For the Jordanian academic, the plan that led to normalization with Israel “seems dormant” but remains a valid “foundation.” The Middle East today is a different reality than during the magnate’s first term. The “zero conflict” policy applied by Riyadh privileges the economic sphere and opens dialogue with Tehran. The centrality of the Palestinian issue to stop conflicts.
Milan () – The Abrahamic Accords signed in 2020 during the first term of US President-elect Donald Trump – which led to the normalization of relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan – today “do not have the appeal of four years ago” . A pact that “seems almost dormant at this moment”, but which remains a valid “base” to relaunch “the question of regional peace”, with the hypothesis “even of a name change”, to untangle the “knot with Saudi Arabia.
This is what Jordanian professor and geopolitical analyst Amer Al Sabaileh, an expert on Middle East issues, international security and the politics of peace processes in crisis areas, emphasizes to . The Amman-born academic, contributor to several international publications, including The Jordan Timesrecognizes the value of the agreements signed in the magnate’s first four years in the White House, which could still “be useful.” “However,” he continues, “the name should undergo a change compatible with the demands” of Riyadh, which is “the largest country and represents the Sunni Islamic world.” However, “the concept of religious coexistence, of rapprochement between confessions” remains central and the “Agreements” could always be “the main knot on which to reconstruct a new model.”
Riyadh: zero conflict
In recent weeks, international (and regional) diplomacy has made moves in an attempt to defuse the numerous sources of war and tension that are burning in the Middle East. The visit – in a rare high-level meeting – of the head of the Saudi armed forces, General Fayyad al-Ruwaili, to Tehran, where he met with his Iranian counterpart, General Mohammad Bagheri, is part of this perspective. At the center was the development of “defense diplomacy” and an “expansion of bilateral cooperation”, at a stage in which the two powers of Sunni and Shiite Islam are “stretching relations” in a framework very far from the Trump’s first victory. In 2016, Iran and Saudi Arabia severed ties following attacks on Riyadh’s diplomatic missions in the Islamic Republic during protests over the Wahhabi kingdom’s execution of Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr. Relations already marked by the opposing sides in Yemen, with the Saudis supporting the government recognized by the international community and the Iranians close to the Houthi rebels.
“Saudi Arabia today aspires to play a fundamental and ambitious regional and global role,” underlines Al Sabaileh, “based on economic power that revolves around the concept of stability, especially after the experience in Yemen.” War has demonstrated its ease in bringing the crisis within the borders and putting strategic places such as oil companies under attack. Riyadh intends to pursue the goal of “zero conflict”, it does not want to represent itself as a threat” and in this perspective “it aspires to rapprochement with Tehran” also because the instability and clashes “contradict the Vision 2030 plan” of Moḥammad bin Salman (Mbs) . It aspires, continues the expert, to become ‘a regional economic and energy center, as well as a sports center’ with the 2034 World Cup and other events of equal importance. In this perspective, “a war against Iran would have serious consequences for Saudi ambitions” and would be contrary to the ideal of “crisis mediation.” The first step ‘is to reestablish an alliance’ regionally and in the Muslim world ‘to find a political solution to the Palestinian question and, consequently, to the war in Lebanon.’
2016-2024: Trump and the Middle East
Among the leaders of dozens of Arab and Muslim nations gathered in the Saudi capital, many speculated about the meaning – and options – of a second Trump presidency and, unlike fears that linger in Europe, unpredictability could be a strength for stability. After all, Trump is seen in a better light in Saudi Arabia than the outgoing president, Joe Biden, and the Democratic administration, whose influence has waned in recent years, with a White House incapable of stopping Israel’s wars in Gaza. and Lebanon. A panorama of deep uncertainty and confusion remains, with rumors of negotiations and confidential meetings subsequently denied by the diplomacy of the countries involved. Proof of this is the alleged meeting between Elon Musk, Trump’s right-hand man and recently called to co-lead the new Department of Efficiency of the US Government: according to the New York Times, which cites anonymous Iranian sources, the billionaire would have had a face-to-face meeting with Amir Saeid Iravani, Tehran’s ambassador to the UN, although the news has not been confirmed either by the Iranian side or by the president-elect’s transition team. It was the spokesman for the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Esmaeil Baghaei, who “categorically denied such a meeting” and was also “surprised” by the coverage given by the American media.
The differences between 2016 and 2024 “are obviously many,” Amer Al Sabaileh stressed, especially “the issue of stability in the region,” as well as the challenges “for open conflict fronts” that threaten to block Trump’s economic goals. , from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean. “There are many problems,” he continues, “so the first point will be security, the presence of militias and the open conflicts in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq that threaten any future economic corridor. Then there is the “stabilization in Gaza: around these issues,” says the Jordanian academic, “I think there will be a fundamental change with respect to the previous mandate” in the White House, although “imposing a solution will not be easy and will not be able to satisfy to everyone.” This will require a much more rigid policy, but equally determined: this may be your challenge for at least the first two years. In the past, Trump has taken advantage of the tensions between Riyadh and Tehran to bring Israel closer to the Gulf countries and introduce not only the Abrahamic Accords, but also the “military” aspect by putting the Jewish State “under the wing of CentCom (Command Central of the United States), no longer the European division: it was a very important step. Now, he warns, it is about linking peace with Israel “to the recognition of a Palestinian State.”
Palestine and Iran: the paths to peace
Arab and Muslim countries debated the issue on November 11, establishing a common table that provides for an immediate ceasefire and reiterates the two-state solution – Israel and Palestine – for peace in the region. On the occasion, Mohammad bin Salman spoke of the “genocide” taking place in Gaza and, in a joint note at the end of the summit, the participants condemned the aggression that is spreading to Iraq, Syria and Iran after the bloodshed in the Strip and Cedar Country. “The concept of recognizing a Palestinian state,” says Al Sabaileh, “is mandatory in a peace package, also to prepare the region for future economic projects” and the Israelis “will have to compromise and concede something, especially under Trump.” “A good Israeli intention guaranteed by the Americans,” he adds, “would open the dialogue because Saudi Arabia could also, with great pragmatism, see the opportunity to build the solution, not wait for others to outline it.”
Then there is the stone guest, the Islamic Republic that “must be seen as several Irans, not as one: there is the hostile one,” explains the academic, “of the policy of regional aggression that has formed militias, groups around Israel.” from Lebanon to Syria, from Iraq to Yemen. With this Iran,” he says, “I don’t think there is tolerance.” However, since the death of President Ebrahim Raisi we have seen the emergence of a pragmatic line, which tries to find solutions to the problems. The conflict that we see outside the country is also internal, at least on the political level” and the rise of Masoud Pezeshkian has meant, at least in words, an attempt at “reconciliation with the world.” Not surprisingly, these latest wars have weakened the Revolutionary Guards and the groups linked to them, from Hamas to Hezbollah. The defeats suffered by the Pasdaran and their affiliates, the expert concludes, could push “Iranian policy to look more inward and prioritize development, with less aggressive foreign diplomacy that Trump could take advantage of.”
THE ‘GATE TO THE EAST’ IS THE ASIANEWS NEWSLETTER DEDICATED TO THE MIDDLE EAST
WOULD YOU LIKE TO RECEIVE IT EVERY TUESDAY IN YOUR EMAIL? SUBSCRIBE TO THE NEWSLETTER IN THIS LINK
Add Comment