Turkey, Iran, Syria Postpone Moscow Meet As Xi Jinping Arrives

You are Here: Tweet, Like, Share, Comment, Subscribe…be the Voice of Free Press!

EDITORIAL: By Saeed Naqvi, Edited By Adam Rizvi, The India Observer, TIO: NJ: To gauge the importance of the Saudi-Iran rapprochement, mediated by China, it would be useful to see the evolution of this relationship since the Islamic revolution of 1979.

In an era aching for peace, such a radical development would undoubtedly be infectious. Just as the world sat up in wonder at the development, signals became discernable of quiet low key efforts at repairing other parts of the frayed tapestry of West Asia. Deputy Foreign Ministers of Iran, Turkey and Syria were headed for Moscow.

Also Read, Tweet & Share: Swinging Nuclear Pendulum between US and Iran

Tayyip Erdogan would be ready for bargains all around if these boost his chances in the May elections. Would it not be a coup for him if he goes into the contest after a summit with the Syrian President Bashar al Assad? The meeting of the three officials has been postponed briefly because Moscow is readying itself to receive Xi Jinping on Monday.

True, the revolution which brought the Ayatullahs to power in 1979 did introduce a sharp bipolarity in the Islamic world, but what worried Saudis much more was a development in their own citadel. At about the same time that the revolution was taking place in Iran, a group of Muslim militants who called themselves the ‘Akhwan’, a sort of double distilled variant of Akhwan ul Muslimeen (the Muslim Brotherhood) occupied Islam’s holiest mosque in Mecca, demanding that the House of Saud relinquish control of the holy shrines. The argument was that monarchical control was anti Islamic.

Also Read, Tweet & Share: Pope Francis And Ayatullah Sistani Talks: Balm For Bruised Souls

This was not dissimilar to the Ayatullah’s demand. It had consequences too: the House of Saud began to describe themselves as “keepers of the holy shrines”. In good time the new title fell into disuse. And now that friendship, or atleast its promise, has broken out between the countries, such awkward issues are unlikely to be raised. With such moderation breaking out, the more theological debates will now intensify in Najaf and Qom on the one hand and among the on the other.

Iran was a Shia country even under the Shah. The Ayatullahs avoided the sectarian inflection and called it the “Islamic resolution”. The sectarian divide was amplified for strategic reasons by the Washington, Jerusalem, Riyadh combine.

Also Read, Tweet & Share: Modi, Xi discuss blueprint for bolstering bilateral ties after Wuhan summit

Since the establishment of the Jewish state, the Palestinian issue has had extraordinary saliency in the Arab world. For the Iranian revolution, it was a stated article of faith: no normalization with Israel unless all Palestinian rights were restored. Despite what happened to Saddam Hussain, Muammar Qaddafi, Bashar al Assad (his county destroyed even as he survives), the Iranians have stood firm, thereby earning the wrath of Israel and all its supporters.

This stand on Palestine, standing upto the Israeli-US combine obviously resonated in the Arab basement. This unnerved Arab potentates in dalliance with the Americans and Israelis. Playing up the “Shia axis of evil”, therefore served all their purposes. Even thinkers like Henry Kissinger began to amplify this propaganda. “The region is no longer focused on the Palestinian question, they are worried about the Shia-Sunni divide.”

Also Read, Tweet & Share: Syrian War Being Dragged On Basis Of Lies For Ulterior Reasons

When the late King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia returned from convalescence in a German hospital in the summer of 2011, he was dismayed that the Arab Spring had taken a toll of two of his friends – Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, and Zine El Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia.

He swore that no more monarchies, sheikhdoms and authoritarian regimes would be allowed to fall. Americans, he said, should “cut off the head of the snake”. The snake, in King Abdullah’s parlance was Iran. To reach the “snake”, the Shia arc had to be weakened.

Also Read, Tweet & Share: After Friendship Without Limits With Russia, Comes Turn Of Vietnam

That is when the rebellion against Assad was manufactured and stoked. I myself saw US ambassador Stephen Ford and his French counterpart huddle with rebels in Homs, Hama and Dera. A former US ambassador, Ed Peck who witnessed the brazen US interference in Syria, wrote this letter to a friend, a former Indian Ambassador to Damascus:

“I have been dismayed by the accolades and support given to Ambassador Ford, our man in Syria, for stepping well out of the traditional and appropriate role of a diplomat and actively encouraging the revolt/insurrection/sectarian strife/outside meddling, call it what you will. It is easy to imagine the US reaction if an ambassador from anywhere were to engage in even distantly related activities here. I fear my country remains somewhat more than merely insensitive, and is sliding into plain rampant and offensive arrogance.”

Also Read, Tweet & Share: An Eerie Silence Over Afghanistan Could End With A Bang

After ten years of trying to oust Assad with the help of Western and regional powers, Americans find to their chagrin that the Syrian President is still around. If Assad cannot be defeated by a proxy war sustained for a decade, what hope is there of prevailing on Putin by proxy methods?

By 2015, President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry were embarked on pivot to the Pacific. By signing the nuclear deal with Iran, they were creating a power balance in West Asia. Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey would “balance power” in the area, enabling the US to attend to the bigger business in the Pacific – the rise of China.

Also Read, Tweet & Share: Iran summons Turkish ambassador over Erdogan remarks in Baku

Donald Trump tore up the agreement. His son-in-law, Jared Kushner helped place the regional crown on the head of the Iran’s implacable enemy – Israel.

Inconsistency in US policy was causing weariness. The messy American withdrawal from Afghanistan, caused the world to gasp. Punters began to change their bets. Provoke Vladimir Putin into Ukraine, trap him into a long war and clobber him with sanctions until Putin is on his knees – this was the stated intention. Nothing of the sort happened. In fact, at this stage, French President Emmanuel Macron, appears to have called it right. “After 300 years, Western hegemony is coming to an end.”

Also Read, Tweet & Share: After Soleimani: The Cost-Benefit For US, Israel, Saudi And Iran

By this token, the US, as yesterday’s hegemon, has woefully diminished persuasiveness.

When Trump asked Jimmy Carter: “What should we do because China is going ahead of us?” Carter’s response was pithy: “except a brief conflict with Vietnam in 1978, China has not been at war.” Carter’s punch line was telling: “We have never ceased being at war.”

Also, Read more from this Author: Did Failure Of Agra Summit Set The Scene For Modi’s Rise?

Curated and Compiled by Humra Kidwai

Articles written by contributors have different viewpoints. The views expressed in the articles are the author’s own and not necessarily supported by TIO, The India Observer its affiliates, staff, or the management. Our Articles can be reproduced, with the following conditions, (1) No alteration to the content, (2) Visible, and full credit is given to the Author & Editor. (3) Citing, The India Observer, TIO. In the case of online or electronic media, a link to the original article must be given. Rules are strictly enforced. Any questions, email the Editor at: Mediaiss@gmail.com Or TheIndiaObserver@gmail.com

All Copyrights reserved. Please be guided.

Saeed Naqvi

Saeed Naqvi

Saeed Naqvi is a senior Indian journalist, television commentator, interviewer. He has interviewed world leaders and personalities in India and abroad, which appear in newspapers, magazines and on national television, remained editor of the World Report, a syndication service on foreign affairs, and has written for several publications, both global and Indian, including the BBC News, The Sunday Observer, The Sunday Times, The Guardian, Washington Post, The Indian Express, The Citizen and Outlook magazine. At the Indian Express, he started in 1977 as a Special Correspondent and eventually becoming, editor, Indian Express, Madras, (1979–1984), and Foreign Editor, The Indian Express, Delhi in 1984, and continues to writes columns and features for the paper.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *