“The aid is on the way,” US President Donald Trump promised a few days ago to the Iranians protesting against the mullahs' regime.

But a week later, that “aid” still hadn't appeared. And it seems increasingly unlikely that it will happen.

A few days after his announcement, the US president backtracked, arguing that he had been informed that the killings following Iran's crackdown on the protests were decreasing. He also ruled out that mass executions were being planned.

“Alarming violence”

Apparently, other UN member states do not share this assessment. On January 23, the UN Human Rights Council will hold a special session on the “alarming violence” in Iran.

Meanwhile, the US-based Iranian human rights organization Human Rights Activists (HRA) reported last Monday, through its news agency HRANA, that it had verified 3,919 deaths related to the protests.

HRA later updated this figure on the social network X and reported 4,029 documented deaths. Another 9,000 deaths are still under investigation. It is estimated that the death toll could be significantly higher.

Trump likely backed down for other reasons, primarily due to pressure from several Arab countries. According to press reports, representatives from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, and Egypt held intensive diplomatic talks with the United States last week to avert a possible US attack on Iran. Furthermore, the Associated Press reports that these countries also urged the Tehran regime to exercise restraint.

Reservations of the Gulf States

While the Gulf States have a strong interest in keeping Iran weak, so that it is less dangerous, “they also fear that violence could spiral out of control after an attack and that they themselves could become targets of Iranian attacks,” notes political scientist Pauline Raabe of the Middle East Minds think tank in Berlin.

In the opinion of political scientist Eckart Woertz,The director of the Middle East Studies Institute at GIGA believes it is unlikely that the Tehran regime will fall. However, he clarifies that if this were to happen, the unleashed violence “could be directed against the Gulf countries” and trigger large refugee movements.

Although the Gulf countries and Iran have been moving closer for years, a US attack could derail this process, Pauline Raabe believes. “US bases in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, or Bahrain could become the first targets of potential Iranian airstrikes.”

Economic Risks

Likewise, a confrontation with Tehran could have serious economic consequences, Raabe points out. “If Iran were to decide to block trade routes, for example, this would have significant repercussions for the economies of the Gulf countries.”

The expert does not rule out blockades in the Persian Gulf. “We have already seen what this means in the Red Sea, where the Houthi militia, an Iranian-backed group, is bombing international shipping,” explains the political scientist. A similar blockade in the Persian Gulf would have enormous economic consequences, both for the Arab states and for the global economy, he says. Eckart Woertz believes that instability would also affect the processes of economic transformation underway in the Gulf: “Saudi Arabia, in particular, is repositioning itself economically. Any instability constitutes a significant obstacle. This also applies to its traditional business of extracting natural resources, especially oil. Any uncertainty harms this sector, as it relies so heavily on trust and functioning supply chains. Both are essential to the Gulf economy.” Authoritarian Stability. Furthermore, Woertz believes that “the political elite of the Gulf countries would prefer to stick with the old regime rather than confront a new and potentially unknown force. Of course, there are strong reservations about the Iranian regime in the Gulf countries. At the same time, however, both sides have deepened their diplomatic contacts in recent years, following a period of strained relations. They don't want to jeopardize that.”