New Delhi, 30
April 2003
Iraq
and West Asian Neighbours
The
fall of Baghdad has had a tectonic effect, sending shockwaves
through the entire West Asian region. Most of Iraq’s neighbours,
which have monarchical dictatorships, are wondering whose regime
change could be next?
Till
the break-up of the Soviet Union some of these countries had an
alternative to fall back upon for economic and security support.
However, with America emerging as the sole super power displaying
its overwhelming military power in Afghanistan and Iraq, and bent
upon creating Islamic democracies in the region, there seems to be
nothing left but to be on Yankee mercy.
The
moderate Arab states that backed America’s campaign in Iraq, can
expect to emerge largely unscathed or even enhanced by the outcome
of the war. But other hard line countries like Syria, Iran and to a
large extent Saudi Arabia are very vulnerable to the American power
on their doorstep.
We
give below our analysis of the likely behaviour that each of these
neighbours may embark upon, either voluntarily or under duress, and
how the entire region’s power politics could derive a new shape.
The
politics of oil, of course, will play an all-encompassing role. The
Kuwaiti Al-Rai al-Aam newspaper had reported that American forces
had blown up the oil pipeline running between Kirkuk in northern
Iraq and the Syrian port of Banias. The pipeline was believed to
have supplied Syria with 200,000 barrels of Iraqi oil a day, in
defiance of UN sanctions. The report remains unconfirmed, but a
diplomatic source in Damascus said that the supply of Iraqi oil to
Syria appeared to have dried up. The humbling of Arabs by the United
States could also make them less receptive to Bush administration
efforts to sponsor democracy in the Middle East.
Iran
–– The Ace of Hearts
Rhetoric
apart, the Iranian Government showed considerable restraint before
and during the Iraqi conflict. It chose to condemn rather than
actively retaliate against several stray missiles, one of which
killed a young boy, or the invasion of Iranian airspace and warnings
from America not to get involved. No doubt its efforts will be
directed on securing own national interest in the post-Saddam Iraq,
but events of the last few days indicate that Iran would not be
averse to fish in the troubled waters using the Iraqi Shi-ite
majority hook, line and sinker. Most Iranians rightly feel that they
are slowly being encircled and can easily be targeted because of
their record of support for militant Islamic groups and pursuit of
weapons of mass destruction, particularly the nuclear programme.
From the American point of view, despite being on the “axis of
evil” list, Washington would prefer that Iranians themselves bring
about a change. Yet there is a 50–50 possibility of Iran facing
the American rod.
Jordan
–– The Jack of Diamonds
The
41-year young king Abdullah II of Jordan must have breathed a sigh
of relief that the conflict across the border in Iraq was over
swiftly. However, the popular resentment, caused by Jordan’s
controversial policy of allowing US troops to operate from its
territory, will not disappear quickly and is bound to impact upon
the nature of governance. Much will depend on the way that the
postwar phase is handled. Though American victory was an accepted
fact, many Jordanians were hoping that the Iraqis would inflict
painful losses on the “US–British invaders and occupiers”. But
the reality is slowly sinking in, leaving a sense of frustration and
anger over the presence of US troops in Jordan. Historically,
Jordan, wedged between Israel and Iraq, had accepted Western near
suzerainty, first British and then American. Its aim in future would
be to sail through this storm and emerge with least damage to its
strategic interests.
The
King is also banking on the promise of postwar order to bring
prosperity to Jordan’s weak economy, which has suffered more than
£1.3 billion in losses since the start of the war on Iraq, its main
market and sole supplier of cheap oil. Washington has already agreed
to give Jordan more than £700 million over one year to offset the
impact of war, while Japan has pledged £64 million in grants.
Jordan has strengthened security measures on its common borders with
Iraq, saying it could not afford to take responsibility for the
war-affected Iraqis.
Saudi
Arabia –– The King of Spades
Inspite
of being termed the King of Spades in the Arab world, Saudi Arabia
is likely to be the one most vulnerable to changes in the region.
The Saudi authorities cooperated with American and British forces
more than they admitted. In particular they allowed coalition
aircraft to use bases in Saudi Arabia for combat operations against
Iraq. But the war has been deeply unpopular with ordinary Saudi
people. The authorities fear a backlash from the rising
anti-American sentiment and may press America to close its bases in
the country and move all foreign troops off its soil. The monarchy,
most die-hard of all, is also concerned about American plans for a
representative government in Iraq and Washington’s declared aim to
spread democracy through the region. It is quite worried about the
prospect of a Shia Muslim leadership taking control in Baghdad and
in league with Iran, challenging the Sunni Muslim domination
throughout the Arab world. Furthermore, the Saudis are also
concerned that if a pro-American government in Iraq allows US
companies to exploit the country’s huge oil resources, US will
become far less dependent on Saudi oil for its energy needs. Saudi
rulers have both internal and external pressures to ward off. How
much they will have to change in the process of adjustments, the
next five years will tell.
