http://www.thenational.ae/
For those hoping for greater stability in the Middle East, this has
been a discouraging week. The intensified standoff between Saudi
Arabia and Iran, backed by their regional allies, is one of the most
ominous developments in many months. This is not only a severe fault
line between two major regional powers. It also intensifies the
sectarianism that increasingly defines regional dynamics and
identities, and which threatens to divide the Muslims of the Middle
East into bitterly antagonistic rival camps into the foreseeable
future.
This current wave of intensification was kicked off by the Saudi
execution of a dissident Shia cleric, Nimr Al Nimr, who has repeatedly
called for the secession of the oil-rich Eastern Province and was
accused of promoting violence in that cause. Nimr was arrested in 2012
and sentenced to death in 2014, but was only executed last week.
The Saudi authorities must have known that this execution would
provoke a significant backlash from Iran and many Shia organisations
and constituencies in the Arab world.
Moreover, it seems to contradict a number of gestures towards
conciliation, including the restoration of full diplomatic relations
with Iraq, preparations to send a new ambassador to Iran and
substantive discussions with the Iranian officials on the fringes of
the Syrian peace talks.
It’s likely that the proximate cause for the execution of Nimr and
three other Shiite activists was the simultaneous mass execution of
more than 40 Sunni extremists associated with Al Qaeda.
Those executions also come in the context of the formation of a
Saudi-led antiterrorism alliance and other measures aimed primarily at
Sunni radicals such as ISIL and Al Qaeda. The inclusion of a small
number of radical Shias in the execution list may well have been an
effort to appear “even-handed”, particularly to domestic political
constituencies.
Although some claim that Saudi Arabia was acting in a “panicked”
manner because many of its policies seem to be going badly, and its
economy is in the doldrums, the real message appears to be one of
determination and defiance.
Riyadh appears to be telling both Sunni and Shia radicals that they
will find little space to operate within the kingdom. Iran and its
clients are being put on notice that Saudi Arabia and its allies are
not only ready to meet any challenge, but are even prepared to raise
the stakes. And the US is being reminded that, given the perceived
absence of American leadership, Saudi Arabia is prepared to define its
own security measures and pursue its national interests with a much
greater degree of independence from Washington.
Many observers, particularly in the West, have reacted angrily to the
Saudi move, decrying an apparent sectarian provocation that could only
have had the effect of exacerbating Sunni-Shiite tensions. And,
indeed, this is what has, predictably, occurred. But what’s missing
from this analysis is that Riyadh is merely playing catch-up to
Tehran.
Iran’s sectarian regional politics are so deeply entrenched that no
one notices them anymore. They appear to be “normal”. But, of course,
they are not. Iran worked for decades to unite Shia and quasi-Shia
communities across the Middle East in its orbit, drawing in the Syrian
regime, Hizbollah in Lebanon, many of the Shiite parties in Iraq, the
Houthis in Yemen and so forth.
Hamas was once the exception that proved the rule, being a Muslim
Brotherhood party that was also a part of the pro-Iranian alliance.
However, after the outbreak of the conflict in Syria, Hamas was forced
by Damascus and Tehran to choose sides, and it could not remain
aligned with what was clearly a sectarian Shia coalition. It was, in
effect, expelled from the Iranian alliance because of its opposition
to the Bashar Al Assad regime once the Syrian uprising really caught
fire.
While it might be fair to decry the exploitation of sectarian
sensibilities by both countries, it’s preposterous to imply that Saudi
Arabia is exacerbating religious divisions without acknowledging that
this has been Iran’s modus operandi for decades, since at least the
outbreak of the Iran-Iraq war, if not from the very outset of the
Islamic Republic.
Yet the situation is alarming and dangerous, and there are faults on both sides.
While it is extremely unlikely that there will be a direct military
confrontation between Iran and Saudi Arabia, both countries are now
involved in directly combating each other’s clients.
In Yemen, Saudi Arabia and its allies are directly confronting the
Iranian-backed Houthi rebels, while in Syria, Iranian forces have
joined with Syrian government, Russian, Hizbollah and even Iraqi
militia forces in combating Saudi-backed Syrian rebels.
With the breaking of diplomatic relations with Iran and the suspension
of even trade links by Saudi Arabia, following the outrageous attack
by government-backed Iranian mobs against the Saudi embassy in Tehran,
tensions have reached a new high.
It’s in everyone’s interests that the parties pull back and resume
efforts to create a constructive dialogue. But for that to happen,
enlightened self-interest and responsible behaviour are going to have
to replace the current atmosphere of mutual fear, suspicion and
loathing. Right now, that seems a tall order indeed.