Has the Middle East turned a corner?
Illustration: Nino Jose Heredia/Gulf News
Saturday, March 17, 2007
TWO weeks ago, it seemed as if the Middle East was on the brink of war. United States carrier strike forces were heading for the Gulf while US Vice-President Dick Cheney growled that, if Tehran did not halt uranium enrichment, "all options were on the table".
Washington's belligerent neocons seemed to be making a comeback and their organ, the Weekly Standard, was baying for war.
Suddenly, a break in the clouds suggests that better weather lies ahead. A striking development has been a surge of Saudi diplomacy in a great many directions.
Braving Washington's displeasure, Riyadh has embarked on an intense dialogue with Iran — first through Prince Bandar Bin Sultan and Ali Larijani, the respective heads of their countries' national security councils, and then at a recent summit meeting in Riyadh between King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz and Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The two countries have a strong common interest in (a) preventing Sunni-Shi'ite violence in Iraq from spilling over into the region; (b) damping down the flames of conflict in the Palestinian and Lebanese arenas; and, above all, (c) preventing a US-Iranian war, which would be catastrophic for the whole Middle East and especially for the Arab Gulf states.
The Saudi-Iranian dialogue is a strong signal that these two leading countries are determined to take the destinies of the region into their own hands, free from the intervention of external powers.
It is a clear message directed at the US, whose influence and authority are much diminished because of its calamitous war in Iraq.
All this would seem to be in preparation for the important Arab summit meeting in Riyadh on March 28 and 29. In the past, these summits have often been derided as ineffectual, because they have rarely been followed by concerted action. This time, however, there is a new sense of urgency.
The Riyadh summit is widely expected to re-launch the Arab Peace Initiative, first proposed by King Abdullah when he was Crown Prince, and then endorsed by the entire Arab world at the Beirut summit of March 2002.
When it was first launched, Israel scornfully rejected the Arab Peace Initiative, but times have changed. Voices are now being raised in Israel — not least that of Foreign Minister Tsipi Livni — suggesting that the Initiative could provide the basis for negotiations.
America's severe difficulties in Iraq; the beginning of its dialogue with Iran and Syria and the inevitable eventual withdrawal of its troops; Israel's failure to crush Hezbollah in last summer's war in Lebanon or to eliminate Hamas by military strikes and a financial boycott; the re-engagement of the US in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process; the awakening of European Union diplomacy, as may be seen from this week's Middle East tour of the EU's high representative Javier Solana; the ending of Syria's isolation — all these developments have led some Israelis to believe that the time may have come to seize the outstretched Arab hand.
Not least among the factors influencing Israeli opinion is the utter discredit of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his hapless defence minister, the former trade union leader Amir Peretz.
According to the polls, their standing in Israel is close to zero. They may well be driven from office when Eliyahu Winograd, a retired judge, publishes his interim report next month into the events which led to the 34-day Lebanon war. Olmert, in any event, is facing questioning in a series of corruption cases.
His disappearance from the political scene may give an opportunity to Tsipi Livni to make a bid for the leadership of Kadima. In the Labour camp, the fall of Peretz may give former prime minister Ehud Barak a chance to re-emerge.
Both Livni and Barak seem to understand that Israel's strategic environment has changed for the worse and that the time for a comprehensive peace with the Arabs may have arrived.
Israeli hardliners such as Binyamin Netanyahu, also dreams of making a comeback at the head of a reinvigorated Likud, if Kadima should break up.
Almost imperceptibly, it looks as if the Bush administration is correcting its aim in the Middle East. Diplomacy is once more in fashion after the unilateralism of recent years, the pre-emptive use of military force, the talk of regime change and the contempt for international organisations.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is returning to the Middle East on March 24 for another meeting with Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian National Authority.
She is also due to meet representatives of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates, as well as of the international Quartet (US, Russia, EU and the United Nations).
Little has so far come of her earlier visits to the region, but she must be given good marks for perseverance.
She may also attend a meeting in Istanbul next month to follow up the work of the conference in Baghdad on March 10, which brought together representatives of 17 countries and organisations in a bid to stabilise Iraq. This will be an opportunity for bilateral talks with Iran and Syria.
Behind the scenes, leading European states are urging the US to lift the boycott of the Palestinian national unity government, even though it includes Hamas.
A test of Rice's independence will be whether she agrees to do so, or whether she will continue to shun the Palestinian government, as Israel would like.
The battle for peace is by no means won. Inside the American administration, pro-Israeli hardliners remain in positions of power, such as Eliott Abrams at the National Security Council and Stuart Levey, under-secretary at the US Treasury.
In a surprise move, Rice has appointed Eliot A Cohen, a leading neocon champion of the Iraq war, to the post of State Department Counsellor, which he is due to take up next month. This would seem to contradict the new trend towards diplomacy and conflict-resolution.
