional players such as Saudi Arabia and Israel. The primary goal had been to counterbalance Iran’s influence, particularly after the 1979 Iranian Revolution, which had established Tehran as a formidable opponent to American interests. But Saudi Arabia’s recent diplomatic overtures to Iran, combined with its conditional stance on normalization with Israel, revealed a shift in priorities that defied traditional expectations. This shift hinted at the emergence of a more complex, multipolar Middle Eastern order.

Saudi Arabia’s Evolving Relationship with the United States

For U.S. policymakers, MBS’s approach posed a dilemma. Saudi Arabia had long been a cornerstone of American influence in the Middle East, providing the U.S. with a foothold in the region and helping to secure energy supplies through mutually beneficial economic ties. However, MBS’s recent warning to Israel and his engagement with Iran indicated a willingness to diverge from Washington’s strategies when they conflicted with Saudi Arabia’s interests. The message to the U.S. was clear: Saudi Arabia would not follow blindly but would instead pursue an independent path aligned with its national priorities.

In Washington, this development triggered a reassessment of American influence in the region. The Biden administration, which had already signaled a pivot toward Asia, now faced the reality that its once-unquestioned hold over Middle Eastern allies was waning. Saudi Arabia’s growing closeness with China—both as a mediator and a strategic partner—compounded these concerns. China’s role in brokering the Saudi-Iran rapprochement exemplified Beijing’s ability to shape regional outcomes without resorting to military might, contrasting sharply with America’s historically interventionist approach.

For the U.S., the implications of Saudi Arabia’s shift extended beyond the Middle East. In a world increasingly defined by great-power competition, the risk of losing influence over a key ally to a rival power like China signaled a potential reordering of alliances on a global scale. The U.S. found itself grappling with the challenge of maintaining influence in a region where its traditional partners were beginning to explore alternative alignments.

China’s Growing Influence and Strategic Investments

As Saudi Arabia’s relationship with the U.S. evolved, China emerged as a powerful new actor, one that promised stability through economic cooperation and non-interference. Beijing’s interests in the Middle East were primarily economic; as the world’s largest importer of oil, China depended on the region’s energy resources to fuel its industrial growth. To safeguard these supplies, China had invested heavily in diplomatic efforts aimed at promoting regional peace. Its successful mediation of Saudi-Iran relations was a testament to its rising clout, demonstrating that Beijing could achieve through diplomacy what other powers had failed to accomplish through force.

Saudi Arabia’s pivot toward China reflected a pragmatic calculation. By aligning with Beijing, Riyadh could diversify its economic and diplomatic partnerships, reducing its dependency on the U.S. while fostering a new relationship that complemented its Vision 2030 goals. China, for its part, viewed Saudi Arabia as a critical partner in its Belt and Road Initiative, a global infrastructure project that relied on stable trade routes and access to energy resources.

In Riyadh and Beijing, analysts recognized that this alignment had the potential to redefine the Middle East as a multipolar arena. No longer tethered exclusively to American interests, Saudi Arabia could now navigate between multiple alliances, each offering distinct benefits. The result was a more flexible, balanced foreign policy that allowed Saudi Arabia to engage with Iran, cooperate with Israel on security issues, and partner with China on economic projects—all without fully committing to any single bloc.

Russia’s Strategic Position and Regional Ambitions

Russia, too, saw an opportunity in Saudi Arabia’s evolving stance. Having maintained a strong military presence in Syria and established itself as an ally of the Assad regime, Russia held considerable influence in the Levant and beyond. Moscow’s goals in the region aligned closely with Tehran’s, as both sought to counter U.S. influence and support the regimes and factions aligned with their interests. For Saudi Arabia, this relationship with Russia opened up an additional avenue for strategic balancing.

Though Saudi Arabia and Russia held divergent views on certain regional conflicts, including Syria, their shared interests in energy markets provided common ground. Both countries were key players in OPEC+, an alliance of oil-producing nations that regulated output to stabilize global oil prices. By cooperating with Russia in OPEC+ and engaging with it on issues related to Syria, Saudi Arabia could exert influence within the energy sector while maintaining a diplomatic buffer against Iran’s regional ambitions.

