MENA: New proxy war ground for US and China

Tensions between the United States and China are expanding beyond the Asia-Pacific region. The Middle East and North Africa (MENA) is likely to be one of many venues in what might be a new Cold War between Washington and Beijing.

We can imagine how Washington and Beijing’s respective global outlooks and ability to project (soft and hard) power could affect their future relations with the MENA region.

How MENA countries deal with each other and the role they play in the emerging global energy and economy transitions could influence how the two superpowers engage with the region in ways as interesting and important as what the superpowers are able to do themselves. On the MENA side of the equation, two critical dimensions are likely to shape their role in the future US-China competition in the region:

Intraregional politics

The first is how regional countries relate to each other with functional and practical economic and political integration, or sustained dysfunction and instability. Prior to the current war in Gaza, there was a trend toward de-escalation, stabilization, and integration.

Whenever that momentum might be regained, under the “functional and practical” route, we could imagine MENA nations looking in new ways at the lessons of pan-regional intergovernmental organizations.

The region could explore policies and mechanisms that emulate the practical benefits afforded to member states of other regional blocs like the European Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Such ideas could first lower trade barriers, then foster closer economic and commercial ties across the region.

Similarly, the thinking behind the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 and the Organization for Cooperation and Security in Europe could influence MENA governments’ approach to their citizens’ human rights and each other’s domestic affairs.

The functional and practical path would represent a MENA equipped with deliberative, consultative decision-making processes to act with agency, putting its own interests before the dictates of the US-Chinese competition.

The alternative path is easy to define, MENA governments continue to support various armed groups in proxy wars, and use that environment to ignore human rights, enabling outside players to exploit that dysfunction.

Levers of the future economy

The fossil fuel resources of Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates ‑ energy-rich club might soon include Egypt and Israel ‑ are likely to remain MENA’s main sources of leverage vis-à-vis Washington and Beijing — at least for the next couple of decades. Given the desire of two superpowers to secure the region’s oil and gas for themselves and their allies, or deny them to adversaries, US and Chinese companies will remain powerhouses in regional markets.

MENA is poised to influence the future global stage, and gain agency in the US-China competition over the region, by leveraging its energy and financial power in different ways in the future.

As the world turns to renewable energy, the region’s petrostates are simultaneously ramping up economic diversification into tech sectors, while also leveraging their wealth to finance climate-friendly energy projects and other green economy endeavors in their neighborhood and around the world.

The new frontier for the region’s resource- and capital-rich countries will be fostering innovation and science/technology/ideas hubs for the post-carbon economy that humanity intends to build in the 21st century.

Beside eventually waning hydrocarbons and ascending green energy, new logistical/transportation/energy networks have proliferated in the region and are likely to further increase its geopolitical and commercial significance.

Be it through long-established routes, such as the Suez Canal, or new and proposed ones, such as the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route, India-Middle East Corridor, and the Turkish-Iraqi-Emirati-Qatari Development Road, MENA is going to be sitting at the center of global trade networks. Many of the region’s seaports and airports will also play an expanded role in international affairs.

United States assaults in MENA on the rise

Further to my previous blog, US wages almost 400 military interventions one of the most interesting revelation is that a quarter of these assaults have been in the Middle East and Africa. It also appears that the end of Cold War has unchained the global military ambitions of the United States and the region is being targeted increasingly.

The first major study of its kind also found the post-9/11 era resulted in higher hostility levels, with US military adventures becoming overwhelmingly commonplace. Given the current landscape of interventions, and inertia, experts expect to see a continuing upward trend in US interventions in both MENA and Sub-Saharan Africa.

"The cumulative impact of what we discovered from our data collection effort was indeed surprising," said Sidita Kushi, an Assistant Professor at Bridgewater State University in Massachusetts, and one of the study's authors. "We hadn't expected both the quantity and quality of US military interventions to be as large as revealed in the data," Kushi told Middle East Eye.

Following the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States emerged as the dominant military power globally. However, this did not translate into a decrease in military interventions.

"The post-Cold War era has produced fewer great power conflicts and instances in which to defend vital US interests, yet US military interventions continue at high rates and higher hostilities," the report concluded. "This militaristic pattern persists during a time of relative peace, one of arguably fewer direct threats to the US homeland and security."

Following the end of the Cold War, US humanitarian military interventions were increasingly justified under the banner of human rights.

During the post-9/11 US "Global War on Terror" Washington chose to use military force to solve its problems, said Monica Duffy Toft, Professor of International Politics at the Fletcher School of Tufts University, also in Massachusetts.

The study found that the end of the Cold War unchained US military global ambitions. Even as US rivals reduced their military intervention, Washington began to escalate its hostilities, resulting in a widening gap between US actions relative to its opponents.

