Trump’s initial foreign policy moves are producing results. Venezuela and Colombia agreed to accept the return of their citizens who entered America illegally. Mexico is sending 10,000 soldiers to its border with the US border to staunch the flow of migrants and drugs. Canada wants to negotiate, urgently. Panama agreed not to renew its infrastructure borrowing from China. Trump pairs boldness with toughness in a unique and pragmatic way.
Now he should turn his attention to Kuwait, home to the forward base of the US army component of Central Command (CentCom) and the fourth largest number of US troops based overseas. Its strategic importance, bordering Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia, is unquestionable.
Slightly smaller than Connecticut, Kuwait plays an outsized role in Arab diplomacy and regional economics. The relationship between the US and Kuwait has been strong ever since the US led a multi-national coalition of forces to liberate the nation from Iraqi invaders in 1991. Kuwait supports America’s role in regional security and pays billions of dollars every year to fund US army facilities in Kuwait – unlike most nations that charge fees to the US to use military facilities.
But Kuwait is facing headwinds that could blow down the Trump Administration’s plans for peace and security across the Middle East.
Kuwait’s ability to modernize is hampered by a reluctance to engage in broader diplomatic shifts, particularly to support the Abraham Accords, a historic peace accord between Israel and three Arab countries (plus Kosovo). The Trump Administration wants to widen the adoption of the Abraham Accords to spread peace and prosperity across the Middle East.
The United States has a direct interest in ensuring that Kuwait moves forward, strengthening its economy and regional position while aligning itself with the emerging Gulf consensus. This requires bold leadership from the Emir, strategic support from Washington, and a pragmatic approach that balances Kuwait’s political culture with its long-term interests.
Kuwait’s political system, unlike those of its Gulf neighbors, grants some independent legislative authority to an elected parliament. But Islamist-leaning factions in the legislature have consistently blocked critical economic and governance reforms, leaving Kuwait overly dependent on oil revenue, burdened by bureaucracy, and struggling to attract foreign investment.
The Emir, Mishal Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah, recognizes the need for modernization. He has an economic reform agenda that meets persistent parliamentary resistance. He has the constitutional ability to override parliamentary opposition, while ensuring judicial oversight to prevent abuse. Such measures would allow Kuwait to move forward without undermining its democratic framework. Economic revitalization is essential to Kuwait’s future. The country must diversify beyond oil and create a more attractive environment for foreign investment, especially relating to modernized banking and investment rules. Establishing strategic economic zones where businesses can operate with fewer bureaucratic hurdles, as the Emir proposes, would also be a significant step forward.
Reforming labor laws create private-sector jobs for Kuwaitis and reducing dependence on guest workers from Central and South Asia improve worker’s rights while boosting the economy. Privatization of key non-essential state industries, such as utilities and telecommunications, would introduce efficiency and innovation while lightening the financial burden on the government.
These measures would position Kuwait as a regional hub in the northern Gulf for investment and innovation, enhancing its economic resilience. To ensure fiscal sustainability, Kuwait must also introduce gradual tax reforms, beginning with a low corporate tax and a value-added tax system that does not deter business growth.
At the same time, the government should phase out broad subsidies on fuel and utilities, replacing them with targeted assistance for lower-income citizens to maintain social stability and solidarity.
Americans like to promote democracy abroad, sometimes championing legislative bodies over executive agencies. But each country presents a unique set of circumstances where the balance between executive and legislative functions evolved over centuries and it took many years to find the right equilibrium. At this moment, Kuwait might be freer with a more powerful executive, who can modernize more quickly, than with a parliament dependent of key leaders who hail from smaller, wealthier and more educated enclaves who care more about ideological purity than economic growth.
The less prosperous majority may well agree with the Emir that growth is more important than purity at this time. The Emir should be encouraged to use referenda to gauge public support for critical reforms, bypassing parliamentary resistance.
Beyond economic reform, Kuwait must also define its role in a changing regional order. The Abraham Accords have reshaped Middle Eastern diplomacy, with the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Kosovo normalizing ties with Israel, leading to unprecedented economic and security cooperation.
Kuwait, however, remains hesitant due to internal political resistance. While full normalization may not be immediately feasible, the United States should encourage Kuwait to take gradual steps toward engagement, emphasizing how participation in regional cooperation does not equate to abandoning its historical positions.
Instead, Kuwait could use its influence to push for peace in the Middle East through diplomatic channels opened by engagement rather than isolation. The economic benefits of joining the broader framework of the Abraham Accords are overwhelming. Israel’s leadership in technology, agriculture, and water management presents valuable opportunities for Kuwait to enhance its infrastructure. Trade and investment flows would diversify the economy, providing new markets and business partnerships.
Kuwaiti youth, who are increasingly looking for opportunities beyond the public sector, could benefit from collaboration with advanced industries, fostering job creation and entrepreneurial growth. The UAE and Bahrain have already demonstrated how normalization with Israel can drive economic expansion while maintaining their respective geopolitical identities.
Kuwait should recognize the pragmatic benefits of engagement rather than allowing outdated political narratives to dictate its future. Security considerations are also vital. All Gulf nations face the same threats from Iran: domestic subversion, media influence, terrorism, and cyber warfare, all of which demand stronger regional cooperation. Aligning Kuwait’s intelligence and defense efforts with those of CentCom and its nearby allied nations would make it safer and stronger.
Washington should offer Kuwait security guarantees and defense support, beyond its current force structure in the country, as incentives to enter the regional framework of cooperation bringing together Israel and pro-American Arab states. This requires a careful diplomatic approach. Unlike the UAE or Bahrain, where leadership had the autonomy to make rapid foreign policy decisions, Kuwait’s parliamentary system necessitates broader consensus. America should focus on behind-the-scenes engagement, working with the Emir and key political figures to address concerns and outline the strategic benefits of participation.
A well-crafted public awareness campaign, led by respected Kuwaiti voices, could highlight how joining the regional framework does not compromise national identity but rather strengthens Kuwait’s ability to influence key regional issues.
Saudi Arabia’s evolving position on Israel also presents an opportunity. As Riyadh continues to explore avenues for normalization, Kuwait will find itself increasingly isolated if it remains outside this shift in Gulf diplomacy.
The United States should work with Saudi Arabia and other GCC states to encourage Kuwait to start the process of economic and security engagement with the Abraham Accord countries. A phased approach, starting with non-diplomatic cooperation in areas like healthcare, education, and technological exchange, would allow Kuwait to test the waters before committing to full normalization. Symbolic gestures, permitting limited trade and cultural exchanges, could serve as confidence-building measures before larger steps are taken.
The United States has a direct interest in Kuwait’s modernization and regional integration. A stable, economically diversified Kuwait is a stronger and more reliable ally.
Supporting the Emir’s reform agenda would create a more business-friendly environment, benefiting American companies and investors while ensuring long-term economic stability in the region. Moreover, countering the influence of Iran and extremist factions in the Gulf requires Kuwait to be part of a broader security and economic framework that prioritizes stability and growth over ideological resistance.
Kuwait’s moment for transformation is now. The Emir has demonstrated the will to push forward reforms, but he needs international support to overcome internal opposition.
The Trump administration has a unique opportunity to shape the future of one of the Gulf’s most strategically located nations, ensuring that it becomes a model of economic progress and pragmatic diplomacy.
By standing firmly behind Kuwait’s modernization efforts and encouraging its gradual engagement with the Abraham Accords, the United States can help secure a stronger, more stable Middle East—one where economic prosperity and regional cooperation replace stagnation and division.
This is a defining moment for Kuwait, and President Trump should seize the moment to expand the Abraham Accords.