Russia’s presence in the Middle East thus provided Saudi Arabia with an indirect means of managing its relations with Iran. By aligning with Russia on energy and security, Riyadh could establish a backchannel to Tehran, mediated by Moscow. This arrangement allowed Saudi Arabia to maintain diplomatic contact with Iran without formalizing a contentious relationship, reinforcing its broader strategy of pragmatic engagement.

The Future of Regional Alliances and the New Middle Eastern Order

With these shifting dynamics, the contours of a new Middle Eastern order began to emerge. Saudi Arabia’s willingness to engage both Iran and Israel signaled a departure from the zero-sum politics that had long characterized the region. Rather than positioning itself as a rival to either nation, Saudi Arabia was carving out a role as a stabilizing force, one that prioritized diplomatic engagement and economic cooperation over conflict.

This approach reflected a growing recognition that regional stability was essential for economic prosperity—a priority underscored by Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030. For MBS, ensuring stability meant fostering an environment where foreign investment could thrive, trade routes remained secure, and energy markets remained predictable. By embracing a multipolar framework, Saudi Arabia could hedge its bets, working with whichever partners best served its interests at any given time.

This evolving multipolarity presented both opportunities and challenges for the Middle East. On one hand, it allowed countries like Saudi Arabia to pursue independent paths, reducing their dependency on traditional power structures. On the other, it introduced new uncertainties, as nations navigated alliances that were increasingly fluid and dynamic. In a region where allegiances could shift overnight, the risk of miscalculation loomed large.

For Israel, the new order posed a distinct challenge. With Saudi Arabia engaging Iran diplomatically and signaling its own priorities, Israel found itself navigating a Middle East less aligned with its own security imperatives. While covert security cooperation with Saudi Arabia persisted, Israel’s reliance on unconditional U.S. support was increasingly at odds with the multipolar currents shaping the region. To secure its interests, Israel would need to adapt to a landscape where alliances were transactional, requiring new strategies that took into account Saudi Arabia’s independent course.

Saudi-Iranian Joint Military Exercises in the Sea of Oman: A Deep Analysis

In a remarkable turn of events that underscores the shifting geopolitical dynamics of the Middle East, Saudi Arabia and Iran recently conducted joint military exercises in the Sea of Oman. The Saudi defense ministry spokesman, Brigadier General Turki al-Malki, confirmed the conclusion of these exercises in a statement to AFP, highlighting the participation of other countries as well. This development is particularly significant given the historical rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran, two regional powerhouses that have often found themselves on opposing sides in various conflicts across the region.

Iran announces first joint military exercises with Saudi Arabia in the Red Sea

Follow us on Odysee: https://t.co/gMbz1a2E5x pic.twitter.com/Z22ul03meg

— RT (@RT_com) October 26, 2024

Historical Context: From Rivalry to Rapprochement

The joint military exercises between Saudi Arabia and Iran represent a remarkable thaw in relations between two nations that have long been at odds. The rivalry between Saudi Arabia, a Sunni-majority kingdom, and Iran, a Shiite-majority republic, has been a defining feature of Middle Eastern geopolitics for decades. The two countries have backed opposing sides in conflicts in Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, and elsewhere, and their rivalry has often been characterized by proxy wars, sectarian tensions, and competing visions for regional leadership.

Diplomatic ties between Saudi Arabia and Iran were severed in 2016 following the execution of a prominent Shiite cleric in Saudi Arabia and the subsequent storming of the Saudi embassy in Tehran by protesters. This event marked a low point in Saudi-Iranian relations, and the two countries remained estranged for several years. However, in a surprising turn of events, Saudi Arabia and Iran resumed diplomatic relations in 2023 under a China-brokered deal. This rapprochement was seen as a major diplomatic breakthrough and a testament to the changing dynamics of the region, where external powers like China are increasingly playing a role in mediating conflicts and fostering dialogue.

The resumption of diplomatic ties between Saudi Arabia and Iran has paved the way for increased cooperation in various fields, including military engagements. The joint naval exercises in the Sea of Oman are a clear indication of the willingness of both countries to engage in confidence-building measures and to work together on issues of mutual interest, such as maritime security. These exercises come at a time when the region is facing multiple security challenges, including the threat of piracy, terrorism, and the need to ensure the safe passage of oil and gas shipments through vital maritime routes.

