Showing posts with label Syria. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Syria. Show all posts

Tuesday, 18 February 2014

Has Iran replaced Saudi Arabia in the Middle East?

America and Iran is meeting today to discuss the latter’s nuclear policy and future relations. This development in the international community is to be honest rather obscure and not a transition many predicted. The main question this article asks is why the pleasantries? What has changed in the region that has made America keen to engage with Iran?

Likely Allies? American and Iranian talks continue.

The Near East/Middle East (yes there is a difference) is evidently a complex web of state relations. A brief overview of the area is practically impossible but I will attempt below to layout the relational history of the states discussed in this article.

America and Israel – Typically strong allies as Israel has been seen as a bloc against the extremism so feared by the Americans. Yet, with the 24th November 2013 Geneva Interim Agreement, which eased economic sanctions on Iran in return for a freeze on its nuclear program, the relations have worsened between America and Israel. With this second round of talks Israel is watching the development with intense focus.

America and Saudi Arabia – A checkered relationship typifies the relational foreign policy of these two states. The first conflict between the two states centred on the creation of Israel and since then it has been dominated by this issue, oil, and counter-terrorism. By partnering with Saudi-Arabia, America has reduced Arab defiance to the Jewish state.

Israel and Iran – In 1947 Iran was among 13 countries that voted against the UN Partition Plan for Palestine. Two years later, Iran also voted against Israel's admission to the United Nations, and showed tacit solidarity with the Arab states during the 1948 Palestine war. After the 1979 Revolution, Iran severed all diplomatic and commercial ties with Israel, and its government does not recognize the legitimacy of Israel as a state.

However, this is a broad overview. In reality the states all help and work against the other states in divergent ways. For instance, only yesterday an article was published on Israel attempting to sell arms to Iran.

Why Iran?
So why is America courting Iran when Saudi Arabia can provide the oil needed to keep its international dominance?

Simply, it does not have enough. The Saudi oil production is beginning to flatline and thus America is looking elsewhere for oil, mainly Iraq and Iran.

Saudi Arabia's Oil dominance is showing signs of waning.

With Iraq’s security issues, Iran is a tempting partner for American oil interests but is displeasing to Israel as demonstrated by this rather untactful article in ‘The Jerusalem Post’.

Though, Ayatollah, the Iranian Supreme :eader, is not optimistic about the talks today we should not read too much into this statement. After years of opposition it would be strange for Iran and America to become strong allies. Approaching the talks with scepticism simply safeguards the Iranian government against its developments and may help to further reduce the sanctions placed on Iran.

Furthermore, this is the not the first time the Americans have worked with the Iranian. During the Bonn Conference concerning the future of Afghanistan the Iranians were vital to securing American intentions (read After the Taliban: Nation Building in Afghanistan by J. F. Dobbins for an in-depth account of this period).

It is an interesting shift in politics in the region and I look forward to the progression in these talks. It may have a knock on effect for the talks on Syria as well.

Tuesday, 17 December 2013

Syria and the Global Arms Trade

In the run up to Christmas we are all frantically buying presents for loved ones, ensuring deadlines are complete so we can avoid thinking about them, and becoming a little more focused on ourselves and our families. 

There is nothing wrong with that. In fact we deserve a break! Or certainly I will admit I need one!

But, as we prepare to celebrate another Christmas and hunker down it was strange to hear that yesterday the BBC launched a series of reports on the Syrian conflict to mark its third year - almost like a birthday? Oddly it seems like only yesterday that fifteen children in Deraa wrote anti-government graffiti and the subsequent violence started.

After three years of fighting, what can we infer from the situation? 

Well it is rather stale… in fact it is a stalemate.

That does not mean that fighting is not occurring but rather that rebels will take one area for it to be only retaken by government forces and vice versa.

Sustained firefights on the streets of Aleppo. Credit: James Lawer Duggan

Concerning the BBC report it concluded that the influence of external powers will be the deciding factor in this conflict; an observation that could be drawn from most, if not all, armed conflicts in this present age. Cheers for that BBC… we do indeed live in a globalised world so external powers are bound to take an interest and have an influence.

Conversely, in  studies on the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) major scholars in democratisation such as Diamond, Linz and Lipset (1996) exclude the MENA  states from their studies as they “lack much democratic experience, and most appear to have little prospect of transition to even semi-democracy”. This lack of democracy simply makes this region even more interesting to external powers as it is so volatile. Volatility means vast amounts of money and where there is money there is bound to be trouble.

So, let us have a quick look at how have the external powers influenced Syria recently?
  • They have given non-lethal aid to the Free Syrian Army (FSA) but due to the Islamic Front taking FSA bases in Bab al-Hawa the aid has stopped to this region.
  • Aid for refugees and those suffering from the now crippling winter has been provided. Though it is risky for aid workers to complete their jobs.

This aid seems rather cautious and concerned with the people of Syria’s welfare. However, underneath this bubble of aid lies a more sinister trade, the arms trade. If external powers are not involved in this then… well we all know they are.

So what makes weapons profitable?
  • Their durability.
  • The ease with which actors can locate ammunition. Obviously finding ammunition for an AK47 is easier than another rarer or outdated rifle. 
  • They are fungible and interchangeable.
  • They retain their value
  • Conflict seems to be a constant at this present moment so someone will always want to buy them
Read this article here for a more in-depth understanding and an overview of the arms trade.

Vast stockpiles of weapons in unstable states. See this article on the arms trade in Latin America.

Who is supporting who?
  • Russia and Iran are supplying the Assad regime
  • External powers such as America are not explicitly trading arms but are facilitating the transfer of arms from Libya to Syria rebels. The logic is that the more weapons fired at Assad means fewer weapons in the hands of militants in North Africa. Sound logic.
Furthermore, if you watch ‘Holidays in the Danger Zone - The Violent Coast: Liberia and Sierra Leone’ by Ben Anderson (I would recommend his documentaries) about sixteen minutes in he finds an RPG-7 provided by a British Arms Manufacturer despite the arms embargo on Liberia. Thus, as Western powers attempt to reduce conflict in developing states it is worth considering how they might be sustaining them or profiteering from them.

Nonetheless, they are playing a game which all foreign powers play from Pakistan to China to Russia and consequently for them to be involved, no matter how irresponsible, might help to prevent certain powers from dominating the international sphere.

I would argue that all should be aware of this practice but that preventing the arms trade presents a conundrum needing international cooperation. Calling for the West to stop trading arms could lead, however inhuman this appears, to worse atrocities. If both sides are armed then a realist state of deadlock may emerge. Though, if this is broken after sustained vertical proliferation, and with more weapons available, the conflict could be prolonged. It is a difficult situation.  

Therefore, as we spend Christmas buying lots of presents lets us take a minute to think about the way in which armed forces throughout the world are able to buy their ‘presents’ this Christmas. I urge you to consider the arguments, research the subject and form your own opinions on this important matter.

Resources used (if not already linked):
Diamond, L., Linz, J. J. and Lipset, S. M. (1995) Politics in Developing Countries: Comparing Experiences with Democracy. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.