(Published in Indian Foreign
Affairs Journal Vol. 12, No. 4, October–December 2017, 277-325)
The
near extermination of the ISIS threat from West Asia has ironically brought a
new set of challenges in its train. Major global powers thatcame together to
pound the terrorist proto-state to smithereensare nowcontending with each other
to carve their own geostrategic space at the expense of setting the regional orderright.
A
new power axis – Russia, Iran, Turkey and to an extent China — threatens to arbitrate
the post ISIS dispensationby bringing Iraq and Syria into their expanding
sphere of influence, thereby upsetting the traditional hegemonic applecartof
the United States in the regionalong with its allies — Israel and Saudi Arabia.Thus,
an incipient Cold War is playing out in this most fractious hub of geopolitics,
with the US threatening to rescind on its commitment to the Iran nuclear deal
and planning to impose fresh sanctions on Russia before its presidential
elections in March.
The crescendo of crises!
The
ferocity with which major geopolitical events have wracked West Asiaover the past year is a cause for serious
concern as any of these events has thepotential of flaring up into a serious
international crisis in an already fraught and destabilized region.
To list just a few flashpoints, we havethesimmering
groundswell of public discontent against the Iranian regime that manifested in the
New Year protests spreading across 31 provinces, the still unravelling power
struggle within the House of Saud under the garb of an anti-corruption drive
led by a young and ‘inexperienced’ Crown Prince, a widening wedge within the
GCC following the Saudi Arabia-led travel and trade blockade of Qatar, the
continuing barrage of Scud-like missiles from Yemen landing ever so close to
the Saudi capital and the US unilaterally declaring Jerusalem as the Israeli
capital and preparing to move its embassy to the ‘Holy City’.
Worsening the present scenario is the emergence
of a dangerous bi-polarity in the region, with Cold War rivals the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia pitted against a ‘revisionist’Russia
that is forging alliances with Turkey, Iran and now Egypt.Thus, the incidence
of any geopolitical crisis in the near to medium term cannot be discounted,
which in turn might have severe implications for India. With arguably more at
stake than any other country outside the region, India has over 7 million of
its citizens working in GCC states alone, an economy that remains vulnerable to
energy price fluctuations, and a maritime trade that has critical chokepoints on
its sea lanes through the Gulf region, such as the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab
Al Mandeb.
India: The cost of being mute
spectator
Therefore, the time has come for India to reconsiderthecontinuing
viability of its hitherto successfulpolicy of diplomatic non-interventionin
West Asia. By making full use of its well-earned goodwill among all regional
players — who are cognizant ofIndia’s growing geopolitical heft and its major stakes
in the socio-economic development of the region — the country needs to consider
shifting its diplomatic gear into a more active peacebuilding, if not
peace-making role, rather than remaining a passive fence-sitter in a presumed
state of incapacity. In any case, New Delhi should at least start making
arrangements in the event any sudden contingencies arise out of the worsening
situation.
The purpose of this essay is not to sound
alarmist, but to debate the trajectory of the worsening situation in the region
in order to prepare ourselves for dire situations. Any futuristic scenario
building is always riddled with uncertainties, but the appearance of a black
swan in the treacherous waters of West Asia seems less far-fetched today than
ever before.In fact, many analysts aver West Asia is an accident waiting to
happen!
This paper posits that there is now a growing
sense of unease among individual actorsof the region, who are faced with major
internal and external challenges, which many openly characterize as being of an
existential nature. In such a charged atmosphere, there is a high degree of possibility
for an uncalculated, unilateral action (like many recent actions by major
powers in the region)that might snowball into a major international crisis. The
following sections briefly survey these inner vulnerabilities of the regimes in
the region that make them susceptible to taking desperate, uncalculated risks
in times of danger, thereby making a major geopolitical crisis hitting the
region the most likely scenario in the near to medium term, with disastrous
repercussions for the world and the Indian economy.
