Iran Pursues a Strategy of Confusion by Targeting Bahrain and Kuwait

As Iranian drones and missiles strike Bahrain and Kuwait, RFI interviewed Mahdi Ghuloom of the Dubai‑based ORF Middle East think‑tank, who argues that enduring rivalries, the limited size of the two states and divergent Gulf strategies are shaping the current dynamics.

3 min Reading time

The United Arab Emirates bore the brunt of Iranian strikes during the brief but intense Iran‑U.S. confrontation in March and April. Tehran has now turned its focus toward Bahrain and Kuwait.

Air raid sirens echoed across Bahrain on Wednesday, underscoring the Gulf’s front‑line role in the ongoing US‑Iran confrontation. Vessels from Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have also been targeted in the Strait of Hormuz.

Several factors explain this shift, says Ghuloom.

“The first and most salient factor is the long‑standing historical tension between Iran and these two countries. In the case of Bahrain, Iran’s propaganda‑driven claim over the island persists,” he explained.

“Animosity toward Kuwait intensified after the country detained agents of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps attempting to enter its borders,” he noted.

“It is politically advantageous for Iran to target Bahrain and Kuwait given these historical grievances,” Ghuloom remarked.

“The second factor is the modest geographic size of the two states, which allows Iran to generate fear with relatively low effort,” he added.

Explosions resulting from intercepted drones and missiles resonate throughout both nations, facilitating the spread of fear among their populations.

Instigating Discord

However, attacks confined to Bahrain and Kuwait are unlikely to compel a collective Gulf response, Ghuloom argues. The two nations cannot persuade other Gulf states to retaliate while diplomatic channels remain open.

These efforts encompass behind‑the‑scenes diplomacy, direct mediation between the United States and Iran, and regular talks between Saudi Arabia and Iran facilitated by China.

“All these elements demonstrate that Iran is pursuing an aggressive strategy of sowing confusion among Gulf states by striking only Bahrain and Kuwait rather than others,” Ghuloom asserted.

Critical infrastructure in Kuwait, such as electricity networks and desalination plants, has been successfully hit, while the situation in Bahrain remains more contained.

“The fact that critical infrastructure in Kuwait – the electricity supply and water desalination facilities – has been successfully targeted is a frightening scenario that is becoming a reality,” Ghuloom warned.

Despite the attacks, the populations of Bahrain and Kuwait have demonstrated resilience and there has been no widespread panic.

“They want it to end. They want a normal summer, where they can travel freely,” Ghuloom said. “But ultimately, there has been no panic. There is sufficient confidence in the air defences,” he added.

Without collective action by the Gulf states, Bahrain and Kuwait are unlikely to confront Iran, as neither possesses the military capacity to respond alone without risking a prolonged conflict.

“It is not clear what the benefits of such a response would be,” Ghuloom said. “Would it deter Iran, or would it, conversely, embolden it to intensify its attacks?”

The Gulf Cooperation Council, the regional bloc of Gulf states, condemned what it termed Iran’s “war crimes” on 18 July, accusing Tehran of targeting civilian infrastructure.

But a broader coalition against Iran would most likely require the attacks to pose an existential threat to one of the Gulf states, according to Ghuloom – “though nobody knows exactly where that threshold lies,” he added.

Avoiding such a response is positive because all parties aim to prevent further escalation, Ghuloom noted.

“It’s a red line that, once crossed, is very difficult to defuse. Thus, Gulf states are right to set a high threshold for any trigger of a collective response,” Ghuloom observed.

This article has been adapted from an interview in French by Guilhem Delteil.

Source link