Middle East
The Russian Federation in the new Middle East
In mid-October of last year, President Trump’s order to leave the Syrian territory as quickly as possible led the Russian military to quickly filling the void left by the U.S. forces.
Certainly some U.S. special forces are still operational, but the strategic aim is obviously lacking.
On the edge of the 32kilometre corridor from the border line between Turkey and Syria, Bashar al-Assad’s army now controls Manbiji, at the beginning of the buffer area requested by Turkey, up to Ayn Issa, Tel Amer and Qamishli.
Below this line there are only the YPG and PKK Kurds, of whom it is difficult, in fact, to separate and distinguish the militancy.
When Assad regained control of North-East Syria, with the decisive Russian help, President Putin was still on a diplomatic tour between Saudi Arabia and the Emirates.
To say the least, none of the US traditional Sunni allies has appreciated the fast US acquiescence and Turkey’s unequal agreement with the United States. In fact, this is exactly the way in which the Syrian and Kurdish policy followed by the United States and Turkey has been interpreted by Saudi Arabia and the Emirates.
The Sunni powers regard Turkey as a dangerous side effect of the Muslim Brotherhood – and this holds true at least for Saudi Arabia – or also as a geopolitical wild card – and this applies to the Emirates.
This holds true also for the countries, like Qatar, which have always been interested friends of the Ikhwan, namely the Muslim Brotherhood.
Hostile to God and to his enemies – this is the future of the Turkish global strategy, rebus sic stantibus. Either it binds itself to Russia, under its terms and conditions, or it remains alone in the new Greater Middle East, by now deprived of support from the United States.
The Sunnis who count, namely those of the Arabian Peninsula, and Al Jazeera have understood the U.S. countermelody and are already looking for new allies. They cannot succeed on their own and hence Russia sets in.
“Russia is my second home” – as Prince Mohammed bin Zayed from the dynasty ruling in Abu Dhabi has cleverly stated – but the withdrawal of U.S. soldiers ordered by President Trump is really a strategic, moral and historical turning point.
The Kurds, betrayed in no time by the United States, have immediately negotiated and reached a good agreement with Assad, mediated only by Russia and organized above all by the Shiite factions of the Kurdish nation, present especially in Iraq and with excellent relations with Iran.
Syria, i.e. the place where Turkey wants to enter so as to avoid the strategic link between Syrian Kurds, Anatolian Kurds and Iraqi Kurds – which would constitute a Kurdish State capable of annihilating the rest of the ethnically Turkish population – needs an ally that can “keep firm and alive” (as Machiavelli said with reference to France) Syria as a solid unitary entity, Kurds included.
President Putin still wants to stay in Syria, because he hopes that, in the future, Turkey will leave NATO and become a Russian peripheral ally. Is it an impossible dream? Not necessarily so.
Turkey may also adhere to Russia’s project: the Atlantic Alliance is now the wreck of a war which ended seventy years ago and which has never supported Turkey except in the long series of military coups in 1961, 1980 and again in 1997. Finally, in the changing of the guard that saw all the NATO Mediterranean countries oust their ruling classes, Turkey had to face the AKP, a party reborn from the ashes of an Islamist organization that had been banned by the Turkish Constitutional Court.
The Muslim Brotherhood, acting as US agents – also when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State – to “bring democracy”, i.e. its own democracy, throughout the Islamic world. A masterpiece in reverse.
Currently, after the end of the “Cold War”, only those who can be blackmailed rise to power. Hence the transfer of power in Italy, in the Middle East, but also in Latin America and even in Asia.
Briefly President Putin currently wants Turkey to leave NATO to start collaboration with Russia in Central Asia and, above all, in the great future business of pipelines from Asia to Europe.
The “Middle Corridor” – if organized by Turkey – favours the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative.
There is also the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway opened in October 2017, as well as Turkmenistan’s port on the Caspian Sea, built by Turkish companies closely linked to the Turkish Presidency, which has been operational since 2018.
