President Donald Trump recently declared that a deal with Iran is “largely negotiated.” As a liberal Muslim scholar from the Middle East who was forced to flee Egypt after defending Israel following Oct. 7, 2023, I know exactly what that declaration is worth without the Arab world’s full commitment behind it: very little.
There is an old Arab proverb: “Trust in God, but tie your camel.” The leaders of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Egypt, and Jordan would do well to remember it now. The framework under discussion includes a 60-day ceasefire, the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, and a commitment from Iran to never pursue nuclear weapons and negotiate a suspension of its enrichment program. Iran, predictably, is already hedging on what those commitments mean.
Recommended Stories
A bilateral U.S. deal that allows Arab states to remain passive bystanders is not a breakthrough. It is an opportunity squandered.
TRUMP IRAN DEAL: IT’S NOT A VICTORY IF THE REGIME SURVIVES
Trump recently spoke with the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, and Pakistan, and later publicly asked them to sign on to the Abraham Accords simultaneously with any Iran agreement. Saudi Arabia has previously stated it would not normalize relations with Israel without an “irreversible pathway” to Palestinian statehood. Qatar, which spent years hosting Hamas’s political leadership while positioning itself as an indispensable mediator, is resisting as well.
Predictable, but not acceptable.
Trump’s instinct to link the Iran deal to expanded participation in the Abraham Accords is strategically correct. The same Arab states that stand to gain the most from Iran’s containment are the ones most reluctant to commit concretely. Any final agreement must include basic nonnegotiable details.
Arab states must commit to active normalization with Israel, not aspirational language about future conditions. The United Arab Emirates and Bahrain have already shown this is possible and that it pays dividends in technology, investment, and security cooperation. Saudi Arabia faces more difficult domestic politics, but the strategic logic remains the same. Signatures obtained under White House pressure, with no institutional follow-through, are not commitments but are delay tactics.
The Gulf states must adopt a unified position on Iran’s proxy networks, not just its nuclear program. The Gulf states have never presented a formal unified front on Iran, consistently failing to insist that any deal must address Tehran’s support for armed proxies, not just its enrichment program. That divide has only sharpened in 2026. Tehran has survived every previous diplomatic framework by exploiting exactly these divisions. A unified Arab posture closes those gaps. A fractured one invites Iran to play one capital against another, which it has done for decades.
Most importantly, Arab states must back their commitments with a security architecture, not just words. Under a proposed civil nuclear deal with Washington, Saudi Arabia could gain uranium enrichment capability within the kingdom, because Riyadh does not fully trust that U.S. pressure on Iran will hold. That fear is understandable. The answer is not a Saudi nuclear hedge; it is a regional security framework robust enough that no state feels the need to do it alone. That framework only exists if Arab states are full participants, not observers waiting to see which way the wind blows.
Ironically, the states most reluctant to commit to the Abraham Accords framework are the ones that will pay the highest price if Iran reconstitutes its proxy infrastructure under the cover of a deal. Egypt knows what Iranian-backed networks do to regional stability. Jordan lives with that reality on its borders. The Gulf monarchies spent years under Houthi missile fire and watched their shipping lanes weaponized.
I did not flee Egypt because of Israel. I fled because I refused to repeat the lie that Iran’s proxies represent anything other than a foreign regime’s instrument for controlling Arab societies. The Arab world has been told for a generation that opposing normalization with Israel is a form of resistance. It is not. It is a form of paralysis that has left every Arab state more vulnerable to the very extremism it claims to oppose.
The Trump administration has a real opportunity. A deal that restrains Iran’s nuclear program, reopens the Strait of Hormuz, and expands the Abraham Accords would transform the region in ways that benefit every state, including, eventually, the people of Iran.
IRAN NEGOTIATES WITH ONE HAND AND FIRES MISSILES WITH THE OTHER
But it requires more than signatures. The Arab world must put its economies, its security establishments, and its political credibility behind a new regional order. As the proverb warns: whoever tries to sit on two chairs at once eventually falls between them.
The Arab world must decide. Join the architecture that contains Iran and builds a stable, prosperous region, or continue sitting on the fence while Tehran rebuilds its terrorist network.
Dalia Ziada is an award-winning Egyptian writer and political analyst specializing in governance, geopolitics, and regional security in the Middle East and Eastern Mediterranean. She serves as the Middle East Scholar, Research Fellow and Washington, D.C., Coordinator at ISGAP.