Iran: Regional strengths, internal
vulnerabilities
In the nearly four decades of its history, the
theocratic regime of Iran has never enjoyed a more commanding presence across
West Asia than it does at present. However, it has also never felt equally
vulnerableinternally, with the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei drawing flak from
both hard line and reformist groupsas well as from a growing cross-section of
the public as seen during the January protests that spread to over a hundred
towns and cities across all provinces.
For a very long time, the country has remained
under severe international sanctions, which has seriouslyimpaired its economic
progress, thereby making its people increasingly frustrated with the regime’shighly
touted foreign policy.
In fact, the Iranian government appears to have
been cognizant of the rising public umbrage for a long time, which compelled it
to forge a nuclear deal (JCPOA) with the P5+1 countries in 2015, which it then
sold to its people as a foreign policy breakthrough that would pave the way for
the lifting of sanctions, the facility to sell oil worldwide and the
‘unfreezing’of Iranian assets in various international financial institutions.
However, the precipitous fall in oil prices and
the election of an inimical US President following the deal did not deliver the
Iranian economy the promised reprieve it was looking for. With President Trump not
certifying the nuclear deal with Iran, a substantial segment of the Iranian
population — particularly the economically challenged sections — have grown
increasingly disillusioned with the theocratic dispensation.
Anticipating public unease, the re-elected
Rouhani government in May last year formed a cabinet filled with members from
the regime’s unpopular intelligence agencies. Many of its new ministers are
said to have had dubious human rights record and their inclusion had to be made
at the expense of the first woman minister and leaders from ethnic and
religious minorities that Rouhani promised in his pre-election campaign.
Thus, many eyebrows were raised when Alireza
Avaii was appointed justice minister last year
although he is said to be involved with the infamous ‘Death Committee’ that
supervised the alleged execution of thousands of political prisoners in 1988.
Even Communications Minister Mohammad-Javad
Azari-Jahromi and Labour Minister Ali Rabiei are alleged to have been
intelligence officials in charge of interrogations, torture and censorship.
These cabinet appointments by the Iranian
government are indicative of its increasing sense of insecurity on the internal
front, which in turn makes it susceptible to engaging in militaristic
misadventures abroad in order to secure greater authority and control within.
It is important to note here that Iranian Defence
Minister said a few months ago that if the Saudis did anything “ignorant”, his
country will
leave “no area untouched”in that country except Mecca and Medina. The Iranian
Revolutionary Guard Force also issued a threat to Israel last year that “Hezbollah and the revolutionary youths of the
Muslim world can target the fake regime of Israel anytime they decide to do
so.”
Saudi Arabia: The bogey of Iran’s
sectarianism
A similar existential angst bedevils the Kingdom
of Saudi Arabia. As internal squabbles increase among a new generation of princely
claimants to the throne (with King Salman bin Abdulaziz being the last of Ibn
Saud’s many sons), Saudi Arabia has been externalizing its internal insecuritiesby
successfully demonizing the Shiite theocratic state of Iran in the eyes of the
West. As sectarian bitternessspews out of its religious institutions and media
outlets, Saudi foreign policy and military debacles remain shrouded from the
gaze of the domestic audience, including setbacks in Yemen, Syria, Iraq,
Lebanon, Bahrain and Qatar.
Saudi Arabia is also in the midst of a major socio-political
change. With the ascension of the octogenarian King Salman bin Abdulaziz to the
throne in 2015 and the rise of his 32 year-old-son Mohammed bin Salman
(popularly known as MBS) as the Crown Prince, Saudi Arabia has sought to
modernize its economy under Vision 2030 programme, giving more freedom to its
women population, has opened up its cultural centers and entertainment outlets,
etc.