The Significance of the Joint Military Exercises

The joint military exercises between Saudi Arabia and Iran in the Sea of Oman are significant for several reasons. Firstly, they represent a major step towards building trust between two countries that have historically viewed each other with deep suspicion. Military exercises are among the most sensitive forms of international cooperation, as they require a high level of trust and coordination. The fact that Saudi Arabia and Iran were willing to engage in such exercises indicates a significant shift in their relationship and a desire to move towards a more cooperative regional security framework.

Secondly, the exercises highlight the role of external powers, particularly China, in facilitating dialogue and cooperation between Saudi Arabia and Iran. The China-brokered deal that led to the resumption of diplomatic ties between the two countries has opened the door to further cooperation, and the joint military exercises can be seen as a direct outcome of this renewed engagement. China’s growing influence in the Middle East is reshaping the region’s geopolitical landscape, and its role in mediating between Saudi Arabia and Iran is a testament to its rising status as a key player in global affairs.

The exercises also come at a time when both Saudi Arabia and Iran are facing significant domestic and regional challenges. Saudi Arabia is in the midst of implementing its Vision 2030 plan, which aims to diversify the economy and reduce its dependence on oil. Achieving the goals of Vision 2030 requires a stable regional environment, and improved relations with Iran are seen as a key component of ensuring regional stability. For Iran, the lifting of economic sanctions and the need to rebuild its economy have created an incentive to seek better relations with its neighbors, including Saudi Arabia.

The Role of the Sea of Oman in Regional Security

The Sea of Oman is a strategically important body of water that connects the Persian Gulf with the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean. It is a vital maritime route for the transportation of oil and gas, and ensuring the security of this region is of paramount importance to both Saudi Arabia and Iran, as well as to the broader international community. The joint naval exercises in the Sea of Oman are a reflection of the shared interest of Saudi Arabia and Iran in maintaining the security of this critical maritime corridor.

Maritime security in the Sea of Oman has been a major concern in recent years, particularly in light of incidents involving attacks on oil tankers and the threat of piracy. The joint exercises are aimed at enhancing the capabilities of both countries to respond to such threats and to ensure the safe passage of commercial vessels. By working together in the Sea of Oman, Saudi Arabia and Iran are sending a message to the international community that they are committed to ensuring the stability of this vital region and that they are willing to put aside their differences in the interest of regional security.

The Red Sea and the Broader Implications for Regional Stability

In addition to the exercises in the Sea of Oman, there have been reports of plans for joint military drills in the Red Sea. The Red Sea is another strategically important body of water that is crucial for global trade, as it connects the Mediterranean Sea with the Indian Ocean via the Suez Canal. The security of the Red Sea is of particular importance to Saudi Arabia, as it is home to major ports and is a key route for the export of oil and other goods.

The Red Sea has also been a theater of conflict in recent years, particularly due to the ongoing war in Yemen. The Iran-backed Houthi rebels have waged a campaign of attacks against ships in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, which they claim is a show of solidarity with the Palestinians during Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza. These attacks have posed a significant threat to maritime security in the region and have highlighted the need for greater cooperation among regional powers to address the security challenges in the Red Sea.

The reported plans for joint exercises in the Red Sea between Saudi Arabia and Iran are a positive development, as they indicate a willingness on both sides to work together to address common security challenges. However, the Saudi defense ministry spokesman, Brigadier General Turki al-Malki, stated that no other exercises are being addressed during this period, which suggests that discussions on joint drills in the Red Sea may still be in the preliminary stages. Nevertheless, the possibility of joint exercises in the Red Sea is a reflection of the broader trend towards increased cooperation between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which could have far-reaching implications for regional stability.

The Impact of Regional Conflicts on Saudi-Iran Relations

The ongoing conflicts in the Middle East have had a significant impact on Saudi-Iran relations, and the recent joint military exercises must be viewed in the context of these conflicts. The war in Yemen, in particular, has been a major point of contention between Saudi Arabia and Iran. The Houthis, who are backed by Iran, have been fighting a Saudi-led coalition since 2015, and the conflict has resulted in a humanitarian crisis that has claimed thousands of lives and displaced millions of people.

Saudi Arabia’s involvement in the war in Yemen has been driven by its desire to prevent Iran from gaining a foothold on its southern border. The conflict has been costly for Saudi Arabia, both in terms of financial resources and human lives, and there is a growing recognition in Riyadh that a resolution to the conflict is necessary for the stability of the region. The recent rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran has raised hopes that a political solution to the conflict in Yemen may be possible, and the joint military exercises can be seen as part of a broader effort to reduce tensions and create the conditions for a negotiated settlement.