Egypt
–– The King of Hearts
President
Mubarak was one of the few Arab leaders who fought very hard to find
a diplomatic solution to the Iraqi crisis. For Egypt the war has had
a considerable economic cost, with the Government estimating that it
will lose between $6 billion and $8 billion, mostly in lost tourism
revenue. Although there will be some compensation –– the World
Bank is finalising a $1 billion loan and the US has promised $2.3
billion in aid –– the war could not have come at a worse time.
The Egyptian economy is at one of its lowest points in years, its
pound having lost nearly 20 per cent of its value since the
beginning of the year and causing severe inflation.
Anger
about the economy has been compounded by the widespread belief that
while Egypt publicly opposed the war, it provided secret support. As
the war began, the largest demonstrations in a generation took place
in Cairo. They also featured rare direct criticism of Mubarak, once
a taboo, and demands for political reforms. Hosni Mubarak, the
resilient ruler, will have to use all his finesse to placate the
Opposition and turn around the economic downslide. Some Americans
feel this time he may not succeed as several neo-conservative allies
of President Bush, including Richard Perle and James Woolsey, the
former CIA chief, have publicly expressed a desire to destabilise
his rule.
Syria
–– The Queen of Clubs
Not
much was heard about Syria, the second most powerful enemy of
Israel, till the start of the war. It was neither in the list of
“axis of evil” nor the one having oil or any other natural
wealth. It was just known as rabidly anti Israel and pro Russia
giving help to Palestinian Terrorist groups. In the middle of the
Iraq war, Donald Rumsfeld, the US Defence Secretary, accused Syria
of helping to arm Iraqi forces by permitting hundreds of Arab
volunteers to cross into Iraq. Subsequent unconfirmed reports
claimed that Syria had helped to channel Russian Kornet anti-tank
missiles to Iraq. The warnings from Washington were quickly backed
by military action. Before the end of war, a bus travelling through
Iraq, 100 miles from the Syrian border, was struck by a US missile,
killing five Arab volunteer fighters. Reports of bombing and
low-flying American aircraft near the Abu Kamal crossing have been
interpreted as an attempt to deter vehicles from travelling to
Baghdad. America has also closed the unauthorized oil pipeline from
Iraq to Syria.
The
anger of US might is breathing down Assad’s neck that compels him
to refrain from undertaking any anti-American act in the face of the
naked warning, “Syria is a good case where it should conclude that
the chemical weapons programme and the biological weapons programme
it has been pursuing are things it should give up.” Robert Baer, a
former senior CIA officer, believes that the Pentagon has “pretty
much decided to go after Syria”, taking advantage of the presence
of American forces in Iraq. The Syrians are “easy to get,
they’re vulnerable. There’s been this build-up of rhetoric and,
of course, the Israelis would like us to do it”. The queen of
clubs is in real trouble.
Lebanon
–– The Jack of Clubs
In
loudly opposing the American-led invasion of Iraq, Lebanon echoed
its political master, Syria. But its stance against the war caused a
diplomatic rift with Kuwait, the Arab world’s leading supporter of
using military force to unseat Saddam Hussein. Kuwait is one of the
largest donors of financial aid to Lebanon and has played a major
role in the multibillion-dollar reconstruction programme in the past
decade after the 1975–90 civil
war. This diplomatic rift is threatening a $500 million loan from
Kuwait to Lebanon.
With
15,000 Syrian troops deployed in Lebanon, Syria dominates the
political process of its tiny neighbour. But in the long run it
could be a potential winner if the developments in the region
eventually lead to less Syrian control over the country. Lebanon’s
chief source of instability is in the south, where fighters of the
Hezbollah organisation are deployed in strength along the border
with Israel. Many Lebanese fear that Israel may take advantage and
mount a military operation to wipe out its arch-enemy.
Turkey
–– The Queen of Hearts
Having
a long time record of being a US ally in the region, Turkey acted
like a reluctant maiden concerned for its chastity. Except for
coming away from the war with a clear conscience, it certainly
strained its ties with Washington over refusal to allow the
deployment of US soldiers on its soil. When Turkey’s parliament
voted on March 1 to oppose the US deployment, it not only deprived
the United States of what was felt to be a crucial northern front
against Baghdad, it also deprived itself of a multibillion-dollar
aid package to compensate for war related economic losses, the
chance to take its own troops into northern Iraq to guard against
any attempts at independence by either Iraqi or Turkish Kurds and
very likely the chance to have a good deal of say in the formation
of a post-Saddam Iraq.
A
good section of the Turkish population remains unconvinced of the
need and the legitimacy of the US-led war and is angry that
Washington went through with a move that could greatly destabilise
the country’s borders and economy. The long term interests of the
nation necessitated a more rational approach by supporting US
designs as it had no political, racial or religious ties with the
Arabs in general and Iraq in particular.
A
visit by Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, at the fag end of
war was followed by Turkish agreement to allow US logistical
and humanitarian support through its soil and a deal for a greatly
reduced sum of US money ($8.5 billion) in credits rather than a
package worth up to $30 billion to help Turkey’s already ailing
economy, but this has been seen as simply an attempt to smooth the
problems over. How bad the ties have been hurt, only time will tell.
