| More

Fact Sheet: Arab Leaders Voice Concerns about Iran and its Nuclear Program

Arab leaders worry that Iran's hostility toward the West and Iran’s nuclear obsession will destabilize the region. . The Gulf States are particularly concerned about the ecological danger that an Iranian nuclear facility would bring. Iran's nuclear power plant is located 75 miles (120 km) from the border with Kuwait and, in case of a leak, would devastate Kuwait's water supply.

Across the Middle East, Arab politicians, academics and journalists have become increasingly outspoken about their concerns regarding Iran's nuclear program. They have publicly voiced their opposition to actions and comments by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, even comparing him to Adolph Hitler.

The following is a sampling of remarks made by Arab political leaders, journalists and prominent intellectuals.

Arab Political Leaders

Kuwaiti Member of Parliament Nasser Al Duwaila:

“[There is] huge Iranian activity in the center of the State of Kuwait”…“Be aware of the dangerous activities that can be carried out by Iran in Kuwait" …"Soon we will hear about bombings and assassinations in Kuwait, similar to what is happening in Lebanon.”[2] (Sept. 13, 2008)

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak:

“A nuclear armed Iran with hegemonic ambitions is the greatest threat to Arab nations today.” [3] (March 2009)

“The Persians are trying to devour the Arab states." [4] (Dec. 11, 2008)

Kuwaiti Member of Parliament Dr. Walid Al-Tabtabai:

"Iran has oil and gas reserves that will last it for dozens, if not hundreds, of years. I don't think it's true that this project is for energy purposes…They want to intimidate their neighbors."[5] (Aug. 30, 2006)

Former Kuwaiti Minister Dr. Ahmad Al-Rubei:

"What we are facing is madness. I call this madness. The Iranian nuclear activities must cease." [6] (March 6, 2006)

Former Secretary-General of the Gulf Cooperation Council Abd Arahman Attiyah:

“The Iranian nuclear program does not have any justification. . . . We call on the international community to make the Middle East a zone free of weapons of mass destruction." [7] (November 2005)

Former Secretary-General of the Gulf Cooperation Council Abdullah Bishara:

"[Iran's nuclear program] totally turns over the balance of power and makes Iran the master of the region and influential instrument in its decisions - the [Gulf Cooperation Council] position should be united, strong, and clear." [8] (May 26, 2006)

"I don't buy this, the Iranian claim that [the] nuclear program is for civilian purposes]…it is contradictory and aiming to divide the international community." [9] (Jan. 12, 2006)

"The Iranian project threatens the entire region with catastrophes." [10] (Jan. 12, 2006)

Saudi Arabian Ambassador to the United States Prince Turki al-Faisal:

"It [Iran's nuclear program] escalates tensions, brings about competition which is unneeded and unnecessary and uncalled for." [11] (Feb. 10, 2006)

Saudi Arabian Prince Saud Al-Faisal

“Iran…[should] accept the position that we have taken to make the Gulf, as part of the Middle East, nuclear free and free of weapons of mass destruction. We hope that they will join us in this policy and assure that no new threat of arms race happens in this region.” [12] (2006)

United Arab Emirates Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahyan:

"Iran should be transparent in dealing with the [Gulf] region." [13] (May 6, 2006)

"The Iranian nuclear program ... is worrisome not only for us, but for the entire world." [14] (May 6, 2006)

[In order to ] "ensure stability and the future of generations to come in the face of risks to the environment that could come about for one reason or another, we have to have further assurances, which we are seeking from Iran." [15] (May 6, 2006)

"We appreciate Iran's efforts to reassure the region over its program…but for the sake of stability and to avoid any environmental disaster, there needs to be more Iranian guarantees and we are trying to ensure this." [16] (May 7, 2006)

Secretary-General of the Gulf Cooperation Council Abdul Rahman ibn Hamad al-Attiya:

"The concern of the Gulf countries is real and justified." [17] (Sept. 10, 2006)

"The majority of the capitals and cities of the countries of the GCC are closer to the nuclear thermal power stations than Tehran." [18] (Sept. 10, 2006)

"We are really worried; this worry is well-grounded, particularly in regard with the [region's] safety and security." [19] (April 17, 2006)

"Saudi Arabia and the other GCC countries can't find any justification for such nuclear activity which possesses great dangers for all the peoples in the Gulf region." [20] (May 26, 2006)

Senior Palestinian Negotiator Saeb Erekat:

"We [The Palestinians] have recognized the state of Israel and we are pursuing a peace process with Israel, and…we do not accept the statements of the president of Iran…this is unacceptable." [21] (Oct. 27, 2005)

Kuwaiti Foreign Minister Muhammad as-Sabah:

"We in Kuwait are worried. We are not worried that the Iranians may use atomic technologies to make nuclear weapons. It is the risk of a nuclear catastrophe in the region that worries us. Its consequences to the environment will be appalling. After all, the matter concerns the objects located only 120 kilometers from the borders of Kuwait. What if it results in an ecological catastrophe in the Gulf itself? We get drinking water and water we need for other purposes from the Gulf... the Gulf is our only source of water. A nuclear catastrophe in the Persian Gulf will leave us without drinking water.” [22] (May 6, 2006)

Jordanian King Abdullah:

"The rules have changed on the nuclear subject. . . . Everybody's going for nuclear programs. . . . What we don't want is an arms race to come out of this.” [23] (January 2007)

Arab Journalists

Abd Al-Rahman Al-Rashed, editor of the London-based Saudi Daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat:

"Nuclear armament will lead us to the same place we were led [to] by conventional armament. Iranian fighter planes engaged in air battles with Saudi fighter planes on a day in the past, and Scud missiles crushed Tehran and Qom and reached Riyadh and Doha. You can imagine what it would have been like had their warheads been nuclear.” (Oct. 8, 2003)