As early as 1992, the Western powers have conveyed the message to Turkey that it only needs to become the secular Sunni rampart against Iran.
In 1993 Turkey also founded the Alliance for Turkish Culture while, in 2009, the Turkish regime established the Cooperation Council of the Turkic Speaking States.
Now Turkey’s primary idea is to be a “central power” that, however, operates freely in Asia and, in any case, outside the interests of the Atlantic Alliance.
This is exactly what Vladimir Putin likes about it.
The Turkish energy mix, however, is linked to natural gas. Turkey imports it from Russia, Azerbaijan and Iran.
If the Trans-Anatolian Gas Pipeline Project (TANAP) is implemented, Turkey’s energy connection from Central Asian countries would be objectively more important than the old link with the USA and NATO.
Hence Russia could be a real trump card for Turkey.
President Putin, however, has favoured the connection and operational communication between Assad’s forces and the “Turkmen” militias linked to Turkey.
There is no channel of communication that Russia does not control in the Greater Middle East.
After all, if you wage war in the Middle East against a Western-style “villain” typical of comics, the only possible result is that your work is done by the old enemy.
There is also the Iraqi insurgency which concerns corruption, inefficiency and government irrelevance.
So far the toll has been 200 victims, with at least 6,000 injured people.
It is said that Iran has supplied snipers to hit the crowd, but there is no evidence about it.
The Asaib ahl-Al haq militia, i.e. the Shiite network of Al Ghazali that has already operated in Syria, was seen operating also in Iraq and often had to face strong negative reactions from the local population.
Meanwhile, Russia is reaching agreements with all Middle East countries obviously focusing on energy, but also on the media – and above all TV–as well as on infrastructure and the Armed Forces.
In January 2019 Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov hosted his Iraqi counterpart, Mohammed Alì al-Hakim.
Russian investment in Iraq has recently exceeded 10 billion US dollars, while Russia has cancelled an old Iraqi debt of 12.2 billion US dollars in exchange for a new 4 billion US dollar oil contract, which provides Russia with the opportunity of starting to exploit West-Qurna 2, one of the largest oil fields in the world.
Lukoil and Gazprom Neft officially entered the Iraqi Kurdistan’s oil market in 2012, thus paving the way for many new contracts.
Russia has also directly funded Kurdistan’s government, with a 3.5 billion US dollar loan, which will be repaid with the oil sold to Russia’s Rosneft as soon as possible.
In October 2013 Russia sold to the Kurdish world in Iraq and Syria 4.3 billion US dollars in weapons to replace the Iraqi ones. These funds make the Kurdish Rojava autonomous from Iraq, even strategically.
The old intelligence operational centre between Russia, Iran and Syria -opened by Russia in Iraq – is still very active.
Now it also carries out geoeconomic operations.
In September 2018, also the Iraqi-Russian Cultural Centre in Baghdad – closed down in 2003 – was reopened.
In Iraq, however, Russia never wants to compete with Iran. Moreover,Iran and Iraq work very well also with China.
There are 1.7 billion dollars of trade between Iraq and the Russian Federation, which cover the 30 million US dollars of debt that Iraq still holds with China.
On October 21, 2019, President Putin received Erdogan in Sochi and, after seven hours of discussion, the Turkish-Russian bilateral plan has been such as to further diminish the U.S. role, while the Russian one is increasing significantly.
All this is a continuation of the meeting between Russia, Turkey and Iran held in Astana on September 16 last.
Russia wants to weaken the Iranian security forces still present in Syria, by using both Iranian coldness about the Syrian conquest of Idlib and Iran’s traditional tendency to remain – with its forces – on the border between Iran and Syria and to operate, above all, in favour of the corridor between the Iranian Shiite capital and Southern Lebanon.
Russia has not much interest in it.
Moreover, the Russian Federation wants Turkey to quickly disarm its jihadist militias in Idlib, particularly Hayat Ahrir al-Sham, so as to make its ally Bashar al-Assad achieve full controlof the Afrin area, the key point of the North Syrian border and, above all, of the military relationship between Turkey and Syria.
