Will the GCC tantrum change US policy toward Iran?

This week, talks will take place between Arab and American leaders, at the presidential retreat of Camp David, near Washington. The summit is designed to strengthen the security relationship between the United States and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and reassure America’s Arab allies that they can rely on US support amid unrest in the region. US talks with Iran over the latter’s nuclear programme will also be on the agenda.

But several heads of state from the Gulf have said that they will not attend the summit, sending more junior leaders in their place. Saudi Arabia’s King Salman will not attend because the summit coincides with a five-day humanitarian ceasefire in neighbouring Yemen, where a Saudi-led alliance is fighting Houthi rebels. The newly appointed crown prince will attend in his place. The tiny kingdom of Bahrain, whose leadership has close ties to the Saudis, said that it would send its crown prince, Salman bin Hamad al-Khalifa, to the meeting. Separately, the Sultan of Oman and the President of the United Arab Emirates said they would not attend; both are known to be very ill. Of the six participating nations, only two will be sending their heads of state: Kuwait and Qatar.

Is this a snub to President Obama? Some analysts have interpreted it as such, given anxiety in the Gulf about American rapprochement with Iran. But both the US and Saudi Arabia have energetically denied that this is evidence of a rift. “I know there had been some speculation that this chance in travel plans was an attempt to send a message to the United States,” said White House spokesman Josh Earnest. “If so, that message was not received, because all feedback that we’ve received from the Saudis has been positive.” The White House said that Obama had spoken to King Salman on the phone to prepare for the summit. Saudi foreign minister Adel al-Jubeir also said that the decision was not related to a disagreement.

The GCC monarchies, all Sunni, are anxious about Shia Iran’s growing influence in the region, as it backs Syrian government forces (the Gulf states have backed the rebels) and the Houthi rebels in Yemen (the Gulf states are carrying out airstrikes against them). Given this state of affairs, where Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies are essentially fighting a series of proxy wars against Iran, US talks with the Shia nation have been a cause of alarm. The nuclear deal, which could be agreed in June, would curb Tehran’s nuclear programme in return for unfreezing sanctions and funds worth more than $100 billion. Leaders in the Gulf fear that this money could be used to buy arms and to provide further support for Shiite groups in the region.

Most of the international coverage of the summit so far has focused on whether this tension over Iran will dominate. The decision by these four Gulf states not to send their highest ranking official has fuelled this fire, although of course the current violence in the region and the age and ill-health of the leaders concerned do provide a less exciting explanation for their absence.

For its part, the White House will be seeking to reassure Gulf leaders that despite pursing an agreement with Iran, the US will not be abandoning its allies in the Arab world. The US already cooperates with GCC countries on a wide-scale in terms of defence: there are 35,000 US forces in the region, and the US is a major provider of weaponry to these states. The GCC leaders in attendance are expected to ask for advanced weapons, aircraft and missile defence systems. Some newspapers have reported that they will demand defence systems as advanced as Israel’s. (The Israel-Palestine conflict will also be on the agenda, although Iran has overtaken Israel as the top concern of these leaders). In political terms, the Gulf leaders want greater US support in backing opposition forces in Syria. While the US position is officially that President Bashar al-Assad should leave, this has been played down recently. US airstrikes against ISIS targets in Iraq and Syria have forced the country into an uncomfortable alliance with Assad’s forces, who are also battling ISIS.

American leaders have said that the Camp David summit will be substantive rather than symbolic, but analysts agree that not much more is likely to come out of it than statements of commitment to Gulf security. Thus far, US support for the security of these states has been taken as given – a gentleman’s agreement – but given the changing circumstances in the region, it is possible that a more formal commitment may be required.