The situation in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden is also closely linked to the broader conflict between Israel and Iran. The Houthis have claimed that their attacks on ships in the Red Sea are a show of solidarity with the Palestinians during Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza. This linkage between the conflict in Yemen and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict highlights the complex web of alliances and rivalries that characterize the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, which has been trying to extricate itself from the war in Yemen, is also seeking to balance its relations with Iran and its desire for normalization with Israel.

The China Factor: A New Mediator in the Middle East

The role of China in facilitating the rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran is a significant development that has implications for the broader geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. The China-brokered deal that led to the resumption of diplomatic ties between Saudi Arabia and Iran is a testament to China’s growing influence in the region. Unlike the United States, which has traditionally been seen as a partisan actor in the Middle East, China has positioned itself as a neutral mediator that is capable of bringing rival parties to the negotiating table.

China’s involvement in the Middle East is driven by its economic interests, particularly its reliance on energy imports from the region. The stability of the Middle East is crucial for China’s energy security, and Beijing has a vested interest in promoting dialogue and reducing tensions between regional powers. The joint military exercises between Saudi Arabia and Iran can be seen as part of China’s broader strategy to promote regional stability and ensure the security of vital maritime routes that are critical for global trade.

The involvement of China in mediating between Saudi Arabia and Iran also reflects a broader shift in the international order, where emerging powers are playing an increasingly prominent role in global affairs. The United States, which has traditionally been the dominant external power in the Middle East, is facing challenges to its influence from countries like China and Russia. The recent military exercises in the Sea of Oman, which also involved Russia and Oman, are indicative of the changing dynamics in the region, where multiple external powers are vying for influence and seeking to shape the future of the Middle East.

The Future of Saudi-Iran Relations: Opportunities and Challenges

The recent joint military exercises between Saudi Arabia and Iran are a positive step towards reducing tensions and building trust between the two regional rivals. However, the path towards a lasting rapprochement is fraught with challenges. The historical animosities between Saudi Arabia and Iran, as well as their competing visions for regional leadership, will not be easily overcome. The ongoing conflicts in Yemen, Syria, and Lebanon, as well as the broader rivalry between Israel and Iran, continue to pose significant obstacles to improved relations between Riyadh and Tehran.

One of the key challenges facing Saudi Arabia and Iran is the need to address the underlying causes of their rivalry, including sectarian tensions and geopolitical competition. The recent rapprochement has been driven by pragmatic considerations, such as the need for regional stability and economic development, but a lasting resolution to the rivalry will require a deeper reconciliation that addresses the ideological and political differences between the two countries.

The role of external powers, particularly the United States and China, will also be crucial in shaping the future of Saudi-Iran relations. The United States has traditionally been a close ally of Saudi Arabia and has been deeply involved in the region’s security architecture. However, the changing dynamics of U.S. foreign policy, including the pivot towards Asia and the desire to reduce its military footprint in the Middle East, have created an opportunity for other powers, such as China, to play a more prominent role in the region. The involvement of China in mediating between Saudi Arabia and Iran is a reflection of this broader shift, and the future of Saudi-Iran relations will be influenced by the evolving balance of power between the United States, China, and other external actors.

The joint military exercises between Saudi Arabia and Iran in the Sea of Oman represent a significant development in Middle Eastern geopolitics. They reflect a willingness on both sides to engage in confidence-building measures and to work together on issues of mutual interest, despite their historical rivalry. The exercises are a testament to the changing dynamics of the region, where external powers like China are playing an increasingly important role in facilitating dialogue and promoting stability.

The path towards a lasting rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran will not be without challenges, but the recent developments offer a glimmer of hope for a more stable and cooperative Middle East. By prioritizing diplomacy, dialogue, and respect for sovereignty, Saudi Arabia and Iran are taking steps towards a new paradigm in regional relations—one that has the potential to create a lasting foundation for peace, prosperity, and mutual respect among the nations of the Middle East.

The implications of these joint military exercises are far-reaching, not only for Saudi Arabia and Iran but for the entire region and the broader international community. The involvement of external powers, the ongoing regional conflicts, and the shifting balance of power all play a role in shaping the future of Saudi-Iran relations. As the Middle East continues to navigate the complexities of regional politics, the actions of Saudi Arabia and Iran will be closely watched by allies and adversaries alike, and their willingness to engage in dialogue and cooperation will be key to ensuring a stable and prosperous future for the region.

