Will Saudi Arabia Attack Iran? Unpacking A Complex Relationship

Lenny Carter 21 Jun 2025

The Shifting Sands of Middle East Diplomacy
A History of Proxy Conflicts and Regional Rivalry
Saudi Arabia's Stance on Israeli Aggression Against Iran
    Condemnation of Israeli Strikes: A Clear Violation
    Protecting Nuclear Facilities and International Law
The Role of External Powers and Regional Alliances
Economic Implications and Oil Markets
Internal Dynamics and Security Concerns
The Path to De-escalation: Diplomacy and Dialogue
    The China-Brokered Rapprochement
    Shifting Alliances and Normalization Efforts
Conclusion: Navigating a Complex Future

The Shifting Sands of Middle East Diplomacy

For decades, the question of whether **will Saudi Arabia attack Iran** has loomed large over the Middle East. The two regional powerhouses, often described as arch-rivals, have engaged in a complex dance of competition and confrontation, primarily through proxy conflicts across the Arab world. From Yemen to Lebanon, and from Syria to Iraq, their geopolitical struggle for influence has shaped alliances, fueled conflicts, and kept international observers on edge. The narrative of an inevitable clash, or at least continued hostility, has become deeply ingrained in how the world perceives their relationship.

However, recent developments suggest a significant, albeit fragile, shift in this dynamic. While the historical animosity and deep-seated ideological differences remain, there's growing evidence that both Riyadh and Tehran are exploring avenues for de-escalation and direct dialogue. This pivot, often surprising to those accustomed to the old paradigm, forces us to re-evaluate the likelihood of a direct military confrontation and instead consider a future where diplomacy, even if uneasy, takes precedence. Understanding this evolving landscape requires a deep dive into their shared history, their current geopolitical calculations, and the external pressures influencing their decisions.

A History of Proxy Conflicts and Regional Rivalry

To truly grasp the complexities of the relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran, one must first acknowledge their long-standing rivalry. For years, Saudi Arabia, a Sunni-majority kingdom, and Iran, a Shiite-majority Islamic Republic, have been seen as the primary competitors for regional influence. This competition has manifested not in direct warfare between their armies, but through a series of proxy conflicts that have destabilized various parts of the Middle East.

In Yemen, for instance, Saudi Arabia has led a coalition against the Houthi movement, which it views as an Iranian proxy. This conflict has resulted in a devastating humanitarian crisis and has been a major flashpoint in Saudi-Iran relations. Similarly, in Syria, Saudi Arabia supported rebel groups opposing the Assad regime, which has received strong backing from Iran. In Lebanon, the rivalry plays out through the political influence of Hezbollah, an Iranian-backed group, versus Saudi-aligned factions. Even within Iraq, where both nations hold significant sway, their differing interests have often led to political deadlock and sectarian tensions.

These proxy battles have created a perception of an unbridgeable chasm between the two nations, leading many to believe that a direct confrontation, or at least continued indirect conflict, is inevitable. The question of "will Saudi Arabia attack Iran" has often arisen from this historical context of intense, indirect competition. Each perceived aggression by one side, whether through missile attacks or political maneuvers, has historically heightened tensions and fueled speculation about a potential escalation. For example, on December 6, 2021, Saudi air defenses intercepted a ballistic missile above Riyadh, causing shrapnel to fall in several areas. While the origin was not definitively attributed to Iran directly, such incidents have often been linked to Iranian-backed groups, serving as stark reminders of the ongoing security threats faced by Saudi Arabia. This constant state of alert, however, does not automatically translate into an offensive posture from Riyadh.

Saudi Arabia's Stance on Israeli Aggression Against Iran

Perhaps one of the most surprising and telling developments in recent times, directly impacting the question of "will Saudi Arabia attack Iran," has been Riyadh's strong condemnation of Israeli military actions against the Islamic Republic. Despite their historical rivalry, Saudi Arabia has consistently denounced Israeli strikes on Iranian territory, framing them as violations of international law. This stance indicates a clear divergence from any potential alignment with Israel against Iran and instead highlights a commitment to regional stability and adherence to international norms.