With a view to counterbalancing this disagreement with Turkey, Iraq and possibly Iran, Russia is working on agreements with the most important Sunni leadership.
The issue is much wider: since early August 2019 the Lebanon and Iraq have been an integral part of the “Astana process”.
Russia has also proposed a tripartite agreement between the Lebanon, Syria and Russia for the sole repatriation of Syrian refugees. If Iraq manages to carve out a credible role as mediator between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Russia could create a future duopoly with Iraq in Syria, so as to avoid the Iranian “mortmain” and the jihadist and Sunni pressure on the borders of Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
It should not seem strange that the other trump card of the Russian Federation is Egypt and the Emirates.
It is by no mere coincidence that all these countries have reopened diplomatic channels with Syria.
Russia views Egypt as a reliable partner in Syria, also considering the long-standing support provided by Egypt to Assad.
There is also the “Dialogue two plus two” between Egypt and Russia, an agreement between both countries’ Defence and Foreign Ministries.
Incidentally, this agreement is obviously as valid for Syria as it is for Libya.
In the near future, Egypt will directly support the Russian contractors recently made operational in Cirenaica and in the Libyan Fezzan.
In the meantime, the West is sadly counting the many useless ceasefires.
In December 2018, the Emirates reopened their Embassy in Damascus.
Meanwhile, Russia is always selling advanced weapons to Iran.
It cannot be ruled out that, considering that now the United States is no longer in Syria except for “showing the flag”, Iraq officially asks Russia to organize air raids on the ISIS networks currently present between Syria and Iraq, still largely operating outside the old “Islamic State”.
President Putin, however, will favour Iran’s access to the “Eurasian Union”, while Russia will do its utmost to minimize the risks connected both to Iran’s geopolitics and to the global energy market.
This means that the Russian leader will avoid lowering prices even faced with a rather rhapsodic market of Canadian and U.S. shale oil and gas.
Furthermore, Russia also want to normalize relations with the United States and its mediation between Iran and the United States is important, as well as the idea that each energy production area has and can maintain its optimal market without excessive overlapping between sellers.
Hence President Putin will mediate between all players in the Greater Middle East, by trying to focus both on investment in Syria’s reconstruction and in the new routes of the oil and gas market in Europe. Moreover, Russia will create ad hoc alliances to limit the use of weapons in the region and will finally try to protect Israel – its future pivot in the region – by finding a balance between Sunnis and Shiites and playing the Syrian card as the basis of economic communication between all of them.
Few countries in the Middle East have suffered more from conflict and worked harder for its end than Iraq.
Ravaged by war with Iran, the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein, the US-led invasion of 2003 and then the grim experience of Daesh, the Iraqi nation knows the true meaning of suffering and resilience.
Earlier this year the anniversary of the Iraq war and the toppling of Saddam triggered a spurt of media coverage.
For the most part, the tone was of admiration for the Iraqi people’s capacity for endurance, speckled with pity and regret. That, and continuing concern about Iranian influence in Iraq’s national politics.
Successive governments in Baghdad have resisted pressures to confront their powerful neighbour and former foe and instead have sought to play a role of reconciliation with the Arab world.
This has been Iraq’s policy for years and, while the credit for peace-making is shared with others, the fruits of that policy are now becoming visible.
For its part, Iraq has long planned the renewal of national infrastructure it clearly needs to reinvigorate its economy.
This ambition for Iraq to take its proper place in the economic networks of the region has been given fresh impetus by a new government led by Prime Minister, Mohammed Shia Al Sudani, who took office last autumn.
If it survives legal appeal, the recent judgement on oil exports from the Kurdish Autonomous Region being subject to national control should strengthen Iraq as a unitary state.
But Al Sudani’s most ambitious move is to promote the “Development Road” – a long-planned road and rail artery pumping new life into the economy. It would span the length of the country, from Rabia, on the northern border with Turkey, to the new commercial port of Al-Faw, on the Gulf, in the south.
