Mending Gulf fences could weaken support for US sanctions against Iran
By James M.
Dorsey
A podcast version of this story is available on Soundcloud, Itunes,
Spotify,
Stitcher,
TuneIn, Spreaker,
Pocket
Casts,
Tumblr, Podbean, Audecibel, Patreon and Castbox.
Saudi efforts to negotiate an end to the Yemen war in a bid to open a
dialogue with Iran could call into question continued Gulf support for US
President Donald J. Trump’s maximum pressure campaign against the Islamic
republic.
Saudi officials hope that talks mediated by Oman and Britain between the kingdom and Houthi rebels
will lead to a revival of stalled talks between the Yemeni insurgents and the
Saudi-backed, internationally recognized government of Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi.
Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman has tasked his younger brother
and Saudi deputy defense minister, Khalid bin Salman, with engineering an end
to the Yemeni war as part of a broader revamp of Saudi foreign policy.
The revamp involves a return to a more cautious foreign and defense
policy that embraces multilateralism after several years in which the kingdom
adopted an assertive and robust go-it alone approach that produced several
fiascos, including the Saudi-led intervention in Yemen 4.5 years ago.
The revamp was prompted by attacks in September on two of the kingdom’s key oil
facilities as well as doubts about the reliability of the US defense commitment
to the Gulf.
The kingdom’s return to a more cautious approach is also intended to
allow Saudi Arabia to project itself in 2020 as president of the Group of 20
(G20) and repair its image tarnished
by the Yemen War, the killing last year of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and a
domestic crackdown on dissent. The G20 groups the world’s twenty largest
economies.
Mr. Trump’s response to the September drone and missile attacks for
which the Houthis claimed responsibility was the latest, and in some ways
clearest indication, that Gulf states may not be able to count on the United
States in times of crisis even though the Trump administration insisted that
Iran rather than the rebels was to blame for the incident.
“That was an attack on Saudi Arabia, and that wasn’t an
attack on us. But we would certainly
help them. If we decide to do something, they’ll be very much involved, and
that includes payment. And they understand that fully,” Mr. Trump said at the
time, adopting a transactional attitude towards Gulf security.
A US official involved in Gulf policy said more recently that “the
attacks made the Saudis and other Gulf states realize that escalation of
US-Iranian tensions would make them targets in an environment in which the
United States may not wholeheartedly come to their rescue.”
Another US
official suggested that the Saudis’ “prime objective now is to lessen their
involvement in Yemen, to get the Houthis to stop being some version of a proxy,
so they (the Saudis) can deal directly
with Iran.”
United
Nations Yemen envoy Martin Griffiths told the UN Security Council this week
that the number of air attacks by the Saudi-led coalition had dropped by nearly
80 percent in the last two weeks.
“We call this de-escalation, a reduction in the tempo of the
war, and perhaps a move towards an overall ceasefire in Yemen," Mr.
Griffiths said. He held out the hope that a negotiated end to the war could be
achieved early next year.
Saudi
efforts to end the war as well as gestures towards Iran in recent months by the
United Arab Emirates did not stop senior Saudi and UAE officials from adopting
a hard line at this week’s Manama Dialogue.
“Appeasement
simply cannot work with Iran. We hold Iran responsible for the attack on Abqaiq.
We do not want war, but Iran needs to
be held accountable.
The question is whether Iran can abandon its ambition to propagate the
revolution and respect sovereignty,” Saudi minister of state for foreign
affairs Adel al-Jubeir told the Bahrain gathering. By mentioning Abqaiq, Mr.
Al-Jubeir was referring to one of the two Saudi oil facilities targeted in
September.
Mr.
Al-Jubeir’s UAE counterpart, Anwar Gargash, added: “Germany under Hitler, the
Soviet Union, Iran today: revisionist states threaten international order. The
key to stability is deterrence, and steadfast resolve by the international
community that Iran must change. If not, sanctions must be increased,
not loosened.”
The US
Treasury, expanding harsh sanctions that aim to force Iran to re-negotiate on
American terms the 2015 international agreement that curbed the Islamic
republic’s nuclear program, sanctioned this week Iranian
communications minister Mohammad Javad Azari-Jahromi for blocking access to the Internet
as part of a bid to squash anti-government protests.
The blockage
made it difficult for protesters to post videos on social media, generate
support for their rejection of recent fuel price hikes, and obtain reliable
reports on the extent of the unrest. Amnesty International said more than 100 protesters had so far
been killed by
security forces.
Mr.
Al-Jubeir and Mr. Gargash’s tough remarks notwithstanding, winds in the Gulf
appear to be blowing in the direction of reduced tension on all fronts, including
the 2.5-year old Saudi-UAE-led boycott of Qatar.
Inevitably,
reducing tension will only prove sustainable if US-Iranian friction is dialled
back.
Sustainability
moreover will depend on some sort of regional understanding on non-aggression
that would involve Iran and create the basis for a more multilateral security
architecture that would embed rather than replace the regional US defence
umbrella.
Bahraini
foreign minister Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalifa appeared to anticipate a more
multilateral approach in his remarks at the Manama Dialogue. Rejecting an
Iranian call for a security architecture that would exclusively involve
regional states, Mr. Al Khalifa asserted that “Iran's regional security
proposals are fundamentally flawed, especially because they do not include external powers.”
A series of
Saudi and UAE gestures in recent months, beyond the Saudi-Houthi talks, signal
moves towards reducing tensions not only on the Yemeni but also the Iranian and
Qatari fronts.
In the
latest indication, Khaled Al Jarallah, deputy foreign minister of Kuwait, the
official mediator in the dispute with Qatar, said a decision this month by the
Saudi, Emirati and Bahraini national soccer teams to compete in the Gulf Cup in
Qatar, despite their boycott of the Gulf state, “provides a clear indication
that a breakthrough has taken place.”
Similarly, a
Saudi official, in a rare gesture, told reporters in Washington earlier this
month that Qatar had taken a step towards resolving the
crisis by
passing an anti-terrorism funding law, a key demand of the boycotting
countries.
Besides
withdrawing forces from Yemen, the UAE refrained from blaming Iran for the
attacks on the Saudi installations and earlier explosions on vessels off the
Emirati coast and sent officials to Iran to discuss maritime security.
Saudi and
UAE support for the US’ maximum pressure campaign is certain to weaken if Gulf
efforts to reduce tensions progress, particularly with regards to Iran. A peace
process in Yemen and a Gulf dialogue with Iran would be significant steps in
that direction.
Dr. James M. Dorsey is a senior
fellow at Nanyang Technological University’s S. Rajaratnam School of
International Studies, an adjunct senior research fellow at the National
University of Singapore’s Middle East Institute and co-director of the
University of Wuerzburg’s Institute of Fan Culture
Comments
Post a Comment