Condemnation of Israeli Strikes: A Clear Violation

The official statements from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia have been unequivocal. Following Israeli aggressions against Iran, Saudi Arabia has expressed its "strong condemnation and denunciation of the blatant Israeli aggressions against the brotherly Islamic Republic of Iran, which undermine" regional stability. This language, referring to Iran as "brotherly," is particularly striking given the historical animosity.

Multiple statements reiterate this position. Saudi Arabia has explicitly stated that "Israel’s attacks on Iran are a ‘clear violation’ of international laws." This condemnation was echoed by various Saudi officials. Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, in a phone conversation with Iran's leadership, strongly condemned Israel’s strikes on Iran, calling them a violation of international law. Furthermore, Saudi Arabia led Arab condemnation of Israel’s strikes on Iran early on a Friday, which targeted multiple sites linked to the country’s nuclear program and reportedly killed at least two top officials. The Saudi Foreign Ministry has consistently called the Israeli strikes on Iran a "clear violation of international laws and norms." This consistent and strong denunciation, terming the strikes "blatant" and a "clear violation of international laws and norms," underscores a principled position rather than a opportunistic one. In an official message, Saudi Arabia called to "immediately halt the aggression," reiterating, "the kingdom of saudi arabia expresses its strong condemnation and denunciation of the blatant israeli aggressions against the brotherly" Islamic Republic. The Saudi Foreign Ministry, in its statement, specifically denounced Israel's strikes on Iran targeting its nuclear program and senior military leaders, further solidifying their position against any external aggression towards Iran. This consistent stance provides a strong counter-narrative to the idea that Saudi Arabia would itself initiate an attack on Iran.

Protecting Nuclear Facilities and International Law

Beyond general condemnation, Saudi Arabia has also specifically addressed attacks on nuclear facilities, emphasizing the broader implications for international law and regional security. The Saudi Arabia’s Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Commission (NRRC) issued a clear warning, stating that "any armed attack by any party targeting nuclear facilities dedicated to peaceful purposes constitutes a violation of international resolutions." This warning came as Israel had been targeting several Iranian nuclear sites, highlighting Saudi Arabia's concern for the sanctity of international agreements and the dangers of escalating conflicts around sensitive installations.

This position is not merely theoretical; it reflects a deep understanding of the potential for catastrophic escalation should nuclear facilities become targets. Saudi Arabia condemns Israel’s strikes against nuclear and military targets in Iran not only out of solidarity but also out of a pragmatic recognition that such actions could destabilize the entire region, potentially leading to widespread conflict. This principled stance on international law and the protection of peaceful nuclear facilities further diminishes the likelihood that Saudi Arabia would itself engage in unprovoked military action against Iran, especially against its nuclear sites.

The Role of External Powers and Regional Alliances

The dynamics between Saudi Arabia and Iran are not solely dictated by their bilateral relationship; external powers and regional alliances play a significant, often decisive, role. The influence of the United States, China, and other regional actors profoundly impacts the calculus of whether **will Saudi Arabia attack Iran**.

Historically, the United States has been a key security guarantor for Saudi Arabia, often aligning against Iran. However, the recent shift in Saudi policy suggests a growing independence and a diversification of its foreign relations. A crucial piece of information reveals that Saudi Arabia, along with Qatar and Kuwait, secretly told Tehran that they would not allow the US to use their air bases to strike Iran. This was reported by a Saudi source to i24news, indicating a clear message to both Washington and Tehran: the Gulf states are not willing to be launchpads for attacks on Iran, prioritizing their own stability and de-escalation. This move is a significant departure from past assumptions about regional alignments and directly challenges the notion of Saudi Arabia facilitating or joining an attack on Iran.

Furthermore, during meetings, Iran reportedly warned Saudi Arabia it could not guarantee the safety of the Gulf Kingdom's oil facilities if Israel were given any assistance in carrying out an attack. This warning underscores the delicate balance of power and the potential for severe repercussions for any regional state perceived as aiding aggression against Iran. Such direct warnings contribute to a cautious approach from Riyadh, reinforcing the idea that an unprovoked attack on Iran by Saudi Arabia is highly improbable, given the potential for devastating retaliation.

