PIERRE REHOV
US President Donald J. Trump's Gulf Arab allies, according to the New York Times, oppose an American strike on Iran primarily out of fear of regional instability and the possible damage to economies, tourism, and domestic security.
While this explanation may sound credible on the surface, a deeper and far more uncomfortable reality is that for several of these regimes, the real danger is not Iran's collapse, but an ideological exposure that could follow decisive American action, as well as concern about Israel becoming more prominent in the region.
A serious confrontation with Iran would not only reshape the regional balance of power; it would also force a number of Arab states to clarify positions that for decades they have fought to keep ambiguous.
Iran, since its 1979 Islamic Revolution, is not merely a rival or destabilizing neighbor. It is the ideological and operational core of modern Islamist warfare in the Middle East.
Since 1979, Tehran has armed, funded, trained, and coordinated proxy organizations with the explicit aim of undermining Western influence. "Death to America," Ayatollah Ali Khamenei announced in 2023, "is not just a slogan, it is a policy." For decades, Iran has also been encircling Israel in a "ring of fire" the better to destroy it.
Hezbollah in Lebanon; Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Gaza; Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria, and the Houthis in Yemen are not independent actors pursuing local grievances. They are integral components of a coherent Iranian strategy, backed by Russia and China, aimed at expanding Islamist Iran's influence in the region by force; destabilizing sovereign states, and eroding the regional order from within. This strategy is not reactive; it is doctrinal.
Trump's Iran policy, after years of hesitant US engagement at best, has consistently combined economic pressure and military deterrence, with limited diplomatic patience, to restore America's international credibility.
Trump's restoration of credibility has apparently unsettled not only Iran's regime, but also some of Washington's supposed regional allies, who have grown accustomed to maneuvering Washington when desirable. Some, such as Qatar, have built fancied empires by never committing to any side and instead playing every side. Just as much blame, however, must go to those leaders in the Middle East and Europe who agreed to be played.
What many have largely avoided addressing is the extent to which some governments, such as Qatar's and Turkey's -- which host American military bases -- benefit from U.S. security guarantees.
While publicly Qatar and Turkey affirm their commitment to "stability", at the same time they zealously set about destabilizing half the planet by funding, promoting, and even training Islamist terror networks that presumably serve their own strategic interests. To Western audiences, they speak the language of moderation, while churning up grievance narratives and ideological victimhood at home.
A decisive confrontation with Iran might shatter the carefully maintained duplicity that these countries have so tenderly nurtured for decades.
No comments:
Post a Comment