"It would be a mistake to come to the defense of our neighbor Iran out of ignorance and on the pretext of deterring Israel. The Iranian nuclear danger threatens us, first and foremost, more than it threatens the Israelis and the Americans." [24] (Oct. 8, 2003)

Kuwaiti journalist Sami Al-Nusf:

"The Iranian [nuclear] dossier is more dangerous than the Israeli one, and for several reasons. First, the Iranian nuclear reactor is not on the Caspian Sea, but near the Gulf, and six countries use the water of the Gulf for drinking. If the Gulf water is contaminated, six countries will die of thirst. This is not the case with regard to Israel. The same goes for the decision-making. Even though Israel has had nuclear weapons since the 1960s... Despite the 1973 war and the Arab victory over Israel, it did not even threaten to use these weapons. Even during the missile attack on Israel in 1991, it did not threaten to use these weapons. On the other hand, we are familiar with the irrationality of the Iranian approach. Once they obtain this weapon... This was also the case with Saddam. When he obtained chemical weapons of mass destruction, he immediately used them against the Iranians and the Kurds." [25] (Aug. 28, 2006)

An editorial in the Saudi government daily Al-Watan:

"The main problem in the Iranian issue is concern for the environment and future dangers, in the event of a nuclear leak that could pollute the entire Gulf region.”  [26] (April 21, 2006)

An editorial in the Egyptian government daily, Al-Ahram:

"Consent on the part of the international community and the U.S. to Iran's nuclear capability may lead to a misunderstanding on the part of other powers in the region. The Iranian experience will spur many powers in the region to develop a nuclear program, not only out of a desire to increase their regional and international standing by possessing nuclear capability, but [primarily] because Iran's development of nuclear capabilities will necessarily upset the balance [of power] in the region, particularly in light of the nature of Iran's relations with others in the region." [27] (April 16, 2006)

Progressive Jordanian author and journalist, Dr. Shaker Al-Nabulsi:

"The danger posed by a nuclear Iran is much bigger than that posed by Al-Qaeda. This is because a nuclear Iran has weapons, a strong army, great economic means, and strong apparatuses. Iran also has powerful allies, whether states or organizations - such as Hizbullah, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Hamas movement, and Syria.”  [28] (May 9, 2006)

"Iranian President Ahmadinejad's emotional speeches of incitement to the masses…remind us of the speeches of the Fuehrer, Hitler, on the eve of World War II, when he faced the oppressed German masses and delivered an hours-long speech to them, in which he challenged the world…The German masses parroted his slogans. This was done with the power of the political dictatorship…and what was the result?” [29] (May 3, 2006)

"The collapse of the Third Reich, and the destruction and division of Germany. The same drama is being treated today in Iran, as Ahmadinejad (a new Persian Hitler) stands and challenges the world…what the world fears is that these weapons might fall into the hands of a truly unconstitutional and undemocratic dictatorship.” [30] (May 3, 2006)

Arab Intellectuals

Saudi Arabian political analyst Jasser Abdelaziz al-Jasser:
 
"The Gulf region will witness tensions similar to the tensions witnessed in the region in the early years of the Islamic Revolution." [31] (June 26, 2005)

Kuwaiti analyst Ahmad Al Rubei:

"Yes, Iran is a strong country before Gulf States, but not a superpower in front of the international community…the situation will be a grave one and they [Iranians] have to realize this. We are not talking about banning Iran from flowers and fragrances. We are talking about Iran's [potential for] obtaining a destructive device for Iran and its neighbors." [32] (April 3, 2006)

"They are also involved in both Iraqi and Palestinian affairs. They are involved in acts of violence in Yemen and are nauseatingly active in Syria, Egypt, Pakistan, and other nations - while at home their unemployment and poverty problems worsen and their oil revenues are channeled into the development of nuclear weapons technology and the building of its military arsenal. The Iranian people do not deserve this juvenile policy, and the region does not deserve these frivolous policies. The Gulf peoples on both the Iranian and Arabian sides need peace, stability and the exchange of commodities rather than the exchange of missiles, prisoners and injured people, which they've done for many years." (Jan. 1, 2007)[33]

Former Dean of Islamic Law at the Qatar University Dr. Abd Al-Hamid Al-Ansari:

"While the [entire] world, particularly the superpowers, are preoccupied with the Iranian [danger]…the Gulf region appears to be calm, stable, and quiet, as if the matter does not concern them. The region is…in great danger, and we are not lifting a finger!" [34] (April 17, 2006)

"No one believes Iran's clam [that its uranium enrichment is for peaceful purposes only] - not even Russia, its greatest ally, which is funding [Iran's] nuclear [program]..." [35] (April 17, 2006)

"…How can we be calm about Iran, when it still occupies the [United Arab Emirates] islands, and has a problem with every country in the region?!" [36] (April 17, 2006)

Political science lecturer Dr. Ahmad al-Baghdadi:

"[Iran] will not admit to possible danger in the event of a nuclear leak from one of its plants. This is particularly so because it is planning to establish additional plants in the near future - which places the Gulf region at great risk of the destruction and mutilation of life." [37] (April 25, 2006)

"Iran must be prevented from carrying out this disastrous adventure…Iran is a country with limited technological capability. The price of its arrogance and its stubbornness will be paid by the people of the region, both with the health of generations to come and with the resources that they will waste to handle the disasters, which could be prevented now if Iran acts judiciously - or if it is forced to act judiciously, even by the harshest possible means." [38] (April 25, 2006)

Egyptian reformist Dr. Ahmad Subhi Mansour:

"When [Iran] is preoccupied with distant history, turning it into a contemporary matter of religion, policy, and belief... it is in fact playing with nuclear power like a child playing with electrical wires." [39] (April 12, 2006)