With transport and logistics increasingly recognised as a key sector in the global economy, al-Sudani wants to make Iraq a transportation hub for goods and people linking the Gulf, Turkey and Europe.
There is an echo here of China’s “Belt and Road” initiative, which aims to see 130 countries across Asia, Europe and Africa connected to China through new land and sea infrastructure.
The 750-mile Development Road also evokes memories of the original Berlin-Baghdad railway, which started construction in 1903 and was only finished in 1940. The basis of that German imperial project was the Kaiser’s desire to connect directly with the Ottoman world, and beyond it Iran, with a line running through Turkey, Syria and Iraq.
At the outbreak of WW1 the railway was still 600 miles short of Baghdad, but had completed the branch running through Damascus to the Hejaz, serving the pilgrimage route to Medina. By then imperial rivalries had embroiled the project, and the last stretch was only completed in the 1930s by an independent Iraq.
An updated concept of the original plan is now being pitched to investors. Attending the recent launch of al-Sudani’s Development Road in Baghdad were the regional states which could most benefit from the new infrastructure – Kuwait, Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iran and Turkey.
It is too soon to expect pledges of co-investment in the project, which has a headline cost of $17bn. Though Qatar has indicated its potential support and is already a major investor in infrastructure in Turkey,
Planners and policy-makers will be thinking hard about the proposal. Economists will be examining the commercial case for a land route which seeks to avoid the shipping route through the Suez Canal. For shipments at scale, sea transport to and from the well-established facilities in northern Europe, or on to India and further East, will remain unbeatable on cost.
Some reassurance has come from the World Bank which has spoken in support of the project and World Bank involvement in funding (and thus supervision) will also bring comfort to investors.
While Syria probably offers a less expensive route to a Mediterranean port, Iraq rightly sees Turkey as an important economic partner, with complementary strengths and opportunities for collaboration.
Relations have been bedevilled for years by Turkish encroachment on Iraqi sovereign territory in pursuit of its fight against Kurdish separatists – a problem Baghdad has been working patiently to resolve.
But the creation of economic and communications infrastructure for the benefit of shared prosperity is a courageous and necessary step for both countries to take.
Yes, there will be security concerns. Nothing can be taken for granted. But the long game has to be played, and the prize is immeasurable for a country that has suffered so much.
Middle East
The role of Egypt in the Xi Jinping initiative of “democratization of international relations”
Egypt and China play an effective role in enhancing cooperation on maintaining international peace and security, especially in the Middle East. Here, the Egyptian side adheres to the one-China policy, firmly supports China’s efforts to maintain its sovereignty, security and stability, and firmly supports China’s work to combat terrorism and religious extremism. The indicators show the growth of mutual international interests and the rise of China’s global role, which consolidates the system of multipolarity globally, with the increase in the extent of Chinese interdependence in international interests. These are developments that push for the strengthening and consolidation of cultural, political and economic ties between the Chinese and Egyptian sides in the medium and long term, especially with China proposed and implemented the “Belt and Road” initiative, and Egypt inaugurated a political system with development orientations internally, and adopted a “Look East” policy at the external level, which contributes to establishing future Egyptian-Chinese relations that go beyond traditional political, economic, and commercial frameworks, and establishes a more comprehensive and expanding partnership.
China encourages the implementation of global development initiatives, global security initiatives, and global civilization initiatives, enhances coordination and positive interaction between major countries, works to develop relations with neighboring countries, develop solidarity and cooperation with developing countries, maintain multilateralism, and participate in reforming and establishing global governance systems. These are the same concepts and foundations on which President “El-Sisi” agrees with his Chinese counterpart “Xi Jinping” in all international forums. President “El-Sisi” launched of the “Decent Life project” to care for the poorest and most needy villages, as well as care for the poor citizen, comes as a launch of Egypt’s efforts to implementing international development initiatives, which comes in the same context as the Global Development Initiative of Chinese President “Xi Jinping”. Therefore, China, as a rising country, is trying to achieve many development goals, by proposing the Belt and Road Initiative and the long-term goals it contains that have repercussions on bringing about a shift in the structure of the international system from a unipolar system to a multipolar system or to reaching a state of non-polarity in the international system by following a number of political, economic, propaganda, and strategic mechanisms to achieve multi-polar competitiveness, which ultimately reaches and serves Chinese President Xi Jinping’s idea of achieving global development.
