You don't take three months of Iranian fire and then sign onto its alliance.
As President Trump moved to expand the Abraham Accords in late May 2026, Iran's supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei launched a direct counter-campaign, calling on Islamic nations to join a 'New Islamic Civilization' and reject American military presence in the region. The appeal targeted the very Gulf capitals Washington was courting — states that had spent months absorbing Iranian drone and missile strikes. In the long arc of Middle Eastern geopolitics, this moment crystallized a familiar tension: two competing visions of regional order, each bidding for the same audience, each offering a different answer to the question of who belongs at the center of the world.
- Within hours of Trump's outreach to Gulf leaders, Khamenei posted a sweeping call for Islamic unity on X, framing American military bases as occupations to be expelled — a direct and deliberate counter-bid for the same regional audience.
- The audacity of the move was sharpened by its contradiction: Iran had spent months firing drones and ballistic missiles at Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, and Kuwait — the very nations it was now inviting into an anti-American brotherhood.
- Analysts noted the unprecedented precision of the timing, describing it as the same audience, the opposite frame, delivered 24 hours apart — a calculated escalation, not a casual social media post.
- Gulf capitals remain deeply skeptical of Tehran's overtures, but their greater anxiety is that Washington might strike a deal restoring Iranian assets while leaving its missile arsenal intact — effectively rewarding the regime that attacked them.
- Caught between Iranian aggression and American unpredictability, regional leaders are navigating a narrowing space where neither alliance on offer feels safe.
In late May 2026, as President Trump worked to expand the Abraham Accords — the 2020 framework normalizing relations between Israel and several Arab states — Iran's supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei launched a calculated counter-campaign. Within hours of Trump's calls to Gulf leaders, Khamenei posted a sweeping invitation on X calling for a 'New Islamic Civilization,' aimed at the very same capitals Washington was courting. The message was clear: choose Islamic unity under Tehran's vision, or remain bound to American security guarantees.
Khamenei's post framed the choice in religious and civilizational terms, calling on all Islamic governments to join in friendship and cooperation. Beneath the language of solidarity ran a harder edge — a warning that the United States would no longer find safe haven for its 'mischief' or its military bases in West Asia. American installations across the region, from Bahrain's Fifth Fleet to Qatar's Al Udeid, were recast as occupations to be expelled.
What made the pitch particularly striking was its brazen contradiction. Over the preceding months, Iranian forces had actively fired on Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, and Kuwait — the very nations now being invited into an anti-American alliance. The UAE alone reported intercepting nearly 2,000 drones and hundreds of ballistic missiles since late February. As one analyst put it plainly: you don't absorb three months of Iranian fire and then sign onto its alliance.
Gulf capitals found themselves caught in an uncomfortable position. They remained skeptical of Tehran's overtures, but their deeper worry was not Khamenei's invitation — it was the possibility that Washington might negotiate a deal returning frozen Iranian assets while leaving its missile capabilities untouched. A settlement of that kind could be read as rewarding the regime that had just attacked them, leaving regional leaders anxious about American resolve as much as Iranian ambition.
In late May, as President Trump moved to expand the Abraham Accords—the 2020 framework that normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states—Iran's supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei launched a direct and calculated counter-campaign. Within hours of Trump's phone calls to leaders across the Gulf and beyond, Khamenei posted a sweeping invitation on X calling for a "New Islamic Civilization," aimed at the very same regional capitals Washington was courting. The message was unmistakable: choose Iran's vision of Islamic unity, or remain tethered to American security guarantees.
Khamenei's post, published May 26, framed the choice in religious and civilizational terms. He called on "all Islamic countries and governments" to join in "friendship and cooperation," positioning the effort as a path toward advancing the broader Islamic world and solving its collective problems. Woven through the language was a darker thread: a warning that "the United States will no longer have a safe haven for its mischief and for establishing military bases in West Asia." American military installations across the region—the Fifth Fleet in Bahrain, Al Dhafra in the UAE, Al Udeid in Qatar—were reframed as occupations to be expelled, wrapped in the legitimacy of religious principle.
