Saudi Public Split Over Iran War, Research Reveals
The Saudi Arabian government is reportedly facing a complex political dilemma regarding the best way to respond to the expanding conflict between the United States and Iran. Amidst growing security threats in the Gulf region, public opinion within Saudi Arabia is surprisingly divided on the option of direct military involvement.
According to an opinion piece in The Conversation, this division was uncovered through a rare independent polling research conducted within the autocratic monarchy. Political scientists Robert Kubinec from the University of Scarlina and Alexis Montambault-Trudelle from Université Laval tracked the dynamics of Saudi public opinion since the outbreak of armed conflict.
“The Saudi people are deeply divided over military action against Iran—a division that presents a difficult calculus for Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the de facto leader of Saudi Arabia, and his advisers,” wrote Kubinec and Montambault-Trudelle in their joint analysis.
The researchers presented data showing that an absolute majority, approximately three-quarters of respondents in Saudi Arabia, fully support strengthening strategic ties with the United States. This is particularly notable as the poll was conducted after the US military unilaterally bombarded Iran on 28 February. Iranian aggression targeting several allied territories has instead strengthened the desire of local citizens to seek protection under the Pentagon’s security umbrella.
However, the situation shifts drastically when respondents are asked about the option of launching direct military strikes at the heart of enemy defences. The poll results prove that 49% of respondents agree with the Saudi military missile-striking Iranian launch sites, while the remaining 51% firmly reject the option of open warfare.
Differences in Views Based on Age and Gender
Further findings from the research show that support for aggressive military action is highest among middle-aged groups, reaching 61%. This support drops among the younger generation of Saudis, reaching only 45%.
Contrasting perspectives also emerge based on gender. Approximately 54% of Saudi men recorded strong support for military strikes against Iran, while women showed a much more restrained attitude, with support at only 43%.
“Views on both questions reinforce each other; meaning, respondents who view the US alliance positively are more likely to support attacks on Iran, and vice versa,” explained Kubinec and Montambault-Trudelle, detailing the psychological connection between respondents in the survey.
Nevertheless, the uncertainty of the war situation has not fully polarised the Saudi public into extreme ‘hawks’ or ‘doves’. Only 15% of respondents strongly support military action, and only 16% strongly reject it radically.
A large portion of the population is reported to be in a middle position, reflecting ambivalence or deep hesitation rather than hard ideological convictions regarding the armed conflict. This suggests that Saudi respondents appear able to distinguish between the strategic security commitment to the US and support for more aggressive military action.
MBS’s Secret Maneuvers Amidst Public Pressure
The dynamics of these polling results are considered very helpful for the international community to read the direction of the secret manoeuvres being conducted by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS). Last May, the Saudi Arabian Air Force reportedly launched several secret air strikes over Iranian territory, marking a significant shift from their traditional defence doctrine.
Riyadh was forced to take independent action after Washington’s unilateral decision to attack Iran without consultation left Saudi Arabia to bear the consequences of retaliatory Iranian missile strikes on their oil facilities. Meanwhile, media reports suggest that Prince Mohammed personally urged US President Donald Trump to continue maintaining full military pressure on Tehran, which he described as a historic opportunity.
“Our survey shows that Saudi leaders are operating under competing incentives: maintaining a credible deterrent effect from the US alliance and signalling firmness towards Tehran, while simultaneously limiting the domestic costs of open warfare,” stated Kubinec and Montambault-Trudelle regarding the political tactics employed by the palace.
The two researchers assess that even authoritarian regimes are fundamentally sensitive to domestic political constraints and are reluctant to bear the political costs of opposing widespread public preference. From this perspective, Saudi Arabia’s official stance—appearing to exercise restraint publicly while simultaneously supporting secret operations to weaken Iran—is viewed as a mature strategy to satisfy foreign security targets without triggering domestic protests.