China's growing diplomatic role in the region also cannot be overstated. When China helped negotiate a peace deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia in 2023, it hailed the breakthrough as a victory for Chinese diplomacy and a sign that America’s chief geopolitical rival could foster stability. This Chinese-brokered rapprochement is a testament to the willingness of both Saudi Arabia and Iran to seek diplomatic solutions, even if facilitated by an external power. This significant diplomatic achievement indicates a preference for dialogue over conflict, making the prospect of Saudi Arabia initiating an attack on Iran even more remote.

Economic Implications and Oil Markets

The economic dimension, particularly concerning oil markets, is a critical factor in understanding the geopolitical calculations of both Saudi Arabia and Iran. Any major conflict in the Persian Gulf, especially one involving the world's largest oil exporter (Saudi Arabia) and a significant oil producer (Iran), would have immediate and severe global economic repercussions. This economic reality serves as a powerful deterrent against military escalation, influencing whether **will Saudi Arabia attack Iran**.

The global oil market is highly sensitive to Middle East tensions. Even the mere threat of conflict can send crude prices soaring. We've seen instances where "the big jump in crude prices on Friday after Israel’s attack on Iran will narrow Trump’s options in dealing with other" regional issues, highlighting how quickly geopolitical events translate into economic volatility. Saudi Arabia, as the de facto leader of OPEC and a nation heavily reliant on oil revenues, has a vested interest in maintaining stable oil prices and ensuring the security of global energy supply routes. A direct conflict with Iran would undoubtedly disrupt these routes, including the Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant portion of the world's oil supply passes. Such a disruption would not only harm the global economy but also severely impact Saudi Arabia's own economic stability.

Furthermore, there's the intriguing detail of "why Saudi Arabia raised oil output before Israel’s attack on Iran." While the exact motivations are complex, this action could be interpreted as an attempt to stabilize global oil markets in anticipation of potential volatility, perhaps even to mitigate the economic fallout from actions taken by other regional actors (like Israel against Iran). This proactive measure suggests a strategic focus on economic stability, rather than a preparation for a direct military confrontation that would inherently destabilize oil markets. The economic imperative for stability acts as a strong disincentive for Saudi Arabia to initiate any action that could lead to widespread conflict with Iran.

Internal Dynamics and Security Concerns

Beyond the grand geopolitical chessboard, the internal dynamics and security concerns within Saudi Arabia itself play a significant role in determining its foreign policy, including its approach to Iran. The Kingdom has faced direct threats from ballistic missile attacks and drone strikes, often attributed to Iranian-backed proxies. These incidents, while not directly from Iran, underscore the volatile security environment and the need for a robust defense strategy rather than an offensive one.

The experience of having "ballistic missile attacks from Iran" (referring to missiles either originating from Iran or from Iranian-backed groups) forcing many to seek safety in schools, train stations, and public shelters, highlights the direct impact of regional instability on the Saudi populace. This constant threat necessitates significant investment in air defense systems and a focus on protecting critical infrastructure. For example, on December 6, 2021, Saudi air defenses intercepted a ballistic missile above Riyadh, causing shrapnel to fall in several areas. Such events reinforce the Kingdom's defensive posture.

Given these ongoing security challenges, Saudi Arabia's primary focus is on strengthening its own defenses and ensuring the safety of its citizens and vital assets. Engaging in an unprovoked military attack on Iran would undoubtedly invite massive retaliation, potentially escalating the existing missile and drone threats into a full-blown war on Saudi soil. The leadership in Riyadh is acutely aware of the devastating consequences such a conflict would entail, both for its economy and its people. Therefore, while maintaining a strong defensive capability and deterring aggression, the internal security imperatives lean towards de-escalation and diplomatic solutions rather than initiating a direct conflict. The cost of war, both human and economic, is a powerful deterrent against any offensive action.

The Path to De-escalation: Diplomacy and Dialogue

The most compelling evidence against the notion of "will Saudi Arabia attack Iran" lies in the concerted efforts towards de-escalation and the increasing reliance on diplomacy and dialogue between the two nations. While the road has been bumpy and trust remains fragile, both Riyadh and Tehran have demonstrated a willingness to engage, signaling a strategic shift away from outright confrontation.

