GCC States Condemn Israeli Strikes on Iran: Advancing Regional Peace and Stability through International Law

Introduction

On June 13, 2025, Israel launched a large-scale preemptive strike targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities, conventional military assets, senior commanders, and nuclear scientists.[1] This marked the third direct Israeli attack on Iranian territory, following similar operations in April and October 2024. In retaliation, Iran fired missiles and drones into Israel the same day, triggering a 12-day military confrontation.

The United States entered the conflict on June 22 by bombing three Iranian nuclear sites.[2] President Donald Trump hailed the joint Israeli-US operation as a “spectacular military success,” claiming that “Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.”[3] Iran condemned the strikes as an unprecedented violation of the fundamental principles of the UN Charter and international law.[4] On June 23, it launched missiles at the US Central Command’s Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, having issued prior notice to the Qatari government.[5]

Tensions quickly subsided through diplomatic efforts by the United States and Qatar, culminating in President Trump’s announcement that Israel and Iran had agreed to a “complete and total ceasefire.”[6]

This article examines the international response to the Israeli and US use of force against Iran, with particular focus on the member states of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which publicly condemned Israel’s actions on June 13 as violations of international law. These events not only compel a reassessment of the role of international legal norms in maintaining regional order but also serve as a litmus test for whether GCC states will continue aligning their policies with the vision of Middle East stability promoted by Israel and the United States—one that seeks peace through strength.

A Fraying International Legal Order

On June 7, 1981, Israel carried out an airstrike on Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor, which was still under construction. Iraq had been a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) since its inception. In response, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 487 on June 19, strongly condemning Israel’s military action as a “clear violation of the Charter of the United Nations and the norms of international conduct,” and called on Israel to “refrain in the future from any such acts or threats thereof.” Israel has not complied with the resolution and has continued to ignore the urgent request to place its own nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards.[7]

The United States has also faced scrutiny over its use of force in the Middle East, with several incidents raising legal questions about violations of sovereignty and the legitimacy of military action. Notable examples include (1) the Reagan administration’s bombing of Libya in April 1986, (2) the Obama administration’s killing of Osama bin Laden inside Pakistani territory in May 2011, and (3) the Trump administration’s January 2020 assassination of Qasem Soleimani, commander of Iran’s Quds Force, on Iraqi soil.

In particular, the first and third cases drew criticism for failing to provide sufficient evidence of an “imminent threat,” leading many to denounce them as violations of international law.[8]

The recent Israeli and US strikes on Iran have similarly sparked debate over the legitimacy of invoking self-defense. One justification cited by Israel and its allies is Iran’s alleged breach of its nuclear monitoring obligations, as affirmed in a June 12 resolution by the IAEA Board of Governors.[9] Building on this, the G7 leaders issued a joint statement on June 16 affirming Israel’s right to self-defense and expressing support for its national security.[10]

Iran, however, submitted a letter to the UN Security Council asserting that the use of force violated multiple core principles of the UN Charter and international law, including (1) the prohibition on the use of force, (2) the prohibition on aggression, (3) the duty of nonintervention, and (4) Iran’s right to self-determination.[11]

The GCC states expressed understanding of Iran’s position and convened an emergency foreign ministers’ meeting on June 13, explicitly condemning Israel’s military action as a breach of international law and the UN Charter.[12] On June 22, both the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation—of which GCC states are members—issued statements condemning the US bombing of Iranian nuclear sites as a violation of Iranian sovereignty, though without naming the United States directly.[13]

Taken together, Arab and Islamic countries, including the GCC, have reaffirmed their commitment to upholding international law and the UN Charter without exception. This stance reflects a consistent position in their approach to the Gaza conflict and the broader Palestinian issue, underscoring a fundamental divergence from the peace through strength doctrine espoused by Israel and the United States.