---

APPENDIX – Intelligence and Economic Motivations

As Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince delivered his statement, he knew he was treading a fine line between aligning with long-held Arab solidarity and managing Saudi Arabia’s nuanced position as a regional power. In a world where every word was scrutinized, MBS’s calculated warning was more than just rhetoric—it was a move shaped by Saudi Arabia’s economic priorities and the shifting allegiances around it.

Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030, the brainchild of MBS, was the driving force behind much of the kingdom’s foreign policy recalibration. This ambitious economic transformation plan was meant to steer Saudi Arabia away from its dependency on oil, promoting new industries such as tourism, technology, and renewable energy. The stakes were high: a single destabilizing event in the Middle East, particularly one that risked oil flow through the Persian Gulf, could jeopardize the entire project. For MBS, regional stability was not a mere preference but an economic imperative. It was the foundation upon which he planned to build a diversified and globally integrated Saudi economy.

This necessity for stability created an intricate balancing act in Saudi Arabia’s foreign relations. While the kingdom traditionally aligned itself with U.S. interests, recent years had seen a cautious shift as Saudi Arabia pursued a more autonomous stance, gradually decoupling its strategies from those of its Western allies. This growing independence was evident in MBS’s openness to engage with Iran, even as U.S.-Iran relations remained fraught. Yet, despite these gestures toward rapprochement, the specter of Israel loomed over the region, complicating Saudi Arabia’s efforts to both embrace Iran and maintain ties with other regional allies.

This delicate dance was made all the more complex by the influence of China. In March 2023, China had brokered the landmark agreement that reestablished diplomatic ties between Saudi Arabia and Iran after a seven-year freeze. With this move, Beijing had inserted itself as a new, powerful mediator in Middle Eastern affairs. China’s interests were primarily economic—it was one of the largest consumers of Middle Eastern oil, and any instability in the region directly affected its own energy security. For Saudi Arabia, China’s involvement offered a valuable opportunity to hedge its alliances. No longer was Riyadh solely dependent on U.S. support; with Beijing’s backing, it could pursue a broader, multipolar foreign policy that allowed it to navigate both regional and global pressures.

China’s influence extended beyond diplomacy; it was also subtly reshaping Saudi Arabia’s approach to security. Through its Belt and Road Initiative, China had invested billions in infrastructure projects across the Middle East, including in Saudi Arabia. This economic footprint gave Beijing a vested interest in maintaining regional peace, aligning it with Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 goals. As a result, Saudi Arabia had begun to look toward China as a stabilizing force, even as it maintained close ties with the U.S. and engaged diplomatically with Iran. This complex interplay of alliances signaled a strategic pivot, with Saudi Arabia positioning itself as a bridge between East and West.

While the diplomatic scene evolved on the surface, covert intelligence operations continued to shape the undercurrents of Middle Eastern politics. Intelligence agencies on all sides were operating in overdrive. Saudi Arabia’s General Intelligence Presidency (GIP) had for years coordinated with Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, despite the absence of formal diplomatic ties. Their collaboration focused primarily on Iran, a shared rival whose expanding influence posed a common threat. Through clandestine backchannels, the two agencies shared intelligence on Iran’s nuclear activities, cyber capabilities, and regional military maneuvers. For both nations, this covert alliance was essential—an unspoken understanding that transcended public posturing.

Cybersecurity was a particularly critical area of collaboration. Iran had made substantial investments in its cyber warfare capabilities, often targeting infrastructure in both Saudi Arabia and Israel. These attacks included attempts to disrupt financial systems, energy grids, and governmental databases. For Saudi Arabia, which was investing heavily in technology as part of Vision 2030, the threat of cyber intrusion was significant. Israeli expertise in cybersecurity, renowned globally, was therefore a valuable asset. By partnering with Mossad, Saudi Arabia gained access to advanced cyber defense mechanisms, allowing it to counter Iranian cyber incursions with greater efficacy. In return, Saudi Arabia provided Israel with intelligence gathered from its proximity to Iran, creating a mutually beneficial, if unofficial, alliance that strengthened both nations’ defenses against a common adversary.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia’s diplomatic interactions with Iran added another layer of complexity. Following China’s mediation, Saudi Arabia and Iran had engaged in joint naval exercises in the Sea of Oman in October 2024. These exercises were symbolic, representing a tentative rapprochement, but they also served practical purposes. The maneuvers allowed both nations to gain insights into each other’s naval capabilities, evaluating strengths and vulnerabilities in a controlled setting. For Saudi Arabia, these exercises were a strategic means of observing Iran’s tactics up close, providing valuable information that could prove useful in the event of future conflict.

