Some of the recent U.S. and Israeli drive for a peace settlement with the Palestinians is predicated upon the assumption that a new pragmatic coalition exists in the region–a moderate front made up of the Sunni powers plus Israel, united by the fear of Iran. This much was illustrated by Israeli Foreign Minister, Tzipi Livni, at the Annapolis Conference last November, when she said
This is the time for decision. Everyone must decide which side they are on, and the sides, ladies and gentlemen, have changed. They are no longer Israel on one side and the Palestinians on the other side. They are no longer the Arabs on one side and the Jews on the other side. In one camp is everyone who is sitting here in this room – Jews, Muslims and Christians, Israelis, and Arabs, Americans, and Europeans. And on the other side, there is Iran, with its allies and its proxies, agitating and doing mischief.
The view that Iran is a bigger threat to the Arab world than Israel is counterintuitive. But it does not necessarily translate–as some believe and advocate–into an Arab willingness to stand up to Iran alongside Israel and the U.S. Martin Kramer made that clear as early as last January, in his remarks at the Herzliyah annual conference. Now comes an op-ed in Lebanon’s Daily Star, by the Middle East Institute’s Thomas Lippman, reiterating what only the blind cannot see in the Persian Gulf:
In the simplest terms, the Saudis recognize that Iran is a major regional power, a potentially aggressive neighbor that is not going away. Iran is much more capable of making trouble for Saudi Arabia than the other way around, and therefore the kingdom’s security over time requires accommodation with Iran, however difficult it may be to manage the relationship. Americans and other foreigners may come and go, but Iran and its nearly 80 million people – almost four times the population of Saudi Arabia – will remain, a few kilometers across the Gulf.
Whoever thought that Tehran’s rise as a regional power would herd even the best of our allies in the region in Israel’s arms as a way to contain and deflect Iran’s threats forget the history and the geography of the region. FM Livni’s definition of sides ignores regional realities–where not taking sides is a sophisticated skill and the very essence of the art of survival.
Peacemaking may or may not have a chance–though if one counts the odds, it is more the latter than the former. But it is naive, if not outright folly, to count on countries like Saudi Arabia to radically change decades of foreign policy in a bid that at least in the Arab world would be highly controversial, given the yield. Aligning themselves with Western and Jewish infidels as a shield against the Shi’a would not make moderate Sunni monarchies safer. Saudi Arabia would only gain a possible showdown with Iran, whose fallout would hit Saudi shores before it even registers in Europe or the U.S. Pursue peace if you will, but don’t make Saudi help part of that strategy–it never paid, and will never now, especially in the shadow of Iran’s looming nuclear power.
