A Cautious Condemnation: Why Saudi Arabia Spoke Out Against Israel’s Attack on Iran...

In a surprising move amid the volatile dynamics of the Middle East, Saudi Arabia recently condemned Israel’s October 26 air strikes on Iranian targets. This shift hints at Riyadh’s intricate balancing act between internal sensitivities, diplomatic ties, and the evolving nature of regional alliances. Saudi Arabia and Israel—historically uneasy counterparts—both regard Iran as a strategic threat due to its nuclear ambitions and influence over militant groups across the region. However, Riyadh’s response reveals the layered, multifaceted calculus guiding its foreign policy decisions.

Navigating Shifting Alliances

The Saudi response to Israel’s strikes signals a nuanced regional posture that reflects changes in its relationships, particularly with Iran. This year, Saudi Arabia resumed diplomatic ties with Iran in a move brokered by China, setting the stage for more complex regional dynamics. While Riyadh’s priority remains countering Iran’s regional influence, its overt condemnation of Israel may be a gesture meant to underline a diplomatic thaw with Iran. By denouncing the strikes, Riyadh is likely aiming to preserve a working relationship with Iran, as it navigates its own security priorities and broader public sentiment within the Arab world.

The timing of the condemnation also highlights a collective push by Middle Eastern countries like Turkey, Qatar, Jordan, and the UAE to avoid escalation in the region. Saudi Arabia’s statement aligns it with this bloc, projecting a shared interest in de-escalation. Yet, this does not indicate a full realignment with Iran; instead, it underscores the priority Riyadh places on regional stability—a position reinforced by ongoing reforms under Saudi’s Vision 2030, which seeks to reshape Saudi Arabia as a forward-looking, economically diverse nation.

A Signal to Israel and the U.S.

Saudi Arabia’s condemnation serves as a reminder to both Israel and the U.S. of the limits of its support, even if tacit. Israel has sought to build on its regional relationships in recent years, encouraged by the Abraham Accords that normalized its relations with several Arab states, including the UAE and Bahrain. Saudi Arabia, while not formally joining the accords, has engaged in informal talks with Israel, facilitated by U.S. intermediaries eager to secure a broad normalization agreement.

However, Riyadh’s latest stance suggests a willingness to voice disapproval when it perceives Israeli actions as destabilizing. By condemning Israel’s air strikes, Saudi Arabia creates diplomatic space, signaling its reluctance to endorse Israel’s actions unconditionally. This stance is particularly salient as Saudi public opinion remains sensitive to Israeli military actions, especially given the longstanding Arab solidarity with the Palestinian cause. This sentiment is a critical factor Riyadh must weigh when considering any form of normalization with Israel.

Domestic Concerns and Regional Leadership

Riyadh’s rebuke may also be partly motivated by domestic factors. Anti-Israel sentiment remains strong among the Saudi populace, stemming from decades of support for Palestinian causes and opposition to Israeli policies. Any overt alliance with Israel—especially one perceived as prioritizing strategic convenience over Arab unity—could provoke domestic unrest, a risk Saudi leaders are keen to mitigate as they work to balance domestic stability with an ambitious agenda for economic reform.

In its response, Saudi Arabia also reaffirms its role as a leader in the Muslim world, using this moment to solidify ties with other Arab nations. By speaking out, Riyadh reinforces its influence as a diplomatic heavyweight in the region, emphasizing its role in mediating conflicts and promoting regional cohesion. This response may also serve to position Saudi Arabia as a responsible global actor, reflecting its aspiration to be seen as a nation committed to international norms, a goal that aligns with its Vision 2030 framework to diversify economically and strengthen its global reputation.

The Broader Geopolitical Context

Interestingly, Saudi Arabia’s condemnation diverged from the more neutral stances of other Iran allies like Russia and China, who refrained from explicit condemnation of Israel’s strikes. While Moscow and Beijing aim to avoid direct involvement, Riyadh’s more vocal stance may indicate a broader willingness to assert itself within the Arab and Muslim spheres of influence.

Simultaneously, the U.S. response—or lack thereof—adds to the intrigue surrounding Saudi Arabia’s statement. Reports indicate that Washington was aware of the planned Israeli strikes but opted not to intervene directly, urging caution against hitting nuclear sites while refraining from public criticism. Saudi Arabia, though still a close ally of the U.S., may be wary of relying solely on American support, especially given the complex and sometimes ambivalent U.S. stance toward Middle Eastern conflicts.

Potential Implications for Future Normalization

Speculation about the prospect of Saudi-Israeli normalization has intensified in recent years, fueled by a mutual interest in countering Iran and the economic potential of deeper ties. However, for Riyadh, the Palestinian issue remains a significant roadblock, underscoring its stance that any formal alignment with Israel should accompany progress on Palestinian rights.

Furthermore, the Saudi government’s commitment to carefully navigating domestic opinion could impact the trajectory of these diplomatic overtures. Any agreement perceived as compromising Arab solidarity might trigger backlash, especially if Israel’s regional actions continue to strain public sentiment across the Arab world. Riyadh may find it essential to balance these factors carefully, advancing toward a stable Middle East without alienating its citizens.

A New Diplomatic Paradigm?

Saudi Arabia’s condemnation of Israel’s air strikes on Iran may mark a turning point in Middle Eastern diplomacy, one that emphasizes caution, cooperation, and a prioritization of stability over rivalry. By issuing this condemnation, Riyadh may be reinforcing a message of diplomatic restraint and multilateral engagement, setting a new precedent for how regional powers interact amid shifting alliances.

In this light, Saudi Arabia’s actions underscore the evolution of the Middle East’s geopolitical landscape. As Riyadh carefully navigates its relationships with Israel, Iran, and the broader Arab world, it may be signaling that a new era of pragmatic, diplomacy-centered regional leadership is emerging—one where balance, stability, and a commitment to broader Muslim solidarity remain paramount.