In this context, Egypt is trying to take advantage of all the opportunities and gains that China can achieve as a rising power in the international arena in the current century, through its introduction of the Belt and Road Initiative, and its many development and service projects in the axis of the Egyptian Suez Canal and the New Administrative Capital. In all his speeches, President “El-Sisi” emphasizes the concept of the new republic in Egypt, which is the same as what China refers to as the “new era”, which mostly refers to the multipolar world in which China, Egypt, and all African and developing countries are working together to establish it, as an alternative to the polar world. the one.
We find joint Chinese-Egyptian support for international efforts made to confront climate change, and support for initiatives aimed at promoting sustainable green development, including the (Egyptian Initiative for a Green Middle East) and China’s initiative on the (Green Silk Road), with their emphasis on the need for the Middle East region to be free of… Weapons of mass destruction, strengthening efforts to combat terrorism, condemning terrorism in its various forms and motives, and drying up its sources. The Chinese side is working with its Egyptian counterpart to adhere to the concept of a (community with a shared future for humanity), strengthen strategic partnership relations, and deepen cooperation in various fields between the two parties.
The two presidents (El-Sisi and Xi Jinping) agree to reform the current world order and push strongly towards providing pluralism in the new world order, based on the mechanism of the United Nations, preserving its periodic system, strengthening the multilateral global trade system and international poles, and pushing developing countries from marginalized regions to central command areas on the global governance stage. For this reason, both China and Egypt are committed to the concept of (global development) that is characterized by justice, inclusiveness and cooperation in an open, fully coordinated and innovative manner, to promote coordinated and sustainable economic, social and environmental development and the comprehensive development of humanity. Therefore, Egypt’s efforts to participate with the Chinese side in the “Third China-Africa Peace and Security Forum”, which was held from August 28 to September 2, 2023, came to enhance communication between the defense ministries in China and Africa, as part of Beijing’s efforts to protect its commercial and investment achievements on the African continent, and Egypt. Of course, first and foremost, given the importance of Chinese projects in Cairo.
Egypt’s official participation also took place in the Chinese capital, Beijing, on Sunday, July 9, 2023, to participate in (the first high-level conference of the International Action Forum for Common Development). It is a conference in which high-level delegations from 27 countries participated, along with more than 20 United Nations agencies and international non-governmental organizations. The International Joint Development Conference in Beijing, with the participation of the Egyptian side, aimed to discuss strengthening joint action to implement the “Global Development Initiative” proposed by Chinese President “Xi Jinping” in 2021, with the aim of redirecting global development towards a new stage of balance and comprehensive coordination to confront global shocks. Promoting more equitable and balanced global development partnerships and achieving more multilateral cooperation to accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda.
Here we find coordination between the Chinese and Egyptian sides, regarding all international and regional issues, especially the Palestinian issue, by supporting international efforts aimed at reaching a permanent and just solution to the issue on the “basis of the two-state solution”, leading to an end to the Israeli occupation and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. On the 1967 borders, its capital is East Jerusalem. Therefore, the Egyptian-Chinese insistence on the need to prevent a return to the Cold War mentality, and the common positions of the two presidents (El-Sisi and Xi Jinping) on the need to abandon confrontation between the camps, that is, whether they are friends or enemies. Instead, China and Egypt agree on the need to advance international solidarity, advocate the concept of common, cooperative, comprehensive and sustainable security, while respecting and addressing the legitimate concerns of all parties, jointly rejecting the revival of the mentality of competing blocs and opposing attempts aimed at a new Cold War, with the aim of maintaining peace and the international stability.