One explanation heard in Washington is that in order to press Israel to negotiate with the Palestinians, she needs a neocon right next to her to protect her flanks from hawks inside and outside the administration.
Patrick Seale is a commentator and author of several books on Middle East affairs.Gulf News
Washington's belligerent neocons seemed to be making a comeback and their organ, the Weekly Standard, was baying for war.
Suddenly, a break in the clouds suggests that better weather lies ahead. A striking development has been a surge of Saudi diplomacy in a great many directions.
Braving Washington's displeasure, Riyadh has embarked on an intense dialogue with Iran — first through Prince Bandar Bin Sultan and Ali Larijani, the respective heads of their countries' national security councils, and then at a recent summit meeting in Riyadh between King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz and Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The two countries have a strong common interest in (a) preventing Sunni-Shi'ite violence in Iraq from spilling over into the region; (b) damping down the flames of conflict in the Palestinian and Lebanese arenas; and, above all, (c) preventing a US-Iranian war, which would be catastrophic for the whole Middle East and especially for the Arab Gulf states.
The Saudi-Iranian dialogue is a strong signal that these two leading countries are determined to take the destinies of the region into their own hands, free from the intervention of external powers.
It is a clear message directed at the US, whose influence and authority are much diminished because of its calamitous war in Iraq.
All this would seem to be in preparation for the important Arab summit meeting in Riyadh on March 28 and 29. In the past, these summits have often been derided as ineffectual, because they have rarely been followed by concerted action. This time, however, there is a new sense of urgency.
The Riyadh summit is widely expected to re-launch the Arab Peace Initiative, first proposed by King Abdullah when he was Crown Prince, and then endorsed by the entire Arab world at the Beirut summit of March 2002.
When it was first launched, Israel scornfully rejected the Arab Peace Initiative, but times have changed. Voices are now being raised in Israel — not least that of Foreign Minister Tsipi Livni — suggesting that the Initiative could provide the basis for negotiations.
America's severe difficulties in Iraq; the beginning of its dialogue with Iran and Syria and the inevitable eventual withdrawal of its troops; Israel's failure to crush Hezbollah in last summer's war in Lebanon or to eliminate Hamas by military strikes and a financial boycott; the re-engagement of the US in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process; the awakening of European Union diplomacy, as may be seen from this week's Middle East tour of the EU's high representative Javier Solana; the ending of Syria's isolation — all these developments have led some Israelis to believe that the time may have come to seize the outstretched Arab hand.
Not least among the factors influencing Israeli opinion is the utter discredit of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his hapless defence minister, the former trade union leader Amir Peretz.
According to the polls, their standing in Israel is close to zero. They may well be driven from office when Eliyahu Winograd, a retired judge, publishes his interim report next month into the events which led to the 34-day Lebanon war. Olmert, in any event, is facing questioning in a series of corruption cases.
His disappearance from the political scene may give an opportunity to Tsipi Livni to make a bid for the leadership of Kadima. In the Labour camp, the fall of Peretz may give former prime minister Ehud Barak a chance to re-emerge.
Both Livni and Barak seem to understand that Israel's strategic environment has changed for the worse and that the time for a comprehensive peace with the Arabs may have arrived.
Israeli hardliners such as Binyamin Netanyahu, also dreams of making a comeback at the head of a reinvigorated Likud, if Kadima should break up.
Almost imperceptibly, it looks as if the Bush administration is correcting its aim in the Middle East. Diplomacy is once more in fashion after the unilateralism of recent years, the pre-emptive use of military force, the talk of regime change and the contempt for international organisations.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is returning to the Middle East on March 24 for another meeting with Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian National Authority.
She is also due to meet representatives of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates, as well as of the international Quartet (US, Russia, EU and the United Nations).
Little has so far come of her earlier visits to the region, but she must be given good marks for perseverance.
She may also attend a meeting in Istanbul next month to follow up the work of the conference in Baghdad on March 10, which brought together representatives of 17 countries and organisations in a bid to stabilise Iraq. This will be an opportunity for bilateral talks with Iran and Syria.
Behind the scenes, leading European states are urging the US to lift the boycott of the Palestinian national unity government, even though it includes Hamas.
A test of Rice's independence will be whether she agrees to do so, or whether she will continue to shun the Palestinian government, as Israel would like.
The battle for peace is by no means won. Inside the American administration, pro-Israeli hardliners remain in positions of power, such as Eliott Abrams at the National Security Council and Stuart Levey, under-secretary at the US Treasury.
In a surprise move, Rice has appointed Eliot A Cohen, a leading neocon champion of the Iraq war, to the post of State Department Counsellor, which he is due to take up next month. This would seem to contradict the new trend towards diplomacy and conflict-resolution.
One explanation heard in Washington is that in order to press Israel to negotiate with the Palestinians, she needs a neocon right next to her to protect her flanks from hawks inside and outside the administration.
Patrick Seale is a commentator and author of several books on Middle East affairs.Gulf News
Business Besides Oil