Pathways to Regional Security and Stability

Two days after the ceasefire agreement, on June 26, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared in a video address that Israel had “achieved a great victory” in its military offensive against Iran. He also expressed his intent to leverage this moment to end the conflict in Gaza and expand normalization with Arab states under the Abraham Accords.[14] For Netanyahu, the expansion of the accords—alongside the dismantling of Hamas, the disarmament of Hezbollah, and territorial gains within Syria—constitutes a central pillar of Israel’s national security strategy. The Trump administration has supported this trajectory through arms assistance and strategic alignment. Both administrations appear to share a vision for a future Middle East devoid of anti-Israel forces, particularly Iran’s current regime.[15]

In contrast, the GCC states have sought to coordinate with Arab and Islamic countries to promote peace and stability grounded in international law. On the Palestinian issue, the UN Arab Group—comprising Arab states’ permanent representatives to the United Nations and currently chaired by the UAE—has played a central role in securing the adoption of four resolutions on Gaza in the UN General Assembly.[16] Moreover, the GCC states are actively engaged in the High-level International Conference for the Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine, co-hosted by Saudi Arabia and France. Originally scheduled for June 17 but postponed to July 28, the conference aims to reaffirm the international community’s commitment to a two-state solution and to mobilize UN member states toward its realization.[17]

Qatar has continued to act as a mediator in ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas, working in coordination with the United States and Egypt. On the Iran nuclear issue, Oman has served as an intermediary in indirect talks between Washington and Tehran, facilitating five rounds of negotiations since April 2025 in pursuit of a diplomatic resolution. However, Israel’s military action against Iran on June 13—just days before the sixth round of talks scheduled for June 15—prompted the GCC to issue a unified statement condemning the attack.

During this period of heightened tensions, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman held phone calls with President Trump on June 13[18] and with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on June 14,[19] seeking to de-escalate the conflict. On June 16, Oman’s Sultan Haitham bin Tariq spoke with President Pezeshkian,[20] and on June 18, UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed held a call with Russian President Vladimir Putin,[21] both aiming to identify pathways toward a ceasefire.

Notably, the GCC strongly condemned Iran’s attack on the US military base in Qatar, describing it as a grave violation of international law.[22] Nevertheless, following the announcement of the ceasefire agreement, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed spoke again with President Pezeshkian on June 24 to express his welcome and support for the ceasefire deal.[23]

The GCC states have clearly signaled to the international community their commitment to upholding international law and the role of multilateral institutions in resolving both the Gaza conflict and the Iran issue. This approach not only helps chart a course toward settling the Palestinian question but also preserves strategic flexibility amid ongoing tensions between Israel, the United States, and Iran.

Conclusion

In recent years, growing dialogue in the Gulf region has helped build trust among key stakeholders. The Arab-Iranian Dialogue Conference has convened annually since May 2022 to discuss regional and global challenges.[24] Other notable developments include the March 2023 Saudi-Iran reconciliation brokered by China and the inauguration of Iranian President Pezeshkian in July 2024. In April 2025, Saudi Defense Minister Khalid bin Salman made a landmark visit to Iran—the first such trip in 26 years—and delivered a letter from King Salman bin Abdulaziz to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.[25]

Amid the global shift toward decarbonization, the GCC states face mounting pressure to reduce their dependence on oil and natural gas, expand the private sector, and create employment opportunities. These imperatives have heightened the importance of intra-regional economic cooperation. Additionally, fostering a peaceful environment in the Middle East is essential to attract investment, with reconstruction support for Syria and Lebanon forming part of this broader strategy. In these ways, the GCC states are envisioning a security framework that extends beyond military concerns to encompass long-term regional development.

Meanwhile, Israel continues to pursue policies in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Jerusalem that contravene international law and UN resolutions, while maintaining its intention to use force against Iran.[26] This approach of achieving peace through military power stands in stark contrast to the comprehensive security vision championed by the GCC. Unless Israel undergoes a fundamental shift in its posture, meaningful progress in improving relations between Israel and the Gulf states will likely remain elusive.

(2025/08/18)