File Photo: Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi shakes hands with his Saudi counterpart Prince Faisal bin Farhan during their meeting in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. AFP
The proposal, discussed quietly between Riyadh and a number of regional and European partners, reflects growing Gulf concerns that the war could leave behind a weakened but more confrontational Iran, while simultaneously accelerating uncertainty about the future of American military commitments in the region.
According to the report, Saudi officials have referenced the 1970s Helsinki Process — the Cold War-era framework that helped reduce tensions between the Soviet bloc and Western powers — as a possible model for a broader regional security arrangement. European governments and institutions are said to have reacted positively to the idea, seeing it as a mechanism that could reduce the risks of future wars and provide security guarantees for all parties, including Iran.
The discussions come at a moment of profound strategic anxiety across the Gulf. Since the outbreak of the US-Israeli war on Iran, Gulf states have feared that any eventual settlement could produce an embittered Iranian leadership with stronger incentives to project power through missiles, drones and regional allies.
Iran’s retaliation during the war — including missile and drone strikes targeting US assets and Gulf energy facilities, alongside the disruption of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz — reinforced concerns among Arab governments about the vulnerability of the region’s economic infrastructure and energy routes.
Diplomats quoted in the report said the proposed framework would likely receive broad support among Arab and Muslim states, particularly because it aligns with long-standing regional arguments that Middle Eastern security should be managed primarily by regional powers rather than external actors.
“But Iran is not going anywhere and this is why the Saudis are pushing it," according to a diplomat speaking to FT.
At the same time, the proposal also reflects deeper changes in regional perceptions of Israel and the United States following months of war. While Iran continues to be viewed by many Arab states as a major source of instability, there is also growing frustration over Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza, Lebanon and Syria, as well as concern that the war has expanded into a wider regional confrontation.
The report noted that many Arab governments believe Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu played a central role in pushing US President Donald Trump toward a broader attack on Iran despite regional objections.
"Israel is increasingly seen by many Arab and Muslim states as a belligerent, destabilising force," the report noted.
The emerging Saudi initiative also highlights evolving regional alignments. Riyadh has recently deepened strategic coordination with Pakistan, Turkey and Egypt, particularly in the fields of defence and diplomacy. Saudi Arabia signed a mutual defence pact with Pakistan in September, and diplomats say the four countries are likely to expand cooperation further after the war.
Pakistan has also publicly discussed broadening the arrangement. Pakistani Defence Minister Khawaja Asif said this week that Islamabad had proposed expanding the Saudi-Pakistani defence framework to include Qatar and Turkey as part of what he described as a wider regional economic and defence alliance aimed at reducing dependence on outside powers.
However, divisions remain inside the Gulf itself. The United Arab Emirates has taken a notably more hawkish position toward Iran during the war and has maintained closer strategic coordination with Israel. Diplomats cited in the report questioned whether Abu Dhabi would support a broader non-aggression framework involving Tehran.
Short link: