Iran’s Missiles Pose Deadly Threat, Gulf Allies Warn, as Trump Weighs Strikes

Start writinTensions between the United States and Iran have reached a critical point as Gulf allies raise alarms about Tehran’s growing missile capabilities, warning that they pose a “deadly threat” to regional security, even as U.S. President Donald Trump weighs potential military strikes amid simmering crises across the Middle East. The situation unfolds against the backdrop of internal unrest in Iran, rising U.S. military deployments, and widespread fears of a broader conflict that could draw in neighboring countries.

Growing Missile Capabilities and Regional Concern

Persian Gulf states, long wary of Iran’s regional ambitions, have told U.S. officials that despite recent conflicts and claims of degradation, Iran retains significant stockpiles of short-range and medium-range missiles capable of reaching military bases, allies, and strategic infrastructure across the region. Gulf assessments suggest that Iran’s missile forces, though damaged in past engagements, have been rebuilt and dispersed, making them difficult to eliminate in a pre-emptive strike. 

Analysts note that even after last year’s intense clashes between Iran and Israel, Tehran’s missile production — and its ability to strike allied forces — remains robust. U.S. allies say intercepting these weapons would be difficult, and that their existence represents a serious deterrent to any American or coalition action.

Such warnings illustrate the shifting calculus for both Washington and its partners, who must balance deterrence with the risk that military action could prompt a dramatic escalation.

Trump Administration’s Deliberations

According to multiple officials familiar with internal discussions, President Trump has been considering a range of military options against Iran — including targeted airstrikes — as part of broader pressure designed to weaken Tehran’s strategic capabilities and influence. Options reportedly under review include strikes on missile launchers, command infrastructure, or nuclear-related facilities. 

Some U.S. advisers believe limited strikes could help reinvigorate internal protests against Iran’s clerical regime by demonstrating external support for dissenters and by disrupting Tehran’s ability to project force. However, officials also warn that air power alone is unlikely to topple Iran’s leadership and could instead harden resistance or trigger unpredictable retaliation.

In recent days, the U.S. has deployed significant naval assets — including an aircraft carrier strike group and accompanying escort vessels — to the Arabian Sea and Persian Gulf as a demonstration of resolve and readiness. A senior U.S. commander has described the deployment as both a deterrent and a preparation for possible action, underscoring how seriously Washington views the threat environment.

ایران اینترنشنال | Iran International

Gulf States Call for Caution

Despite shared concerns about Iran’s missile stocks, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and other Gulf Cooperation Council members have urged caution and restraint from direct military confrontation. These governments fear that a U.S. strike could provoke immediate retaliation against their territory or U.S. forces stationed within their borders, potentially destabilizing their economies and security. 

Arab allies emphasize that even if Tehran’s regime is deeply unpopular and facing internal protest, abrupt external military action could backfire by uniting Iranian factions and catalyzing a prolonged conflict. Many Gulf leaders have instead pushed Washington to channel pressure through diplomacy and economic leverage, arguing that negotiated restraint on Iran’s strategic programs would better protect regional stability. 

Tehran’s Response and Escalation Risks

In response to the growing threat of strikes, Iran’s leadership has issued tough warnings. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in multiple speeches, has stated that any U.S. military action would trigger a broader regional war. Western news agencies report that Tehran’s rhetoric frames possible U.S. action as existential, making retaliation — potentially using the very missile forces Gulf allies fear — a real possibility. �

PBS

Iran’s government continues to insist that it does not seek conflict and that its defense posture is deterrent in nature. At the same time, military leaders have emphasized their readiness to respond decisively to any attack on Iranian territory or interests. These mixed signals reflect a Tehran strategy of warning without overt provocation — but they have nonetheless amplified anxiety across capitals from Riyadh to Washington.

The Express Tribune

Internal Unrest and Diplomatic Pressures

The U.S. calculus is further complicated by Iran’s internal situation. Nationwide protests sparked by economic grievances and political repression have been met with deadly force by Iranian authorities. Trump administration officials have linked potential intervention to support for protesters and to forcing Tehran back to the negotiating table over its nuclear program and missile development.

Diplomacy has not been ruled out entirely. Despite tense rhetoric, Trump has indicated that Iran is engaged in serious negotiations over elements of its strategic programs, suggesting a desire to reach an agreement that could avert war. Still, demands over missile restrictions and nuclear limits remain central sticking points, and Tehran rejects negotiating under overt military threat.

Financial Times

Global Implications

If Washington elects to strike, analysts warn the effects could reverberate far beyond the Middle East. A regional war could disrupt global energy supplies, intensify refugee flows, and strain relations among NATO partners who differ on how to respond to Iran’s strategic programs. Gulf allies — already wary of escalation — also worry that direct conflict could undercut fragile economic recoveries and shift geopolitical alignments.



The United States faces a stark dilemma: escalate militarily and risk wide conflict, or pursue diplomatic pressure and risk being seen as tolerating threats to its allies. In the meantime, Iran’s missile arsenal remains a focal point of concern — a stark reminder that even without open conflict, the threat of deadly escalation looms large.