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute puts the cost of the US military at more than US$800 billion annually, accounting for almost 40% of global military spending.

"The US continues to dramatically prioritize funding of its Department of Defense while limiting funding and roles for its Department of State," said Toft, adding that currently, the United States has US Special Forces deployed in more countries than it does Ambassadors".

The US global military footprints might be surprising to its citizens; unfortunately, these are hardly surprising to the rest of the world. The legitimacy of US assaults has been marred largely as a result of its now decades-long hyper-interventionist stance.

Violence tends to beget violence, and even a smart return toward a multi-factor foreign policy - a foreign policy which relies on allies' wisdom, which engages diplomacy, trade and aid first, and force last - can take years to bear fruit

 

 

 

Reactions from Middle East and North Africa (MENA) to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine

I am obliged to share with my readers the official statements of countries, usually dancing to the mantra of the United States. This report has been compiled by James F. Jeffrey and Merissa Khurma of Wilson Centre.

On Thursday, February 24, Russia launched a series of missile attacks against locations near Ukrainian capital Kiev, an assault that quickly spread across the country by land, sea, and air. The enormity of the Russian attack, not just on Ukraine but on the long-term global security order, is increasingly clear among states in the Middle East region, and puts pressure on the ‘hedging’ between the US on one hand and Russia and China on the other, commonplace in recent years. 

Middle East countries, including the close military and diplomatic partners of United States, United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Israel, initially hedged their bets between the two superpowers. However, the continued Russian aggression has pushed almost all into the Ukraine camp. Turkey has been particularly vocal from President Erdogan supporting Ukraine bilaterally and in NATO, and then taking the unprecedented step of restricting Russian naval transport of the of the Bosphorous Straits under the war clause of the Montreux Straits Convention, which Turkey controls. 

The regional shift was seen on March, 02, 2022 when 141 countries voted in favor of the UN General Assembly resolution to condemn Russian forces. From Middle East and North Africa (MENA), Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman, the UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey voted ‘Yes’, Syria voted ‘No’, and Algeria, Iraq, and Iran abstained. Algeria has long been pro-Moscow and Iraq, given its internal situation, avoids taking sides. Syria's vote is not unexpected. Iran clearly seeing itself as a potential target of attack, abstained rather than supporting Russia, not so much for Ukraine but for the principle of non-interference in sovereign states. 

A region mostly united

Initially, most Arab governments maintained a neutral stance on the Russian invasion of Ukraine, unsurprisingly, given their reticence to pick a side that they believe may jeopardize their relations with the United States and the Europeans and their equally strategic relations with Russia. In a statement delivered by Saudi UN representative Mohammed Abdulaziz Alateek at the General Assembly, the GCC countries confirmed “the depth of relations” they have with both parties and called on “all parties to exercise restraint.”

Nevertheless, Saudi Arabia remains firm in standing with its OPEC plus agreement that is keeping oil prices high rather than pumping more crude oil to help the United States and the West, at America’s insistence. Whether the Kingdom maintains this position or contributes to bringing oil prices down in the weeks to come remains to be seen and depends on how far Putin goes in Ukraine. 

The notable exception to the neutral Arab stance was of course Syria, whose President Bashar Al Assad reiterated his support for Russia in his call to President Putin and called the Russian invasion in Ukraine a “correction of history.” A staunch ally of Russia, that kept him in power since the beginning of the Arab uprisings, the Syrian President will likely feel emboldened by a seemingly ‘stronger’ Russia, which also gives other regional powers, namely Iran, more opportunities to strengthen its influence in Syria and destabilize the neighborhood. 

Leaders across the region react

Egypt

On February 25 via Twitter, Egypt's Minister of Foreign Affairs (unofficial translation from Arabic to English), “The Arab Republic of Egypt is following with deep concern the successive developments regarding the situation in Ukraine, and affirms the importance of upholding dialogue and diplomatic solutions, as well as endeavors that would hasten the political settlement of the crisis in a manner that preserves international security and stability, and ensures that the situation does not escalate or deteriorate, and thus to avoid aggravating humanitarian and economic conditions, with their impacts on the region and worldwide.”

Iran

On February 22, Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh commented that the latest developments in Ukraine, noting, "interference and provocative measures by NATO and led by the US have made things more complicated in this region.” Via Twitter on February 24, Iran's Foreign Ministry tweeted, "The Ukraine crisis is rooted in NATO's provocations. We don't believe that resorting to war is a solution.

Israel

On February 27, Israeli PM Naftali Bennett spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin, offering Israel's support as a mediator in the crisis. On February 24 Israel's Foreign Minister Yair Lipid stated, "The Russian attack on Ukraine is a serious violation of the international order. Israel condemns the attack, and is ready and prepared to provide humanitarian assistance to the citizens of Ukraine. Israel is a country that has experienced wars, and war is not the way to resolve conflicts.”

