For several years, Arab countries have promoted the narrative of a new Middle East, with a focus on economics rather than ideology. They are concerned that Hamas activities and the war in Gaza could disrupt their economic plans.
The leaders of the 22-member Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Co-operation (OIC), representing 57 mostly Muslim-majority states, convened for an extraordinary summit in Riyadh, the Saudi capital, on November 11th. The summit took place amidst a backdrop of the ongoing Gaza war, which had persisted for over a month, continuously captivating global attention and stirring emotions throughout the Middle East. Notably, the suffering of the Palestinian people elicits a level of concern and passion that sets it apart from the hardships faced by other populations in Sudan, Yemen, or Syria.
The
collective sentiment among the participating nations at the joint summit was a
resounding desire for an end to the conflict. However, what was equally evident
was the expectation that someone else should take the initiative to bring about
this resolution. This dichotomy in perspective, wanting the war to cease but
expecting others to make it happen, underscored the complex dynamics of
regional politics and the sensitive nature of the Gaza situation. The summit's
outcome reflected this mix of urgency and frustration, as it issued a sharp
statement demanding an immediate ceasefire, urging member-states to "break
the siege on Gaza," and calling for an arms embargo on Israel. The
summit's resolutions laid bare the depth of emotions and convictions
surrounding the Gaza conflict, emphasizing its unique significance within the
broader context of Middle Eastern affairs.
The
summit might appear, at first glance, as just another instance of diplomatic
talk without concrete action, a characteristic often associated with gatherings
of the Arab League. However, it had its moments of significance and complexity.
Some leaders at the summit rightfully voiced their concerns about the Western
world's perceived double standards when it comes to the Palestinian issue,
which resonated with many in the room. But it wasn't without its paradoxes. The
inclusion of Bashar al-Assad, a figure widely condemned for his atrocities in
Syria, to discuss Israeli war crimes added a layer of irony to the proceedings.
In addition, portions of the final communiqué seemed at odds with reality; for
example, Egypt, despite the call to break the siege on Gaza, has been a part of
maintaining it for nearly two decades. Additionally, while the OIC
member-states collectively do not sell weapons to Israel, some individual
states within the organization have purchased arms from Israel, underscoring
the complexities of the situation.
Yet,
if you read between the lines, the summit provided insight into the intricate
web of contradictions that characterize the regional response to the ongoing
Gaza conflict. For instance, many Gulf states hold a desire to see Hamas
removed from power in Gaza, driven by their concerns about the potential for
extremism within their own borders. Simultaneously, they aim to weaken Iran's
"axis of resistance" comprised of proxy militias, but they are wary
of becoming entangled in the volatile regional dynamics. Over the past few
years, these Gulf states have championed a vision of a new Middle East, one
centered on economic development rather than ideological strife. However, they
express genuine worries that a protracted conflict in Gaza could disrupt their
carefully crafted economic plans for the region. In essence, the summit offered
a glimpse into the human complexities of political decisions and regional
aspirations amid the turbulent backdrop of the Gaza war.
Divisions
Amid Rhetoric
Ebrahim
Raisi, Iran's uncompromising president, took the stage at the summit and
delivered a speech that lasted nearly 40 minutes. Beneath his clerical robe, he
donned a keffiyeh, a symbol of Palestinian identity. At a pivotal moment, he
called upon Muslim nations to provide weapons to the Palestinians, but his plea
was met with polite but resounding silence. Several other participants
advocated for diplomatic and economic sanctions against Israel, but these
suggestions were likewise brushed aside.
While
a handful of Arab countries have recalled their ambassadors from Israel, those
with existing diplomatic ties have been hesitant to sever them completely. They
have also ruled out using oil as a weapon, as was done in 1973 when OPEC
imposed an embargo on countries supporting Israel during the Yom Kippur war.
Khalid al-Falih, the Saudi investment minister, firmly stated that such a
measure was not on the table today, emphasizing the Saudi need for years of
stable oil revenue to fund their ambitious economic diversification plans. The
last thing they want is to trigger Western countries to accelerate their
transition away from oil.
The
summit's outcome was divisive, reflecting the complex array of interests at
play. While some Arabs were satisfied with the tough rhetoric, others voiced
frustration with what they perceived as their governments' passivity in the
face of the ongoing conflict. Amidst all the posturing, military threats, and
talk of sanctions, the reality remains that the situation is deeply entrenched,
with little concrete progress towards resolution.
As
the region grapples with these complexities, it becomes evident that each party
is acting out of self-interest. Saudi Arabia, for instance, chose to proceed
with Riyadh Season, an annual festival aimed at loosening cultural strictures
within the kingdom. This decision, however, drew criticism as it appeared to
contrast with the situation in Gaza. The Saudis felt unfairly singled out,
arguing that they should not be held solely responsible for festivities while
the region mourns.
Despite
the tension and rhetoric, there is a palpable sense that a full-blown regional
war is not in anyone's immediate interest. Even Iran, known for its aggressive
posturing and support for proxy militias, has exercised pragmatism by not
deploying Hezbollah, its powerful proxy in Lebanon, for an all-out battle in
support of the Palestinians. On the sidelines of the summit, Crown Prince
Muhammad engaged in talks with President Raisi in their first face-to-face
meeting, underscoring the enduring detente reached in March. For now, nobody
wants to tip the scales towards a broader regional conflict.
Nonetheless,
the events of the past six weeks serve as a stark reminder that the Middle
East's recent stability is fragile. The region stands at a crossroads between
perpetual conflict and conflict resolution, with the Gaza war accentuating this
critical choice. As Mohammed Alyahya, a Saudi fellow at the Belfer Centre at
Harvard University, notes, "If the peace camp fails, it is only a matter
of time" before a wider war ensues. The best hope that other Arab states
can muster is to push for peace talks. While the prospect of an
Israeli-Palestinian peace deal may appear remote, it remains a potent tool to
undermine Iran and its proxies. However, with a right-wing Israeli government
and a weakened Palestinian leadership, the revival of the moribund peace process
seems uncertain.
Amidst
the ongoing Gaza conflict, there is a growing international push, spearheaded
by the United States, to encourage Arab states to pledge their commitment to a
multinational force that would be responsible for securing Gaza in the
aftermath of the war. Faisal bin Farhan, the Saudi foreign minister, expressed
his frustration during a press conference following the Riyadh summit, where he
urged reporters to refrain from constantly inquiring about the plans for
post-war Gaza. He emphatically declared, "The only future, and this is the
unifying position of the Arab world, is an immediate ceasefire." Arab
diplomats have emphasized that the longer the conflict persists, the more
challenging it will become to formulate a clear and effective path forward for
Gaza's recovery and stability.
The
international community's insistence on a multinational force reflects the
urgency of the situation in Gaza, where the humanitarian crisis continues to
worsen. As the conflict rages on, the suffering of the civilian population
intensifies, making it imperative to prioritize an immediate cessation of
hostilities. Arab leaders understand that without a ceasefire, it becomes
increasingly difficult to envision a peaceful and prosperous future for Gaza,
as reconstruction efforts and humanitarian aid are hampered by ongoing
violence. The international pressure placed on Arab states to commit to a
post-war security force underscores the gravity of the situation and the need
for a unified effort to bring about stability and hope to a region that has
long been plagued by conflict.
No comments:
Post a Comment