Reconfiguring the Arab region and its global space
How is the Arab region realigning itself in light of the new regional-international alliances and what is its place in the international landscape, beyond the traditional classification of the region in terms of its economic role and the huge security challenges it faces led by ISIS and its ilk?
When raising this question, and because of the overt Russian military intervention in Syria now, the Syrian issue becomes one of major importance in the future of the region and global relations, led by U.S.-Russian relations. However, Syria in reality is not the only benchmark by which we should gauge the realignment of the Arab region in the international arena, while the intent is not to bypass at all raging crises and conflicts, such as those in Syria, Yemen, Libya, and Iraq, nor latent ones such as those in Lebanon, Egypt, or Tunisia.
The intent is that the re-alignment requires long-term strategies that accompany the necessary immediate-term ones to end the conflicts, because they pose serious obstacles to the growth and development of Arab societies, which would help take young people towards fulfilling normal aspirations, instead of falling victim to polarization, extremism, and terrorism.
A summit of the Beirut Institute in Abu Dhabi held this week brought together several prominent intellectuals and strategists from around the world to discuss what the new realignment requires and what mechanisms should be established to build a positive framework in the Arab region, covering regional and international relations as well. The summit saw many boldly admit American, Russian, and Arab mistakes, but went beyond diagnosing and confessing to failed policies and their repercussions, to discussing ideas regarding what should be done in earnest.
The conversations tackled Arab-Iranian, especially Saudi-Iranian, relations; Gulf-Russian relations, which continue to develop despite differences and drawbacks; and the future of Arab-American relations after the current administration and in light of President Obama’s policies.
Full disclosure: I am the founder and executive chairperson of the Beirut Institute, an Arab think-tank. The summit, which was held last weekend in the UAE capital, had support from the host country and brought together senior officials, ministers, former heads of state, and leaders of intellect, politics, and arts from around the world. Several prominent figures from the Arab world sit on the board of the independent think tank, information about which can be found on www.beirutinstitute.org and via Facebook and Twitter.
Syrian tragedy
Naturally, the Syrian tragedy currently overshadows all other crises, despite the importance of what is taking place in Yemen, Libya, and Iraq. The main question here is this: Is Russia in the process of successfully altering internal Syrian equations, and what does Russia really want? Does the United States or the Gulf bless what Russia is doing? Or is Russia being lured into a quagmire in Syria?It is indisputable that the absence and reluctance of the Obama administration to engage in Syria has encouraged Moscow to fill the vacuum, with Russia now repositioning itself in the Middle East. Washington may not mind for Moscow to occupy an exceptional strategic position through Syria, because the Obama administration has decided that the U.S. interest lies in pivoting east, away from the Middle East.
The official Russian pretext for the intervention in Syria is an official request for help from the “legitimate” government in Damascus. Moscow rightly argues that the United States did not question the legitimacy of the Syrian government when it signed agreements over the Syrian chemical weapons arsenal in the wake of a U.S.-Russian agreement, when Obama famously backed down from his “red lines”. Moscow is right because that agreement, which Washington signed through the Security Council, meant that Obama and Washington had backtracked from considering that Assad has lost his legitimacy as Obama had previously said.
At the Beirut Institute, the discussions during the public and closed sessions argued that the Russian intervention in Syria could have been a positive development, if military activities were coordinated on the basis of political understandings. According to one figure closely familiar with Obama’s policies, these understandings would not mind if Russia gained a leading, permanent position in Syria as a foothold in the region. However, President Putin would be mistaken if he believes that Washington would consent to maintaining Bashar al-Assad a permanent president atop the ruins of Syria. For one thing, this would implicate the United States in a confrontation that it does not need with an important segment of the Arab peoples and important nations that the United States still maintains strategic relations with, such as Saudi Arabia.
Source: english.alarabiya.net