During the 1950s and 1960s, the Arab world was dominated by what became known as the “politics of axes,” in which regional dynamics were driven by the rivalries among different alignments of states. As “pax americana” in the Middle East has come to a halting end, the region is returning to a somewhat similar situation, in which the ultimate outcome may possibly bode well for the Arab states.
Generally speaking, there are three broad alignments, which range from formal military pacts to looser collaborative relationships, in which Arab states find themselves today. There is the Saudi-Emirati-Egyptian alignment, which took on an important new dimension when several Gulf states reached an agreement with Israel through the Abraham Accords.
There is the Iran-led alignment of states or organisations that includes Iran, Syria, to an extent Iraq, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen and, more ambiguously, Hamas in the Palestinian territories. And there is a third alignment, that of Turkey and Qatar, the status of which appears to be in transition today following the reconciliation last week between the GCC states and Doha.
This range of relationships is not a replication of the politics of axes of the past. For one thing, it involves three non-Arab states – Israel, Iran, and Turkey – that all play a major role in Arab politics. Nor are the alignments as coherent as those during the 1950s and 1960s, when Arab alliances were more firmly anchored in the ideological divisions between the United States and the Soviet Union.
Today, ideology is very far from the minds of the region’s rulers. Instead, the primary driver of relations is flexibility and cool calculation in the pursuit of regional power and gains, in a political climate where Washington has left behind a vacuum that everyone wants to fill. States are not pretending to adhere to larger principles to justify their actions, they are boldly holding up national interest as validation for their choices, which often explains their sudden turnarounds.
This applies to Iran as much as to others, despite the fact that the leadership in Tehran has frequently used religious (and sectarian) terminology to explain its behaviour. But this appears to be a convenient veil, concealing a deeper Iranian nationalism nourished by regional hegemonic ambitions. Nor is Iran alone in reviving past instincts for domination to pursue power today. Turkey, too, has borrowed from its Ottoman past to colour its present policies.
President Donald Trump has sought to reduce American presence in the Middle East, something which could have an important impact on the region's various alliances. AP
Former US president Barack Obama understood these impulses. He thought they would allow his administration to set up a new order in the Middle East that would permit Washington to withdraw its military forces from the region.
In his famous interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic in 2016, Mr Obama observed, “The competition between the Saudis and the Iranians … requires us to say to our friends, as well as to the Iranians, that they need to find an effective way to share the neighbourhood and institute some sort of cold peace.”
A new politics of axes may one day lead to a measure of regional calm
The only problem is that by trying to offer Iran a stake in the region through the nuclear deal he helped agree with the country, Mr Obama only heightened anxieties among Arab states, making tensions more, not less, likely. Yet the former US president did have a point that a pull-out of American forces from the Middle East could only generate stability in the context of a new regional equilibrium.
That is why a new politics of axes, based on a realistic reading of the limits of one’s power, may one day indeed lead to a measure of regional calm. That won’t happen soon, however, because all the main regional actors are still testing how far they can go, facing setbacks that oblige them to constantly recalculate.
For a long time, Iran in particular felt confident that it could expand its influence in dysfunctional Arab countries. The limits of that strategy are increasingly apparent. Tehran helped preserve the Assad regime in Syria, for instance. But the price was the country’s destruction, perennial instability, and constant Israeli military pushback against Iranian efforts to build up a military infrastructure there.
Syria, like Lebanon or Iraq or Yemen, has shown that being in Iran’s sphere of influence usually creates a one-way relationship with Tehran. The result of Iranian power in these countries is destruction, collapse, and corruption, all for Tehran's gain. That’s hardly an appealing model for Arab societies, which means that over time Iran’s hold may slowly loosen if it doesn’t change course.
If a stable new order in the Middle East is to be established, regional alignments will have to show not only a capacity to impose limits on their rivals, but also to offer soft power incentives to increase their appeal. Given the precariousness of military agendas in a region armed to the teeth, persuasion and attractiveness will likely become more important than intimidation in defining outcomes. The Arab world’s major looming problems show why this can hardly be underestimated.
