The Trump administration is pushing Gulf Arab states to help cover the $35 billion cost of the Iran war, echoing the cost-sharing model from the 1991 Gulf War.
Coverage centers on the diplomatic tension between Washington's cost-sharing demands and Gulf leaders' concerns about fulfilling prior investment commitments to the U.S.
Commentators note the irony of Gulf states being asked to fund a war that has already devastated their own economies and investment plans.
The Trump administration is calling on Gulf Arab states to help cover the cost of Operation Epic Fury, the five-week-old military campaign against Iran that has cost upwards of $35 billion [1].
Reuters reported on March 30 that President Trump is interested in a cost-sharing arrangement modeled on the 1991 Gulf War, when allied nations contributed heavily to offset U.S. military expenses [2]. The White House has not specified dollar figures, but the request comes as the war's daily price tag averages roughly $1 billion, according to congressional estimates.
The ask arrives at an awkward moment. Politico reported on March 26 that the Iran war has "freaked people out" in Gulf capitals, threatening to crimp the massive U.S. investment pledges that Gulf leaders made during earlier diplomatic courtships [3]. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had committed to $600 billion in U.S. investments, with vague promises of reaching $1 trillion, Bloomberg reported [4].
But the war has damaged Gulf economic ambitions. Reuters noted that while the U.S. pulled the trigger, it is the oil-producing Gulf that is paying the price through disrupted trade, elevated risk premiums, and strained sovereign wealth funds [5]. Deutsche Welle reported that Gulf states are unlikely to sustain high investment spending during or after the conflict.
The precedent is clear. In 1991, Gulf allies covered roughly 80 percent of the war's cost. Whether they will do so again, in a conflict many of them did not seek, is the open question.
-- Hendrik van der Berg, Dubai