Donald Trump’s return to the White House, accompanied by a slate of appointees with hardline views on Iran, could present Gulf states with renewed complexities in their dealings with Tehran. After four years under the Biden administration’s emphasis on diplomatic containment, a revived Trump presidency may reintroduce the “maximum pressure” doctrine. Such a shift would undoubtedly reverberate across the region, particularly in the interconnected realms of trade, energy, and tourism that bind Iran and the Gulf.

Trump’s current appointees, such as Elise Stefanik—a staunch advocate for Israel and an outspoken critic of the Iran nuclear deal—offer a glimpse into the administration’s trajectory. Their hawkish views signal a deliberate intent to ratchet up pressure on Iran, likely through bolstered partnerships with Israel and other regional allies. These moves would aim to counter perceived Iranian threats to regional stability and global security.

A cornerstone of this strategy would likely involve urging Gulf states to scale back commercial and tourism ties with Iran. This could manifest as direct warnings or potential sanctions targeting Gulf entities engaged in economic activities seen as propping up Iran’s economy. Washington might push for freezes on key agreements or reductions in flights to Iran, especially where such actions are perceived to indirectly support Tehran’s ambitions.

Nevertheless, Trump is likely to recognize the limits of Gulf compliance. Regional leaders have strategic imperatives that make severing ties with Iran entirely untenable. To balance these realities, Trump could pursue a pragmatic approach: allowing limited Gulf engagement with Iran while preventing closer alignments with global rivals such as China or Russia. These powers, eager to deepen their influence in the region, offer Gulf nations compelling alternatives to U.S. partnerships.

In practice, this strategy could unfold as a dual-purpose effort. On one front, it would seek to curtail Iran’s regional sway by restricting its economic links. Simultaneously, it would position Gulf allies under U.S. influence, using their partial noncompliance with Iran-related measures as leverage in future negotiations. This calculated flexibility could become a bargaining tool, enabling Trump to extract concessions on unrelated matters by invoking past shortcomings on Iran policy.

Trump’s anticipated policy framework also dovetails with his broader goal of achieving U.S. energy independence through expanded domestic oil and gas production, particularly via fracking. While this strategy might bolster the U.S. economy, it could present a more precarious outlook for the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). Increased American energy output could depress global oil prices, directly undermining Gulf economies that heavily depend on oil exports. The GCC would then face a dual burden: economic strain from reduced revenues and political pressure to minimize ties with Iran. Together, these challenges could reshape the region’s alliances and strategies in profound ways.