This dual approach—working diplomatically with Iran while coordinating covertly with Israel—illustrated the extent to which Saudi Arabia was willing to navigate conflicting alliances to secure its interests. MBS’s public warning to Israel was thus not a straightforward declaration of support for Iran but a carefully calibrated message that underscored Saudi Arabia’s desire for balance. By urging Israel to respect Iranian sovereignty, MBS positioned Saudi Arabia as a regional mediator, appealing to Arab and Islamic solidarity without entirely alienating Israel or the United States.

Behind the scenes, the United States watched these developments with a mix of caution and concern. The Biden administration had taken a more reserved approach to Middle Eastern affairs than its predecessor, emphasizing diplomacy over direct intervention. However, the U.S. remained deeply invested in Israel’s security and wary of Iran’s regional ambitions. While the U.S. supported Saudi Arabia as a strategic ally, it was uncertain how to interpret MBS’s evolving foreign policy. Washington understood the economic motivations behind Vision 2030 and acknowledged Saudi Arabia’s need for stability, yet there was apprehension that Saudi Arabia’s engagement with Iran could weaken the U.S.-led containment strategy against Tehran.

Adding to these concerns was Russia’s presence in the Middle East, particularly in Syria. Russia’s military involvement in Syria aligned it with Iran’s objectives, as both nations supported the Assad regime. This alignment created a subtle link between Saudi Arabia and Russia, as both nations had an interest in maintaining stability in Syria. While Saudi Arabia publicly condemned Assad’s actions, it recognized that a stable Syria was preferable to a vacuum that could empower extremist groups. Russia, in turn, saw an opportunity to use its regional influence as leverage, positioning itself as a potential mediator in Saudi-Iranian relations.

This intricate dance of alliances, intelligence sharing, and economic ambitions culminated in MBS’s statement at the Riyadh summit. His call for Israel to respect Iran’s sovereignty was a message layered with multiple meanings, each aimed at a different audience. For the Arab and Islamic world, it was a show of solidarity, a reaffirmation of Saudi Arabia’s role as a defender of regional unity. For Israel, it was a subtle warning, signaling that Saudi Arabia’s support could not be taken for granted. And for the U.S., it was a reminder that Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy was evolving, increasingly shaped by its own national interests rather than by traditional alliances.

Yet MBS’s approach also carried risks. By positioning Saudi Arabia as a mediator between Iran and Israel, MBS risked alienating hardliners within his own government, as well as conservative factions in the region who viewed any engagement with Israel as a betrayal of Palestinian solidarity. Additionally, the delicate balance between diplomacy with Iran and covert coordination with Israel could unravel at any moment, particularly if Iran or Israel took unilateral actions that threatened Saudi interests. MBS was gambling on the assumption that he could control these dynamics, that he could steer Saudi Arabia through the complexities of Middle Eastern geopolitics without igniting a full-scale confrontation.

In the days following the summit, diplomatic channels were abuzz with reactions. Analysts debated the implications of MBS’s warning, some viewing it as a masterstroke of diplomatic balancing, others as a precarious gamble. In Washington, policymakers scrambled to assess what this shift might mean for U.S. influence in the region. Meanwhile, intelligence agencies in Tehran and Tel Aviv pored over MBS’s words, analyzing every phrase, every nuance, searching for clues about Saudi Arabia’s intentions.

As the dust settled, one thing was clear: Saudi Arabia was no longer content to be a passive player in Middle Eastern affairs. Under MBS’s leadership, the kingdom was asserting itself as a sovereign power, willing to pursue its own path even if it diverged from longstanding alliances. For the first time in decades, Saudi Arabia was embracing a foreign policy that prioritized its own vision of regional stability—a vision defined not by rivalry but by strategic pragmatism, one that sought to balance competing interests in a region where every move could tip the scales.

---

Copyright of debuglies.com
Even partial reproduction of the contents is not permitted without prior authorization – Reproduction reserved