In sum total, both sides achieved considerably less than they hoped
for at the start of a period that many agree was one of the bleakest
in the relationship. In the light of greater US rebuff to France,
Germany and Russia, it will be interesting to see how Turkey plays
its diplomatic chess in the European Union. Of course the shaping of
the Kurdish problem will be its immediate concern.
Israel
–– The Joker of Them All
Israel
‘the dog in the Arab manger’ in supporting US action in Iraq,
was not without concern over the danger from Saddam’s ‘Scuds’
and bio-chemical weapons. It greeted the TV images from Baghdad with
a quiet satisfaction, sure that the threat always felt from Saddam
Hussein had been expunged. But with this pleasure was a degree of
wariness that the new post-Saddam era might bring demands to reach
an early peace settlement with the Palestinians. For the duration of
the US–British war in Iraq, Israeli officials had emphasised that
it was not their conflict, while supporting the aims of toppling
Saddam. Ariel Sharon’s Government was fearful of British attempts
to push President Bush into early publication, and implementation,
of the international peace “road map”, which envisages an
independent Palestinian state by 2005. Majority of Israelis,
however, believe that a successful war against Saddam removes a
threat while sending a powerful message to the Arab world that the
Jewish State is there to stay.
Palestine
–– The Dummy
How
successfully US can smooth over the Arab/Muslim world’s wrath-like
anger, will depend upon whether it can bring about a quick and fair
solution of the Palestinian problem. Unless USA acts fairly, the
Islamic terrorism will only gain ground on the shoulders of suicidal
attacks. Muslims don’t forget or forgive easily, and there were a
significant number of followers of this religion in USA. The
incident of an American Muslim soldier shooting in Kuwait on his own
people before the start of the war, should not be glossed over. It
has deep ramifications. Palestinians had not expected Saddam’s
armies to defeat the military might of the United States and Britain
but they had hoped for an Iraqi resistance that would give the
invaders a bloody nose and rekindle a sense of Arab pride.
Most
saw Saddam Hussein as their life-saver in the way he stood up for
the Palestinian cause and gave his support economically, morally and
militarily. They are in the vanguard of Arabs who feel most
humiliated and frustrated by the recent events. The heartening
development is the Palestinian Prime Minister-designate Mahmoud
Abbas presenting a new Cabinet to Yasser Arafat thus ending a days
long standoff with the Palestinian leader over its composition. This
should keep the US-backed peace plan on track. President Bush said
he would present that plan only after an empowered Palestinian prime
minister is installed.
Russia
–– Not Too Distant A Neighbour
Whether
pundits agree or not, the war in Iraq has significant implications
for Russia's international role and domestic developments. There was
speculation about what pushed Putin to become such an active member
of the anti-Bush coalition: Was it nostalgia for lost superpower
status, desire for "revenge" or an attempt to poke the
United States in the eye, as many say? Yet after extending
non-committal support to France and Germany in their opposition to
unilateral action by USA, Putin lost no time in siding with British
Prime Minister Tony Blair and supporting his scenario of going to
the UN for the Iraqi peace settlement.
Russia
could thus serve as a bridge between the European allies,
facilitating fence-mending. But its primary concern is about the
possible destabilization in an area close to Russian southern
borders, the fear of the "pre-emptive war" being
continued; future of its oil contracts in Iraq as also the need for
greater substance in US–Russian relations. There is also a large
debt owed by Iraq to Russia and the latter has said that no one
at the official level had so far suggested that the Russian
government write off those debts. Russia is ready to negotiate the
writing-off of Iraqi debts only with the country's legitimate
authorities, not with the US' transitional Iraqi administration.
The
problem is that the absence of serious strategic engagement, leaves
only the leaders' personal chemistry
and the threat
of a common enemy, i.e. international terrorism, but these are not
sufficient to give the relationship a greater meaning. Moreover,
Iraq, North Korea and Iran continue to be a source of deep
disagreements between Washington and Moscow. But the most serious
consequence of Iraqi war is on the material and thinking substance
of the Russian military establishment. Iraq was equipped with
Russian military hardware though of older vintage and its senior
defence officers were engaged in training Iraqis and formulating
their operational strategy as well tactics against the American
military behemoth. All that seem to have failed miserably. The
Russians are therefore in urgent need of a ‘military
revolution’.
India
––
Lessons to be Learnt
The
Indian Armed Forces too need to undertake a serious study of the
Anglo–American methodology and experiences in the Iraq war. A
major lesson is the joint planning and execution of modern warfare
and importance of CI4. (Please see ‘Iraq
War – Lessons for India’ on this site for more details.)
Iraq had demonstrated that not only Russia but also the West had to
face new challenges of the 21st century. A new world order demands
the creation of new international mechanisms and Russia and India
could still play a significant role.
(With
acknowledgement to Defencenews.com of 10 Apr 03)
(Back
to Top)
Disclaimer Copyright |