These measures are in response to an increasingly restive Saudi
population facing economic challenges following a secular decline in oil prices
and a large unemployed youth bulge rising fromthe fat that 70 percent of the
population being under the age of 30. In an increasingly unpredictable global
economic environment, the new leadership’s plan to transform Saudi Arabia from
an oil-revenue dependent country into a modern knowledge-based economy by 2030
appears too ambitious to say the least.
Meanwhile, the Saudi leadership appears increasingly isolated and
beleaguered not only in the region (given its poor relations with Iraq, Syria,
Turkey and now Egypt) and among certain members of the GCC, but even within the
walls of the royal household. Having learnt that its
proxies often turn rogue, Saudi Arabia has started flexing its own diplomatic
and military muscle — such as in Yemen and Qatar — with disastrous
consequences. It is in the context of these
inherent insecurities and fractiousness that Saudi kingdom appears more
susceptible to takingextreme decisions, mainly against its formidable rival
Iran that might put regional security in jeopardy.
A New Cold War Heats Up in West Asia
Many US experts claim that US hegemony in West Asia is seriously
challenged by Russia these days. In recent years, Kremlin has managed to rope
in NATO member Turkey, Iran and now Egypt into its expanding regional orbit.
With the assistance of Iran and the grudging acceptance of Turkey, it has
helped Bashar Al-Assad reclaim most of his lost territories in Syria, much to
the chagrin of his hapless adversaries in the US, Saudi Arabia and Israel.
Many US strategists view the Obama administration’s muddled
policies in the Middle East, particularly the abandonment of its own ‘red
lines’ over chemical weapons use in Syria, as the turning point in the
geostrategic game that allowed Moscow to step in and increase its diplomatic
clout.
The drubbing received by the Trump administration
at the UN vote against its decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of
Israel, followed by the poor US showing in another UN vote over Iran’s
crackdown during recent protests, has done little to salvage US prestige and influence in the
region.
One can only expect and even more bellicose
response from an embittered and beleaguered Trump administration in the event
of another regional showdown with Russia or Iran in the near term. Perhaps, the
only beneficiary from a prospective geopolitical calamity involving most global
players would be China.
US-Israeli right-wing governments
Much like Saudi Arabia, Israel too considers Iran
as a real and present danger to its existence. On the one hand, it is wary of
Iran’s role in stirring a Palestinian uprising given Tehran’s stated support
for Hamas and Islamic Jihad, with the head of Iran’s Quds Force Qasem Solaimani
recently claiming to be in direct contact with the military commanders of the
two Islamist groups. On the other hand, Israel is concerned about the growing
military strength of Iran’s Lebanese proxy Hezbollah, following the latter’s
successful experience in conventional warfare in the Syrian conflict and its
ability to now fully focus on confronting Israel in southern Lebanon and
southwestern Syria.
In order to overcome these challenges, Israel has
reportedly signed a secret agreement with the US in December last year,
following talks between Israeli national security advisor Meir Ben-Shabbat and
his US counterpart H.R. McMaster, for the two sides to take action and devise
scenarios against Iran on several fronts. The news of the agreement was
released by Israel’s television outlet Channel 10 and points to a growing
commitment to address the Iranian challenge.
Suggestions for a pro-active Indian engagement
It is generally assumed that most options
discussed in India for addressing issuesrelated to West Asia have been so
thoroughly explored that there appears no point in revisiting them. There is a
critical wariness that appears dismissive of any new proposal, let alone
revisiting the earlier explored options in a new light. Still, the paper would
like to submit a few suggestions for consideration:
a) Diplomatic pre-emption versus post-crisis damage control: As argued earlier, India has more at stake in
West Asia than any other external power in the region. Although our unstated
policy of diplomatic disengagement has served us well till date, we may need to
re-evaluate the cost of letting the dangerous melee undermine our vital national
interests right before our eyes or taking a more pro-active approach for
promoting peace in the region, in a way thatit does not violate our carefully
cultivated relations with any of the contending parties. The recent French
intervention in reinstating Sa’ad Hariri to the position of premiership — after
the latter had resigned from that position during his protracted sojourn in Saudi
Arabia — helped diffuse a major political crisis in Lebanon. Thus, proactive
peaceful interventions can prove to be less costly than post-crisis disaster
management and the time has come for Indian leadership to step up to the
challenge.