Michael Young is a Lebanon columnist for The National
BANGLADESH SQUAD
Mashrafe Mortaza (captain), Tamim Iqbal, Liton Das, Soumya Sarkar, Mushfiqur Rahim (wicketkeeper), Mahmudullah, Shakib Al Hasan (vice captain), Mohammad Mithun, Sabbir Rahaman, Mosaddek Hossain, Mohammad Saifuddin, Mehidy Hasan Miraz, Rubel Hossain, Mustafizur Rahman, Abu Jayed (Reporting by Rohith Nair in Bengaluru Editing by Amlan Chakraborty)
French business
France has organised a delegation of leading businesses to travel to Syria. The group was led by French shipping giant CMA CGM, which struck a 30-year contract in May with the Syrian government to develop and run Latakia port. Also present were water and waste management company Suez, defence multinational Thales, and Ellipse Group, which is currently looking into rehabilitating Syrian hospitals.
Coffee: black death or elixir of life?
It is among the greatest health debates of our time; splashed across newspapers with contradicting headlines - is coffee good for you or not?
Depending on what you read, it is either a cancer-causing, sleep-depriving, stomach ulcer-inducing black death or the secret to long life, cutting the chance of stroke, diabetes and cancer.
The latest research - a study of 8,412 people across the UK who each underwent an MRI heart scan - is intended to put to bed (caffeine allowing) conflicting reports of the pros and cons of consumption.
The study, funded by the British Heart Foundation, contradicted previous findings that it stiffens arteries, putting pressure on the heart and increasing the likelihood of a heart attack or stroke, leading to warnings to cut down.
Numerous studies have recognised the benefits of coffee in cutting oral and esophageal cancer, the risk of a stroke and cirrhosis of the liver.
The benefits are often linked to biologically active compounds including caffeine, flavonoids, lignans, and other polyphenols, which benefit the body. These and othetr coffee compounds regulate genes involved in DNA repair, have anti-inflammatory properties and are associated with lower risk of insulin resistance, which is linked to type-2 diabetes.
But as doctors warn, too much of anything is inadvisable. The British Heart Foundation found the heaviest coffee drinkers in the study were most likely to be men who smoked and drank alcohol regularly.
Excessive amounts of coffee also unsettle the stomach causing or contributing to stomach ulcers. It also stains the teeth over time, hampers absorption of minerals and vitamins like zinc and iron.
It also raises blood pressure, which is largely problematic for people with existing conditions.
So the heaviest drinkers of the black stuff - some in the study had up to 25 cups per day - may want to rein it in.
Rory Reynolds
PROFILE OF HALAN
Started: November 2017
Founders: Mounir Nakhla, Ahmed Mohsen and Mohamed Aboulnaga
Based: Cairo, Egypt
Sector: transport and logistics
Size: 150 employees
Investment: approximately $8 million
Investors include: Singapore’s Battery Road Digital Holdings, Egypt’s Algebra Ventures, Uber co-founder and former CTO Oscar Salazar
DMZ facts
The DMZ was created as a buffer after the 1950-53 Korean War.
It runs 248 kilometers across the Korean Peninsula and is 4km wide.
The zone is jointly overseen by the US-led United Nations Command and North Korea.
It is littered with an estimated 2 million mines, tank traps, razor wire fences and guard posts.
Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un met at a building in Panmunjom, where an armistice was signed to stop the Korean War.
Panmunjom is 52km north of the Korean capital Seoul and 147km south of Pyongyang, North Korea’s capital.
Former US president Bill Clinton visited Panmunjom in 1993, while Ronald Reagan visited the DMZ in 1983, George W. Bush in 2002 and Barack Obama visited a nearby military camp in 2012.
Mr Trump planned to visit in November 2017, but heavy fog that prevented his helicopter from landing.
17,000 square metres is the length of the stainless steel facade
14 kilometres is the length of LED lights used on the facade
1,024 individual pieces make up the exterior
7 floors in all, with one for administrative offices
2,400 diagonally intersecting steel members frame the torus shape
100 species of trees and plants dot the gardens
Dh145 is the price of a ticket
UAE tour of Zimbabwe
All matches in Bulawayo Friday, Sept 26 – UAE won by 36 runs Sunday, Sept 28 – Second ODI Tuesday, Sept 30 – Third ODI Thursday, Oct 2 – Fourth ODI Sunday, Oct 5 – First T20I Monday, Oct 6 – Second T20I
Tonight's Chat is a series of online conversations on The National. The series features a diverse range of celebrities, politicians and business leaders from around the Arab world.
Tonight’s Chat host Ricardo Karam is a renowned author and broadcaster who has previously interviewed Bill Gates, Carlos Ghosn, Andre Agassi and the late Zaha Hadid, among others.
Intellectually curious and thought-provoking, Tonight’s Chat moves the conversation forward.
