WANA (Jul 14) – Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi has called for a fundamental overhaul of the Persian Gulf’s security architecture, asserting that the decades-long policy of “containing” Iran was built on a falsehood.

 

In a newly published op-ed, Albusaidi argued that the “Iran threat” was used as a pretext to militarize the region with U.S. bases and excessive defense spending—none of which proved effective. He urged regional states to abandon exclusionist policies and transition toward an inclusive, cooperative security framework.

 

The Myth of ‘Containment’ and the Illusion of the Iran Threat

Reflecting on the security architecture of the Persian Gulf since 1979, Albusaidi wrote that regional security has long been organized around the concept of “containment.” This policy, he noted, was designed to exclude Iran under the guise of defending Western interests against an existential threat.

 

The fundamental flaw in this logic, Albusaidi stated, was that Iran was never actually such an existential threat. The Omani Foreign Minister pointed out that this policy came at an immense financial cost, resulting in:

 

  • Unchecked increases in regional defense spending.

 

  • The expansion of U.S. military bases across the Persian Gulf.

 

  • A heavy reliance on long-range, forward-deployed military presence.

 

Ultimately, Albusaidi asserted that the recent war had demonstrated that the containment policy was nothing but a myth. He added that this reality was now being acknowledged even by those who had spent over 45 years defending the policy as an unavoidable necessity.

 

Tel Aviv Identified as the Real Threat to Regional Security

Albusaidi shifted the focus of regional instability away from Tehran, pointing instead to external actors and Israeli policy.

 

The Foreign Minister wrote that the greatest threats to Persian Gulf security did not originate from within the region, but were rather the result of decisions and actions taken outside of it, chiefly in Tel Aviv.

 

He noted that this reality had now become undeniable, raising critical pquestions about what this realization meant for the future of regional security and how the broader security landscape should be addressed.

 

A New Inclusive Security Framework for the Eight Littoral States

Albusaidi emphasized that any viable future security arrangement must include all eight countries bordering the Persian Gulf: the six members of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (PGCC), alongside Iraq and Iran. He noted that both Iraq and Iran have historically been the primary targets of containment policies and foreign military interventions.

 

To build a sustainable future, Albusaidi proposed:

 

Collective Responsibility: All eight nations must participate in and share responsibility for a new regional security architecture.

 

Abandoning Old Assumptions: Regional states must re-evaluate which partnerships actually guaranteed security and which ones created unintended vulnerabilities.

 

Securing the Strait of Hormuz: Implementing practical, sustainable mechanisms under international law to guarantee freedom of navigation. Albusaidi noted that Oman shared a special responsibility with Iran and the international community to secure this vital global economic artery.

 

Recalibrating Relations with the United States

While calling for a reassessment of regional alliances, Albusaidi clarified that Oman did not advocate for cutting ties with Washington.

 

The relationship with the U.S. was built on deep historical foundations and held valuable potential for future cooperation, he noted. However, he stressed that these ties needed to be recalibrated to align with the strategic realities revealed by the recent conflict.

 

Albusaidi questioned what positive and appropriate role friends like the United States could play if the principle of inclusivity was to replace containment as the foundation of a regional security cooperation system.

 

A Call to Correct Nearly Half a Century of Strategic Errors

Concluding his piece, the Omani Foreign Minister described the recent war—launched without a UN mandate and failing to achieve any of its officially stated objectives—as a tragedy.

 

However, Albusaidi wrote that if this conflict served as the final blow that buried the myth of containment in the Persian Gulf, there was hope for the future. He concluded that the region now had a historic opportunity to build a fairer, more realistic, and more effective security order to correct nearly half a century of strategic blunders.