b) The needfor clear, coherent West Asia policy: In times of
crisis, the apparent deference of any country from enunciating a clearly stated
policy creates more problems for it and not any perceivedbenefits. For one, the
country is not respected or even trusted in the larger international community
as expediency often leads to embarrassing, poorly understood and even
self-defeating choices.The statement of clearly stated policy informs not only the external players but
brings clarity to government in the pursuance of stated goals. If the
government comes out with a White Paper on West Asia that it wants all sides to
resolve their differences, conform to international conventions and that it
shall be open to mediate if desired by contending parties, India will be able
to project itself as a trustworthy power and a force for good in the region.
c) Teaming
up with Europe for mediating role:The growing bi-polarity in West Asia, with the
Trump administration aligning itself more closely with traditional regional
allies Israel and Saudi Arabia against a resurgent Russia, joining forces with
Iran and Turkey, makes the region a veritable powder keg. The absence of any
influential mediating power bloc that might keep the contending parties at bay
from potentially disastrous geopolitical outcomes worsens the prospects of
peace in the medium to long term. Perhaps, India needs to take a bold and
imaginative leadership position to safeguard its vital interests in the region
by teaming up with other major world powerswho may have the influence, respect
and credibility like India to bring all the contending sidesto a better
understanding.
In this respect, the role of European nations —
such as France, Britain and Germany — who have stuck to internationally agreed
positions on the Iran nuclear agreement (JCPOA) and the status of Jerusalem in
a non-partisan, statesmanlike manner, could be engaged by India for a wide
variety of well-coordinated peaceful initiatives — involving various diplomatic
means and channels including bilateral and if multi-lateral efforts to restrain
the US and Russia from getting trapped
in any contentious row or conflict from which they might find themselves
difficult to disengage.
India and Europe have strong trade links (EU
being India’s biggest trading partner), most of which find passage through the
chokepoints on the sea-lanes throughWest Asia and have critical geostrategic,
cultural, demographic and economic interests tied to peace in West Asia and as
exponents of liberal democracies and multiculturalism would prove ideal
peaceful intermediaries in diffusing any untoward escalation.
India’s intervention would re-establish the
nation’s credibility as a constructive player among all parties and to an
extent forestall growing Chinese
influence in the region.
d)
The Need for Leveraging the
Indian Diaspora:It is generally assumed that
the Indian diaspora in West Asia, particularly in the Gulf countries, mainly
constitutes blue-collar workers. Few recognize the presence of eminent Indian
business tycoons like Khimji Ramdass (the only Hindu Sheikh in the GCC), Mukesh
Jagtiani, Yusuff Ali M.A., and Sunil Vaswani, along with B. R. Shetty, Sunny
Varkey, Ram Buxani etc. Some of them like Mohan Jashanmal (spokesperson for the
Indian diaspora, founder of India Club in Abu Dhabi and chairperson of the
Indian Business Group) have done a lot for promoting the interest of India and
the Indian community abroad. Perhaps, the time has come to develop stronger
linkages with these leading Indian luminaries in the region, not only for
promoting the welfare of the Indian diaspora, but also for promoting Indian outlook
and interests in the region. Various forums, cultural centres, think tanks and
direct channels of communications should be developed for closer exchange
between the Indian government and non-resident Indians.
There is no denying that the diplomatic tightrope
India has walked for decades in West Asia has served the country well till
date. However, the growing geo-political and economic interdependence with the
region now necessitates greater peaceful engagement to secure India’s long term
interests and to fulfil the dreams of our aspirational population, which can
never be realized without making West Asian peace and security integral toIndia’s grand strategic geopolitical and economic design.