The China-Brokered Rapprochement

A landmark development occurred in 2023 when China helped negotiate a peace deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia. This breakthrough was hailed as a victory for Chinese diplomacy and a sign that America’s chief geopolitical rival could foster stability in a region long dominated by Western influence. This agreement saw the restoration of diplomatic ties between the two countries after years of severed relations, marking a significant step towards reducing regional tensions. The very act of engaging in such high-level negotiations, facilitated by a third party, underscores a mutual desire to manage disagreements through non-military means.

This diplomatic push was not an isolated event. There have been previous instances of high-level engagement, such as when Araghchi traveled to Qatar and his country's main regional rival, Saudi Arabia, where he held discussions with the Kingdom’s leader, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Such direct talks, even if preliminary, pave the way for understanding and de-escalation. The willingness of both sides to sit at the negotiating table, rather than resorting to military action, strongly suggests that the question of "will Saudi Arabia attack Iran" is increasingly being answered with a resounding "no" through diplomatic channels.

Shifting Alliances and Normalization Efforts

The broader regional context also plays a role in the de-escalation efforts. While the UAE normalized its diplomatic relations with Israel four years ago, Saudi Arabia was on the verge of doing so before the negotiations were derailed by Hamas’ October 7th attack. This indicates a complex web of alliances and potential shifts. Saudi Arabia's pursuit of normalization with Israel, while paused, suggests a strategic re-evaluation of its regional relationships. However, this pursuit does not equate to an alignment against Iran. On the contrary, Saudi Arabia's strong condemnation of Israeli actions against Iran, even while considering normalization with Israel, highlights a nuanced foreign policy that prioritizes regional stability over ideological alignment with any single external power.

The fact that all regional players were quick to condemn Israel’s attacks last week further solidifies the emerging consensus against unilateral military action in the region. This collective condemnation, including from Saudi Arabia, which for years engaged in proxy matches with Iran and was often seen as its main competitor for regional influence, signifies a growing desire among Arab states to avoid further destabilization. This collective stance makes it highly improbable that Saudi Arabia would initiate an attack on Iran, preferring instead to work towards a more stable and predictable regional environment through diplomacy and multilateral engagement.

Conclusion: Navigating a Complex Future

The question of "will Saudi Arabia attack Iran" is far more complex than a simple yes or no. While a long history of rivalry and proxy conflicts has fueled speculation about a direct military confrontation, recent actions and statements from Riyadh strongly indicate a strategic pivot towards de-escalation and diplomacy. Saudi Arabia's consistent and strong condemnation of Israeli aggressions against Iran, its insistence on respecting international law, and its participation in China-brokered peace deals all point away from an offensive posture.

The Kingdom's economic interests, deeply tied to global oil market stability, and its internal security concerns regarding ballistic missile attacks, further incentivize a cautious and defensive approach rather than an aggressive one. The willingness of both nations to engage in dialogue, despite deep-seated differences, suggests a pragmatic recognition that the costs of direct conflict far outweigh any potential gains.

While tensions may flare and the path to lasting peace remains challenging, the prevailing evidence suggests that Saudi Arabia is actively working to avoid a direct military confrontation with Iran. Instead, it appears focused on safeguarding its own interests through a combination of robust defense, diversified international partnerships, and a renewed commitment to regional diplomacy. The future of Saudi-Iran relations will undoubtedly remain a critical determinant of Middle East stability, but for now, the drums of war seem to be receding in favor of the slow, often frustrating, rhythm of negotiation.

What are your thoughts on this evolving dynamic? Do you believe diplomacy will ultimately prevail, or are the historical rivalries too deep to overcome? Share your insights in the comments below, and explore our other articles on Middle East geopolitics to deepen your understanding of this critical region.

For Iran, Saudi Détente Could Ease Strains Regionally and at Home - The

Iran Accuses Saudi Arabia of Attacking Embassy in Yemen - The New York

Iran-Saudi Pact Is Brokered by China, Leaving U.S. on Sidelines - The

Your Luck Starts Here