When Hawks Become Doves: The Mirage of Gulf 'Moderation'
The recent statements from Anwar Gargash, the diplomatic adviser to the UAE president, advocating for an Iran-US deal, might appear on the surface to be a significant pivot. However, a deeper look reveals this 'moderation' is less about genuine rapprochement and more about strategic adaptation to maintain influence in a region where US priorities are visibly—and sometimes unpredictably—shifting.
FIRST INSTANCE: The Hardline Consensus (Late 2000s - Early 2020s) For over a decade, Gulf states, including the UAE and Saudi Arabia, maintained a consistent, explicit position calling for maximum pressure on Iran. This strategy, heavily promoted by groups like AIPAC in the US (e.g., 2015 lobbying against the JCPOA by AIPAC), argued that economic sanctions and military threats were the only means
to curb Iran's regional influence and nuclear ambitions. Their opposition to the Obama-era JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) in 2015 was vocal and sustained, emphasizing Iran's 'destabilizing' actions and portraying any engagement as appeasement. This wasn't merely rhetoric; it was backed by significant security partnerships with the US and a consistent narrative woven through
state-funded media. REPETITIONS: 'Axis of Resistance' and Regional Confrontation (2018-2022) Following the US withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018 under the Trump administration—a move heavily endorsed by the UAE and its allies—the Gulf states continued to push for a confrontational stance. They amplified concerns about Iran's ballistic missile program, its support for proxy groups in Yemen, Iraq,