Dr. Omar Mohammed, director of the Antisemitism Research Initiative Program on Extremism at George Washington University, saw the move as a calculated escalation. The doctrine of Islamic unity, or Ummah, was not new—Khamenei's father had invoked it for years. But the timing and specificity were unprecedented. "This came into the Ummah with Iran, not into normalization with Israel under Washington," Mohammed told Fox News Digital. "Same audience, opposite frame, 24 hours apart, and a bid to assemble that alliance." The statement was no casual social media post; it was published in full by Iranian state media and aligned with Khamenei's first major address as leader on March 12, when he had demanded that U.S. bases in the region close.
What made the pitch particularly audacious was the gap between Tehran's words and its recent actions. Over the preceding months, Iranian forces had actively fired on Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, and Kuwait—the very capitals now being invited to join an anti-American brotherhood. The UAE alone reported intercepting nearly 2,000 drones and hundreds of ballistic missiles since late February. These were not abstract threats; they were sustained campaigns of aggression against the states hosting American military infrastructure. Mohammed noted the contradiction with sharp clarity: "You don't take three months of Iranian fire and then sign onto its alliance."
The broader context involved Khamenei's effort to position Iran as what Mohammed called "the new sheriff of the neighborhood." The challenge was that Khamenei himself remained largely inaccessible to traditional diplomacy—a hidden figure whose actual whereabouts and movements were often unknown. This meant that the real diplomatic channels ran through Iran's president, Masoud Pezeshkian, and its foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi. The Gulf states—Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman—did maintain backdoor communications with Tehran, but those channels were limited by the opacity of Khamenei's own position.
Meanwhile, negotiations between Iran and the United States appeared to be ongoing, with Trump not yet committing to any peace agreement. The uncertainty itself became a source of anxiety in Gulf capitals. What worried regional leaders most was not Khamenei's invitation to Islamic solidarity, but rather the possibility that Washington might sign a deal that returned frozen Iranian assets while leaving its missile capabilities intact—a settlement that could be read as rewarding the regime that had just attacked them. The Gulf states found themselves caught between skepticism of Tehran's overtures and deeper concern about American resolve and the terms any agreement might contain.
Notable Quotes
This came into the Ummah with Iran, not into normalization with Israel under Washington. Same audience, opposite frame, 24 hours apart, and a bid to assemble that alliance.— Dr. Omar Mohammed, director of the Antisemitism Research Initiative Program on Extremism at George Washington University
What actually worries the Gulf isn't Mojtaba's invitation—it's the deal Washington might sign. One that hands Iran its money back with its missiles intact and reads as rewarding the regime that just attacked them.— Dr. Omar Mohammed
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why would Khamenei issue this call for Islamic unity right after Trump's phone calls? Isn't the timing too obvious?
The timing is the point. Khamenei is signaling to those same Gulf leaders that there's an alternative frame—that they don't have to choose Washington's security umbrella. He's trying to make the choice feel like a civilizational one, not just a geopolitical one.
But Iran just spent months firing drones and missiles at these countries. How does he expect them to believe an invitation to brotherhood?
He doesn't expect them to believe it immediately. He's playing a longer game—positioning Iran as the region's center of gravity while the Gulf states watch to see if America will actually back them. The aggression and the invitation work together: the aggression proves Iran is serious, and the invitation gives them a way out if they lose faith in Washington.
What's the real obstacle to Khamenei's pitch succeeding?
The deal Trump might sign. If Washington returns Iran's frozen money and lets it keep its missiles, it looks like rewarding the regime that just attacked the Gulf. That's the nightmare scenario for Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE. Not Khamenei's words—the possibility that America will validate his aggression anyway.
So the Gulf states are trapped either way?
Not trapped exactly, but caught between two uncertainties. They don't trust Iran's sudden friendship, but they're equally unsure whether America will protect them or cut a deal that leaves them exposed. That's where the real leverage lies.