May 29, 2014
A few
months ago we pretty much hit the bottom in violence and political discord
across the entire Middle East, with active wars and insurgencies and daily
terrorism defining many quarters of the region. The heartland of political
violence has been the vast region of Lebanon-Syria-Iraq-Iran, which effectively
has become a single operational arena in terms of the ease of movement of
fighters and weapons for those who do battle around here.
The low point came in December last year, when
violence in Syria and Iraq spiked, and major bombings killed dozens of people
in Beirut and other parts of Lebanon. The bombing locations symbolized the main
protagonists in the fighting inside Lebanon and between the Saudi Arabian and
Iranian regional patrons of those bombing or being bombed in Lebanon. Political
leaders on all sides clearly were frightened by the deaths of dozens of people
at the Iranian embassy, public areas in Hizbollah’s southern Beirut political
heartland, and an upscale West Beirut district that symbolizes the
Saudi-supported Saad Hariri followers. Fear set in all around, because former
red lines had been breached, and everyone in the country and region became fair
game for assassination.
Since then, things seem to have improved on some
fronts, and the regional linkages are critical to this. As I have long
anticipated, we are now witnessing some serious signs of changes for the better
on two of the three most important state-to-state relationships that shape the
condition and future of the Middle East. These two are the Iran-United States
and Iran-P5+1 (five UN Security Council permanent members plus Germany)
relations—as manifested in the ongoing talks to resolve the issues of Iran’s
nuclear industry and Western sanctions on Iran—and relations between Saudi
Arabia and Iran. (The third critical relationship is the Arab-Israeli one,
which has to wait some more before any serious moves for the better take
place.)
Iranian-P5+1 negotiations are now in the final
stretch of drafting a long-term agreement that recognizes Iran’s home-grown,
uranium-enrichment-based nuclear industry for peaceful purposes while removing
international sanctions, and Saudi Arabia has just announced invitations for
senior Iranian officials to visit Riyadh. These long-overdue developments are
to be applauded and built on to bring the entire Middle East back to something
resembling normalcy.
Iran is the pivot of these two political
dynamics that move together for the most part, but also have one important
thing in common: Saudi-Iranian and Iranian-Western tensions largely are houses
of cards that are not anchored in real, tangible threats; rather, they reflect
perceived ideological threats and exaggerated concerns that primarily mirror
the political insecurities and wildly overblown sense of honor on all sides.
If basic common sense and non-racist standards
of legal compliance are followed, it remains inevitable that Iran would work
out its differences with the P5+1 powers and Saudi-Iranian relations would
return to normal. I say there is no real conflict between Saudis and Iranians
because these two countries do not threaten each other militarily or
strategically, though they do react hysterically when they sense that the other
is trying to undermine them ideologically throughout the region.
Tehran and Riyadh are both regional powers who
must be able to protect their national strategic interests in the region. They
can best do this by having good bilateral relations, promoting the
socio-economic development of all other people in the area, and, together and
with smaller partner-states, agreeing on a regional security framework that
would be similar to the Helsinki Agreement the United States and USSR worked
out in the 1970s.
The same thing applies to Iranian-Western and
Iranian-P5+1 relations. These should be anchored in economic and trade ties
that benefit everyone (similar to Turkey’s trajectory in the last three
decades) on a foundation of mutual respect that does not treat Iran in a racist
manner by subjecting it to nuclear limits that are not imposed on other
countries. Iran should be one of the pillars of Western engagements in the
Middle East, given its tremendous human and material capabilities, convergence
of values, and extensive regional links.
If, as I hope, Iranian-Western and Iranian-Saudi
relations shift from confrontation to peaceful coexistence and then active
cooperation, they will impact heavily and positively on conditions throughout
the Arab region. Significant changes for the better in domestic and bilateral
realms will be felt first in Lebanon-Syria-Iraq, which is a sad comment on
those three countries’ stunted sovereignty. The ordinary citizens of these tortured
lands will gain the most, as warmongers and hysterical political hucksters in
Arab, Iranian, Israeli, American and other quarters succumb to the indomitable
forces of common decency and peaceful coexistence that define the vast majority
of citizens in these lands.
Rami G. Khouri is
Editor-at-large of The Daily Star, and Director of the Issam Fares
Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs at the American
University of Beirut, in Beirut, Lebanon. On Twitter: @ramikhouri.
Copyright
© 2014 Rami G. Khouri—distributed by Agence Global