The ‘Arab NATO’ is a US security trap for Gulf countries

The “Arab NATO” initiative, which has been discussed increasingly in diplomatic circles in recent years, has once again become a hot topic in the relationships between Arab countries and the United States. Washington and Tel Aviv insist that this plan can guarantee the security of Arab nations, but can their claims be trusted?

The reality is that the Arab NATO proposal is more of a tool for extracting concessions from Gulf countries rather than an effective mechanism for ensuring their security. This is reminiscent of the role that the original North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) has played for the US; an instrument to put pressure on European allies and extract benefits from them.

The Arab NATO is likely to suffer the same fate, dragging Arab countries into unnecessary hostilities and tensions driven by American and Israeli interests rather than providing genuine security. Ultimately, instead of achieving a stable and independent alliance, Arab countries may become mere pawns in Washington and Tel Aviv’s geopolitical game, serving as foot soldiers to advance their strategic interests in the Middle East.

From its inception, the Arab NATO initiative has faced extensive criticism due to its nature and objectives. The first major issue with this plan is that, instead of reducing tensions in the Middle East, it will only fuel new rivalries. When Arab countries align with global powers such as the US and Israel in this coalition, they risk forming new geopolitical blocs and escalating tensions in the region. In practice, rather than ensuring security, this initiative could heighten the sense of threat among rival states, triggering an arms race and the expansion of military forces. This means that instead of creating a “collective security organisation”, the risk of more conflicts in the region would increase.

Another key criticism of this plan is that it will focus on being an anti-Iranian alliance.

By prioritising confrontation with Iran, the initiative leaves little room for diplomacy and dialogue, instead paving the way for greater hostility and warmongering in the region. Such an approach fails to address the fundamental issues in the Middle East, which stem from internal disputes, economic problems and social challenges. Confronting Iran through a joint military coalition is more likely to provoke regional competition and instability rather than create peace.

READ: US could hit Iran targets in Yemen over support for Houthis, official warns

The plan also assumes that Arab countries can easily align their security interests while, in reality, these nations have deep-rooted differences and ongoing rivalries, particularly in political and economic affairs. For instance, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, or the UAE and Bahrain, have historically been engaged in disputes and internal conflicts. Given these tensions, forming a unified military alliance seems highly unlikely. Ultimately, this initiative appears to be more about strengthening US and Israeli influence in the region, while Arab nations — especially in the Gulf — may end up being used as tools for the interests of others rather than benefiting from the alliance themselves. This could lead to increased distrust and scepticism among Arab countries towards one another and towards Western powers. Therefore, rather than resolving regional security issues, this plan may actually create new crises.

The historical experiences of US allies, including Washington’s European partners, show that following American policies, especially in security matters, rarely results in sustainable security. The US has demonstrated repeatedly its willingness to abandon its security commitments whenever it is convenient for Washington to do so, prioritising its own interests even at the expense of its allies’ safety. One striking example is the Vietnam War, where after years of supporting the South Vietnamese regime, the US unilaterally withdrew, leaving South Vietnam vulnerable to a North Vietnamese invasion.

In the Middle East, the unilateral withdrawal of the US from the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) in 2018 illustrated further how Washington can disregard its commitments, increasing regional tensions and insecurity. European countries involved in the agreement were not only side-lined but also faced the negative consequences of escalating hostilities.

Even within NATO, the US has reinterpreted Article 5 of the treaty, which stipulates that an attack on one member is an attack on all.

Historically, this was seen as a guarantee of collective defence, but in recent years, US officials have suggested that the provision does not automatically oblige America to intervene militarily. Donald Trump has said frequently and openly that if NATO members did not contribute enough to defence spending — five per cent of GDP has been his suggested amount — the US might refuse to fulfil its military commitments. This demonstrates that even within NATO, historically the strongest collective security alliance, the US can adopt policies that jeopardise its allies’ security. These examples highlight the fact that Washington can and will abandon its security obligations at any moment in favour of short-term interests, fuelling distrust and instability among its allies.

In conclusion, following US security policies, particularly in the Middle East, does not guarantee long-term security for Arab countries. The US has shown repeatedly that, in times of crisis, it can withdraw from its commitments and expose its allies to danger to serve its own interests. Instead, the only viable path to regional security lies in de-escalation efforts and the establishment of a regional security framework based on cooperation and trust-building. Arab countries must prioritise self-reliance and develop mechanisms that focus on shared regional interests rather than depending on the unstable support of external powers. Such an approach would not only reduce tensions, but also lay the foundation for long-term stability and security in the region.

READ: Columbia warns journalism students to stay silent on Gaza or risk arrest

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.