 |
| A lot is riding on Joe Biden - and Iran - to end the Middle East crises (Image: POLITICO.eu) |
There have been threats, in recent weeks, of the conflicts taking place in dotted parts of the Middle East 'expanding' to across the region. Whether it is the situation in Gaza, which the current horrors there have been going on for more than 100 days, or what is happening in Yemen and the Red Sea, where the Houthi military group is at loggerheads with ships belonging to the UK, United States and others.
At the heart of these troubles are innocent lives being lost or displaced, and there is little sign, hope or willingness of resolution by those who should be negotiating peaceful solutions. But also at the heart of these are the United States and Iran. For decades, their governments have exchanged countless war of words, and for years, they've ruffled each other's feathers by using proxies and existing forces to needlessly flex their military muscles. These have often been met with eye-rolls by other world leaders and media outlets as these incidents were often petty, childish and short-lasting, even if they sounded dramatic. But with fingers firmly being pointed at Israel's direction in recent weeks, due to its constant bombardment of Gaza, these localised and short-lasting squabbles have been escalated considerably, and appear to stick.
In the UK, the Conservative government say that the Israel/Gaza conflict is "unrelated" to what's happening in Yemen, but you cannot help but feel that this conclusion is misguided. Let's rewind. For weeks after the terror attacks committed by the Hamas group in Israel on 7th October 2023, leaders, including United States's Joe Biden and UK's Rishi Sunak, effectively gave Binyamin Netanyahu permission to plot revenge on Gaza by repeating that Israel 'has the right to defend itself'. The 'defence' has turned into a full blown assault and while Netanyahu may believe that his pursuit in getting rid of Hamas - who currently govern Palestine - will continue into 2025, his careless actions won't discourage anti-Israel sentiments and activities from occurring in the near future.
Middle Eastern countries, largely governed by Islamic republics or similar, have never hidden their disdain towards Israel - particularly towards the way it was formed more than 75 years ago. And the current leadership in Israel, which has led its parliament on-and-off for 15 years, has never hidden its disdain towards its neighbours. What we're seeing leading news agendas today isn't new, and we shouldn't treat these tensions as such.
But blaming Israel for the current crises in the region is easy in some senses. One can argue that it is simply been given permission by United States, UK and others to do what it likes, which is why Houthi is retaliating the way it has on the Red Sea. Equally, it is easy to blame Hamas, Houthi and the like for the atrocities they're causing when they're being blessed by nations like Russia and Iran. The way to end the current escalations is through diplomatic interventions between the 'encouragers', and the quicker that's realised, the better it'll be for everyone.
The future of the Middle East is reliant on how United States and Iran behave (which is the problem), and I fear it could all take a turn for the worse by as early as the start of the next calendar year unless both leaderships get their acts together. Their governments have big elections coming up and you may think that they're causing all this drama just to show their voters that they are a global force not to be messed with. I'm sure that this tactic worked in previous elections for both countries, but this simply won't work in 2024. We aren't likely to see a significant shift in Iran's political landscape when people there head to the polls, but with a low turnout warned and rising tensions in certain corners, we simply cannot rule out this landscape changing shortly after that point. How that looks, and the timing of this, would depend on whether the civil unrests escalate dramatically (currently unlikely), or what happens in the United States this November.
At present, based on polls, we are likely to see a rematch of 2020's election between Biden and Donald Trump this autumn; both desperate to land a second term in the White House. What makes things different for Trump this time around, in the context of the Middle East and Iran, is that his 'people', such as Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani and Mike Pompeo, are upping the ante in their role in wanting to change Iran's regime. In recent years, they have been cosying up with - and providing platforms for - the Mojahedin (MEK) Party, an Iranian 'opposition' group that is discredited and disgraced in Iran (amongst Iranians, not just the regime) and was previously deemed a terrorist organisation by the UK, United States and European Union. The support by this arm of the Republican Party has been going on since at least 2018, and MEK's leader, Maryam Rajavi, has been revelling in that, as well as enjoying influence and platforms provided by influential governments around the world, including Canada and the UK.
Should he win in November, Trump can afford to take these endorsements further, exploiting the protests we've been seeing in Iran since September 2022. Trump didn't have a reason to care about Iran properly when he was President, but he does now. How forceful could the businessman-turned-politician be in trying to pursue a new chapter in Iran, we dare to wonder. He won't care how the change is done, so long as he gets the world he wants, disregarding rules and ethics. Iranians need a fresh start, this isn't it.
Iran's Islamic Republic regime won't fall easily and certainly won't budge because Trump or Rajavi wants it to. You think the tensions between the United States and Iran are bad under Biden, try again later. Involving MEK back to a country who won't be welcoming the group with open arms, can only cause greater concern across the Middle East and beyond. Its history runs too deep and future is too unpredictable to risk (we have little idea if it is friends or foes with Israel, for example, which is probably important to know if we are to hope for wider peace).
So, if I were Biden, for the sake of the Middle East, I'd change tact. If he wants to win this election and regain respect from those he relies votes from, I suggest he stops using big words in front of the cameras to show he's the 'hard man' - it is benefitting no one and even now he is backtracking his almost unconditional support for Israel to the point that he and Netanyahu are reportedly barely talking. He needs to present his vision in how to support the region transition to a more democratic, peaceful future. It isn't done by force or reacting to what your 'enemy' does. It starts by minimal interference and showing that the United States can take the back seat. Doesn't he realise that people in the Middle East have always had a problem with the country's constant meddling? This is Biden's chance to change that perception.
Netanyahu, meanwhile, considered unpopular in Israel, will need to consider his future for the sake of the country's credibility and respect. Israel has a role to play in building sustainable relationships with other Islamic-led Middle Eastern nations. Every day he is there is making matters worse. In turn, Iran's leaders will then need to bite their tongues and lead the proxy organisations they are claimed to support to back down, to ensure they are also good neighbours - they know they'll eventually have no choice, if it wants to survive another day. But Biden holds the key in righting the wrongs. He has time to recover, but the clock is ticking.
Comments
Post a Comment