[ad_1]
Saudi Arabia last week organized three summits – one from the Gulf, one Arab and one Islamic – with a common goal: Confronting and isolating Iran. All other urgent issues in the region, from Yemen's current decimation to Libya's implosion to daily bombings in Syria and the growing occupation of Palestine, have all been forced to give way to the Saudi escalation against Ukraine against the Islamic Republic.
At the end of the meetings, Saudi efforts to exert diplomatic pressure on Tehran paid off, at least on paper. The final communiqué of the urgency of the Gulf Summit and Arab Summits condemned the interference of Iran in Arab affairs. The final statement of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) did not allow to isolate Iran, but it condemned the recent attacks on Saudi and UAE oil tankers and confirmed their right to defend themselves.
What is the significance of this diplomatic attack on Iran and what will be the impact on tensions in the Gulf and Middle East? Here are three possible readings.
A Saudi success
According to some Arab circles, the summits have propelled the Saudi monarchy upward, becoming a central power in the Arab and Islamic worlds.
After a number of recent debacles, including the blockade on Qatar and the badbadination of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, have undermined its international reputation, Saudi Arabia has finally managed to reformulate the Gulf, Arab and Arab positions. Islamic by putting a new emphasis on the danger of Iran. In the words of King Salman, "he has been supporting terrorism for decades and threatens security and stability in order to increase influence and domination."
This reading has been adopted in some Western circles, which claim that Saudi Arabia has largely succeeded in "uniting the Arabs against Iran", the summits marking "the re-emergence of Saudi Arabia from a pariah status to a regional intermediary" ". If Saudi Arabia emerges more powerfully in the Greater Middle East regional zero-sum power politics, it follows that Iran has become weaker.
Indeed, the Saudi hegemony was evident in the work of the summits. Riyadh's handling of agenda priorities was so obvious and so absurd that it prompted some to ridicule her stunt "wait one by two without" in Mecca.
The Saudis have left little chance for debate, imposing final statements prepared in advance on Gulf participants and Arabs, according to Qatar's Foreign Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani. who stressed his country's reservations on both statements. Baghdad also rejected the final communiqué of the Arab summit. Damascus, who was not invited, did so in absentia.
But whether or not the Saudi position represents the majority of Arab leaders, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt have emerged stronger and more determined to lead the Arab League in the absence of any other center of power; the same goes for the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).
They certainly seem emboldened at the very least. As Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi told the Arab summit: "It is time to resume discussions on Arab common defense mechanisms".
But does this mean that Riyadh has the support needed to lead Arabs to confront or war against Iran?
Arab irrelevance
Contrary to Saudi Arabia's official claim, Riyadh failed to have the OIC directly condemn Tehran in the final communiqué. Iran was not mentioned in the two articles on the Gulf crisis.
At GCC and Arab summits, where Riyadh has succeeded in naming Iran by name, the sentence has little strategic weight. The GCC and the Arab League are more divided and weaker than ever, thanks largely to Saudi manipulation of their programs to serve its own narrow interests and those of its allies, as was demonstrated last week. Riyad may have succeeded in formulating the final declarations corresponding to his plans for the region, but these warnings or condemnations are scarcely noticed, let alone listened to.
The Arabs may have had some strategic weight in the past, but the Gulf Wars and the repression of the popular upheavals have greatly weakened much of the Arab region, making it more of a humanitarian burden than a powerful regional policymaker. .
In addition, Saudi, Emirati and Egyptian hostility towards Iran (as well as Turkey) and democracy (as well as the Muslim Brotherhood) meant that everyone had taken the step on Arab peace and security.
In this way, condemning Iran for its interference in Yemen and Syria and blaming it for attacks in the Gulf has little or no impact on regional and international arenas. Unfortunately, the same goes for their calls for peace on the basis of two state solutions in Israel / Palestine.
To issue a conviction without the power or the strategy to back them up is to issue bad checks. Saudi Arabia may have presided over neat summits that endorsed its final communiqué, but the end result is nothing more than a collection of public relations stunts that do not change the balance of power, nor do they change things on the ground.
This is particularly the case since even Egypt's Sisi has refrained from mentioning Iran in its speeches, despite its aversion to the Ayatollahs. This shows Egypt's refusal to support an escalation of the war against Tehran.
Does this mean that tensions will continue to rise and fall, with no end in sight?
Wrong strategy
Regardless of whether Saudi Arabia's efforts behind the summits are, as we have seen above, successful, irrelevant or fruitful, but irrelevant, they are erroneous. The Saudi obsession for Iran has only deepened the Gulf crisis and give ammunition to outside powers to intrude into the region.
Arab leaders are right to warn Iran and try to limit its destabilizing activities in the Arab world, but betting on Washington against Tehran is not the solution. In fact, this could become their biggest problem.
Indeed, Saudi Arabia outsourcing its Iranian problem to Washington will prove disastrous for the region. The summits that Riyadh has just welcomed offer President Donald Trump a considerable badet if he decides to further exploit tensions with Tehran for strategic or even personal purposes before the presidential elections.
The only effective response of the Arabs to the regional ambition of Iran is and has always been: negotiations in a position of strength. But it requires a real, not a false unity.
It also requires addressing the enormous challenges facing the Arab world, particularly its armed conflicts. But Riyadh and its junior partners turned out to be part of the problem, not the solution. They continue to wage war in Yemen, wage a proxy war in Libya, and support new Sudanese military leaders in the crackdown on a peaceful revolution.
In fact, Riyadh showed itself ready, even enthusiastic, to do all that was necessary and to combine with all those who needed it to preserve and expand the narrow interests of its regime. Today, it means intimidating, blackmailing and bribing Arab countries and linking them with outside forces, including the United States and Israel, to the detriment of Iranians, Palestinians and Arabs in the region.
[ad_2]
Source link
