Dr. Ali Aljabiri: Expanding the War — Tehran’s Message to the Gulf Before Washington

At a moment when regional mediation efforts are quietly advancing through Oman, and Gulf states are working to ease tensions between Washington and Tehran, Iran’s rhetoric has once again shifted toward escalation. Instead of signaling restraint, Iranian officials are openly warning that any confrontation with the United States would expand into a broader regional conflict.

That posture was unmistakably reflected in remarks made by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi at the Al Jazeera Forum in Doha, just one day after the first round of U.S.–Iran negotiations began in Muscat. Araghchi reiterated that Iran would target American military bases in the region if Iran itself were attacked. The warning was explicit. And while directed at Washington, its implications extend far beyond the United States — reaching into the security architecture of Gulf states that host American forces.

This is not merely rhetorical positioning in the context of negotiations. Iran has already demonstrated its willingness to act. In June 2025, Tehran launched ballistic missiles at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar in response to U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. That episode followed earlier acts of escalation: the January 2020 missile strike on Iraq’s Ain al-Asad base, and the September 2019 drone and missile attacks on Saudi Aramco facilities — an assault that struck at the very heart of Saudi Arabia’s economic infrastructure. Repeated drone attacks targeting the United Arab Emirates by a Yemeni group aligned with Tehran further reinforced a pattern of indirect confrontation.

Taken together, these events point to continuity, not change.

The Iranian leadership has not altered its regional posture. On the contrary, official statements and military actions reflect a strategic doctrine that links the security of neighboring states to Iran’s broader geopolitical calculations. Whenever tensions rise with Washington, the Gulf appears in the equation — whether through threats against U.S. bases, signals regarding the Strait of Hormuz, or indirect pressure via regional proxies.

The persistence of such rhetoric places Gulf states in a constant state of strategic exposure. Instead of integrating into a cooperative regional security framework, Tehran continues to view Gulf geography — including the Strait of Hormuz — as leverage to be activated when political pressure intensifies.

The Gulf is not simply a sphere of influence. It is the artery of global energy supply and a vital maritime corridor through which a substantial portion of the world’s oil and gas flows. Any attempt to weaponize that geography does not merely endanger one country; it destabilizes international markets and threatens global economic equilibrium.

If Iran genuinely seeks de-escalation, it must demonstrate a tangible shift in conduct — not merely recalibrate its rhetoric while preserving the same strategic approach. Regional stability cannot rest on a doctrine that repeatedly introduces the prospect of wider war whenever diplomatic maneuvering narrows.

The Middle East does not need another cycle of brinkmanship. It requires strategic maturity, not conditional threats. As long as Tehran continues to issue warnings of regional expansion, maintain pressure tactics, and resist a fundamental reassessment of its interventionist policies, doubts about its long-term intentions will persist.

Escalatory language is not an accident. It is a signal. And today, that signal suggests continuity in a confrontational approach that has already cost the region dearly.