Jordan

On February 24, Jordan said it is following with "concern" the current developments in Ukraine, and called on the international community and the parties to the conflict to exert maximum efforts for restraint and de-escalation. In a statement, the Kingdom's Ministry of Foreign Affairs called for a peaceful settlement of the conflict and the restoration of security and stability in the region through dialogue and negotiations in these "critical" times. The statement cited Jordan's ambassador to the United Nations Mahmoud Hmoud during a UN General Assembly session, held to discuss the "situation in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine", as saying that "Jordan underscores the positive and effective role of the UN and the stakeholders to reach that goal". The envoy stressed Jordan's call for respecting the international law, the UN Charter, the sovereignty and regional integrity of states and the principles of good neighborliness.

Lebanon

On February 24, Lebanon's Minister of Foreign Affairs and Emigrants Abdullah Bou Habib condemned the invasion. 

Qatar

On February 25, Qatar's Secretary-General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Dr. Ahmed bin Hassan Al Hammadi met with Ambassador of Ukraine to Qatar Andrey Kosmenko to review bilateral cooperations. On February 24, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani held a phone call with Russia's Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov, followed by Ukrainian Minister of Foreign Affairs Dmytro Kuleba. According to Qatar's State News Agency, Sheikh Al-Thani, "expressed the Qatar's concern over this escalation and its repercussions and urged all parties to exercise restraint and resolve the dispute through constructive dialogue and diplomatic methods."

Turkey

On February 25, President Tayyip Erdoğan responded to reporters that, "NATO should have taken a more decisive step." On February 24, Turkey’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs released the statement, "We consider the military operation launched by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation against Ukraine unacceptable and reject it. This attack, beyond destroying the Minsk agreements, is a grave violation of international law and poses a serious threat to the security of our region and the world. Believing in the necessity to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of countries, Türkiye is against changing of borders by use of arms. We call on the Russian Federation to immediately stop this unjust and unlawful act. Our support for the political unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine will continue."

United Arab Emirates

On March 1, the UAE suspended visa-free travel for Ukrainians and abstained from the United Nations resolution condemning Russia for the invasion. On February 27 via Twitter, UAE senior politician Anwar Gargash affirmed the country will not declare sides in the war. On Wednesday, February 23 the Minister of Foreign Affairs Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed conducted a phone call with Russia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs to discuss their strategic partnership. 

 

 

An uneasy calm prevailing in Pakistan’s neighborhood

Having lived in turmoil area for decades, I feel a bit uncomfortable when a clam prevails in Pakistan’s neighborhood, because it is usually followed by some uncalled-for incident. 

Most of us know that focus of the United States has shifted away from South Asia and Middle East and North Africa (MENA) to South China Seas. India is still struggling to control widespread pandemic. Iran is getting ready for Presidential elections scheduled for 11^th June 2021. On top of all a ceasefire has been established between Israel and Hamas.

Afghanistan

As per plan, most of the US soldiers will leave Afghanistan over the next few weeks, which will require ensuring greater air-surveillance and setting up quick response teams to tackle any emergency, mainly because uninterrupted supply lines have to be maintained for thousands of the US contractors that will continue to work in Afghanistan after the departure of troops.

One of the fears is that Afghanistan will once again plunge deep into civil war. This time the situation will be more alarming because of presence of groups supported by United States, Russia, China, India and Iran. In the past Pakistan had faced influx of Afghan refugees, but this time the threat is greater, because of presence of hundred and thousands of militants, who may slip into Pakistan in search of safe heaven.      

India

At present India faces multiple issues, besides COVID. These include boarder issues with China, growing resentment in Bangladesh and Afghanistan. Lately, Maldives has also been offended because of Indian infiltration in its affairs and India not supporting Palestinian cause. India also faces expulsion from Iranian Chabahar port after Iran and China signed various economic cooperation agreements with Iran.    

Iran

A rather complex situation has emerged after the announcement of Presidential elections in Iran. Not only number of candidates is large, but internal rifts are being created to show cracks in the system. The biggest setback is slow down of JPCOA negotiations. It is also becoming evident that there is no likelihood of easing of sanctions in near future. Pakistan has been a victim of imposition of US sanctions on Iran, particularly due to abandoning of Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline.

Iran has been openly accused of proxy wars in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen. Israel has drilled into the minds of Arabs, “Iran is a bigger threat as compared to Israel”. This has not only smashed unity of Muslim Ummah, but also causing transfer of billions of dollars to the United States and other countries manufacturing lethal arms.