Egyptian President “El-Sisi” also agrees with his Chinese counterpart “Xi Jinping” on the need for international cooperation and collective work to address global challenges, and that the only way to achieve sustainable development is a joint global effort, with access to a new global financial structure that guarantees equal opportunities and fair access to income. Financing for developing countries. This is in light of strengthening efforts to implement the sustainable development goals in response to the (Global Development Initiative) proposed by Chinese President “Xi Jinping” in 2021. Therefore, the joint vision of the leaders of the two countries, President “El-Sisi” and “Xi Jinping”, comes to agree on the importance of aligning global development strategies and development plans with the national priorities and needs of each country. With President “El-Sisi” stressing in his foreign speeches the importance of working with the countries of the South, to emphasize the role of Chinese cooperation with developing and African countries, known as (South-South) cooperation to promote global development goals in parallel with the Chinese Comprehensive Development Initiative, and to promote economic recovery at the global level. And creating development models based on already successful experiences in the countries of the South.
On the other hand, Egypt affirms its permanent commitment to the one-China principle, its support for China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and that Taiwan is an integral part of Chinese territory. In addition to supporting the Chinese position regarding “Hong Kong” within the framework of the “one country, two systems” principle. Taking into account Beijing’s efforts to spread international peace and development, through the two initiatives (Global Security and Global Development), which aim to encourage the international community to pay attention to development issues around the world, respect the rights of peoples to adopt their own approach to promoting democracy in a manner consistent with their national circumstances, and reject interference in the Internal affairs of countries under the slogan of the (preserving democracy).
Hence, we find that the (Global Development Initiative) proposed by China came at the right time, as it is a global development initiative centered around people by joining that initiative, Egypt can benefit from China’s successful experiences in coordinating and planning development, saving energy, reducing emissions, and ensuring Food security, what drives the sustainable development plan in Egypt. The (Global Development Initiative) also aims to establish a new type of international relations based on (the rule of common interest and mutual benefit for countries and peoples), taking into account the objective circumstances of peoples, meeting their national priorities, and respecting their identity and culture, given that this global development initiative was proposed by Chinese President “Xi Jinping” comes and the world is in need more than ever of fruitful collective development and cooperation practices, in which efforts are combined and capabilities are integrated to address the problems facing countries, especially developing ones, which ultimately leads to achieving an advanced and appropriate form of “democratization of international relations”.
A Saudi-Israeli agreement to establish diplomatic relations involving enhanced US commitments to Gulf security could be a game-changer for great power rivalry in the Middle East.
To be sure, US President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu face formidable obstacles in paying the price tag Saudi Arabia puts on the normalisation of relations with Israel.
In return for relations, Saudi Arabia has demanded legally binding security commitments from the United States, support for its nuclear programme, and unfettered access to sophisticated weaponry – conditions that would be challenged in Congress.
The kingdom has also linked diplomatic relations to ambiguously defined progress in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – a demand Mr. Netanyahu will have difficulty meeting with his current coalition government, the most ultra-nationalist and ultra-conservative in his country’s history.
Speaking to Fox News, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman described the Palestinian issue as “very important” and one that “we need to solve.”
Mr. Bin Salman shied away from spelling out what a solution would entail beyond saying he hoped it “will ease the life of the Palestinians.”
Within days of the interview, Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan told the United Nations General Assembly and a webinar normalising relations with Israel would require a plan to establish an independent Palestinian state.
On the first visit to the West Bank by a senior Saudi official since the creation of the Palestine Authority in 1994, Ambassador Nayef al-Sudairi, the kingdom’s first envoy to the Palestinian entity, said Saudi Arabia was “working towards establishing a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital.”
Palestinian officials told their Saudi counterparts that as part of the kingdom’s agreement to recognise the Jewish state, Israel would have to stop building new settlements, expand Palestinian control over security and construction in the West Bank, accept full Palestinian membership of the United Nations, and consent to the opening of a Palestine Liberation Organisation office in Washington and a US consulate in East Jerusalem.
Nevertheless, senior Israeli officials asserted that Saudi Arabia was merely paying lip service to the Palestinian issue in talks about Israel.
A senior Palestinian official conceded “that what is being discussed includes elements that are less than statehood. We’re talking about a pathway to getting there.”
The obstacles haven’t prevented Messrs. Bin Salman and Netanyahu from raising heightened expectations recently by suggesting significant progress in agreeing on the terms of a US-Saudi-Israeli deal.
Speaking to Fox News, Mr. Bin Salman said his country and Israel were getting “closer” daily to establish formal relations. Mr. Netanyahu was equally ebullient at the UN General Assembly.
Largely overlooked in public discussions about a possible Saudi-Israeli normalisation of relations is the fact that the Saudi demands signal that the kingdom, like the United Arab Emirates, which is requesting an “ironclad” security arrangement with the United States, prefers the US rather than China to be its security partner for the foreseeable future.
“Isn’t it interesting? When you look at MbS’ asks from us, they start with he wants a defense treaty with us… What that tells you is that at the end of the day, they don’t think there is anybody else they can rely upon if they really stranded,” said Dennis Ross, a former US Middle East peace negotiator. Mr. Ross was referring to Mr. Bin Salman by his initials.
Former US National Security Council official Kirsten Fontenrose argued that Mr. Bin Salman had created a situation where he could forcefully argue for a binding security arrangement even if efforts to forge a deal with Israel failed.
“MbS looks at this and says, ‘Right now, it looks like the sticking point is Israeli politics. So, even if I don’t get this, I look like the good guy’,” Ms. Fontenrose said.
I expect there will be pressure from the Saudis moving forward, even if we don’t get normalisation, to follow through… (saying), ‘Well, we have arrived so closely on some of these ideas on a US security pact, we’ve done so much work on civilian nuclear cooperation, why don’t we just continue this?” Ms. Fontenrose added.
Even so, it is hard to believe that Saudi Arabia and the UAE think they can retain the freedom to hedge their bets and expand relations with China, as well as Russia, particularly regarding the Ukraine war and Western sanctions, in ways that the United States would see as threatening its national security and undermining its policies.
While the United States would likely not disrupt the Gulf states’ economic and trade ties with China, the Gulf’s largest trading partner, it would limit Saudi and UAE cooperation with China on geopolitical issues, nuclear development, technology collaboration, and arms acquisition.
“The administration is asking for some things from the Saudis. They want them to continue to peg oil to the dollar, there was some talk that they may allow the Chinese to buy oil with the Chinese currency… What is being asked here is not to stop their commercial relationship but to create boundaries in some of the high-tech areas… It’s a two-way street,” Mr. Ross, the former US negotiator, said.
The kingdom “cannot have it both ways. If it wants that kind of commitment from the United States, it has to line up with the United States… If our security relationship with Saudi Arabia is to be deepened because the Saudis want it, then there are certain obligations that come with that,” said former US diplomat and prominent analyst Martin Indyk.
Undoubtedly, Saudi Arabia and the UAE will test how far they can push the envelope if they come to a security understanding with the United States.
Ultimately, however, they are likely also to find that a security arrangement would, at least in the Middle East, shift the geopolitical US-China power balance in the United States’ favour.
-
World News4 days agoSeymour Hersh: A year of lying about Nord Stream
-
World News4 days agoGerad Araud: Deluded Europe can’t see that it’s finished
-
Science & Technology4 days agoTowards A Better World: Our Senses and How Artificial Intelligence is Replicating Them
-
Southeast Asia4 days agoMiles of Hope: The Changing Face of Indonesia-South Korea Relations
-
South Asia4 days agoPakistan’s Role in the United Nations
-
Middle East3 days agoThe role of Egypt in the Xi Jinping initiative of “democratization of international relations”
-
Eastern Europe3 days agoRussia-Ukraine Crisis: Can Multipolar BRICS-11 Ensure Global Peace and Stability?
-
Defense3 days agoCan Pakistan’s Embattled Polity Act Against Militant Groups?