Trump’s ‘Arab NATO’ Idea Is Doomed To Fail

The fears and security concerns of Gulf Arab states are far from homogeneous, and can change quickly

The United States is reportedly floating plans for a new secu­rity alliance with six Gulf Arab states, alongside Jordan and Egypt, to counter Iran’s growing pres­ence in the region. Provisionally named the Middle East Strategic Alliance (MESA), some have dubbed it an “Arab NATO” of Sunni Muslim allies.

“MESA will serve as a bulwark against Iranian aggression, terrorism, extremism, and will bring stability to the Middle East,” a spokesperson for the White House’s National Security Coun­cil told the Reuters news agency.

According to White House sources, the US-proposed alliance would deepen cooperation between the eight Arab countries on a range of security issues, including counterterrorism, missile de­fence and military training, as well as strengthening economic and diplomatic ties.

We’ve heard this one before

Like NATO’s article 5, which con­siders an attack against one member state to be an attack against all, collec­tive defence would likely be enshrined into the constitution of an Arab NATO, which would deem an attack by Iran against a member state as an attack against all.

US president Donald Trump will no doubt claim and even believe that not only is this would-be security alliance a product of his genius, but also that it’s never been tried before. Worse, he might even believe it’s not doomed to fail.

Plans for an Arab NATO involving the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states – Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Qa­tar, Oman, Bahrain – and others in the region are kicked around from time to time, often triggered by the percaption of a shared threat.

When these countries thought of Islamic State (IS) as the primary threat to regional regime survival in 2014, the six GCC states, along with Morocco and Jordan, talked about consolidating their military capabilities into a fully integrated collective defence alliance.

These plans never materialised for a number of reasons, including differing views of the conflict in Syria, Oman’s cordial ties with Iran and Qatar’s sup­port of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is seen as anathema to Egypt’s military junta and the Saudi monarchy.

During the latter years of the Cold War, Arab monarchies viewed Soviet-exported Communism and the Iranian Revolution as the primacy security threats to their regimes. Their collec­tive fears were piqued when the Soviet Union invaded Iran’s neighbour, Af­ghanistan, in December 1979, and then spiked when the war between Iraq and Iran broke out the following year.

These events led to the establish­ment of the Peninsula Shield Force (PSF), which was designed to deter Iran from widening the war front to neigh­bouring Arab states.

Pro-democracy revolution

The PSF collapsed half a decade later, when member state Iraq invaded member state Kuwait. The failure of the PSF to mobilise against the Iraqi inva­sion not only led to its demise, but also led members to shun collective security alliances in favour of individual secu­rity strategies, with the US becoming the protector of choice. This explains why the total number of US military bases and personnel in the region has ballooned in recent decades.

Ultimately, the concept of security is based entirely upon threat percep­tion, with security being defined as the absence of threat to the nation state. Security threats emerging from nearby are considered the most dangerous, but threat perceptions change rapidly – of­ten without warning.

For instance, the Arab states had no idea that a pro-democracy revolution was about to sweep the region when a Tunisian street vendor, Mohamed Bouazizi, set himself on fire after a dispute with local authorities on 17 De­cember 2010. Within hours, protests had spread to his hometown. A mere four weeks later, Tunisian dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali fled the country, giving birth to the Arab Spring.

When Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak resigned from office on 11 February 2011, Arab regimes were fac­ing an existential crisis fuelled by lib­eral democratic solutions for resolving socioeconomic and political injustices. Almost overnight, the threat posed by al-Qaeda to the security of these re­gimes had been replaced by the threat of democracy.

Three years later, that threat would be replaced with the threat posed by IS. With the threat of the terror group es­sentially mitigated, Arab states have returned to a fixation on Iran.

Qatar blockade

For a more contemporary example of how quickly collective security al­liances can be undone in the Middle East, one can examine the way in which Saudi Arabia has led an Arab blockade against its fellow GCC member Qatar, in retaliation for what the Saudis view as Qatar’s all-too-cosy relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Intercept recently learned of a Saudi-led plot to invade and conquer Qatar in 2017. “The plan, which was largely devised by the Saudi and UAE crown princes and was likely some weeks away from being implemented, involved Saudi ground troops crossing the land border into Qatar, and, with military support from the UAE, advanc­ing roughly 70 miles towards Doha,” ac­cording to the Intercept.

This, again, demonstrates how threat perceptions and security con­cerns of Gulf Arab states are far from being homogenous, and can change quickly.

If Iranian-led sectarianism is viewed by the Sunni Gulf Arab states as the primary security threat, then these states would be better served by alle­viating the concerns of their Shia mi­norities and granting equal rights and responsibilities to all their citizens.

To this end, the Trump administra­tion is attempting to devise a military solution to a political problem – some­thing that has been tried and failed many times already.

It is for these reasons that hat an Arab NATO is doomed to fail.

The Article First Appeared In Middle East Eye

Be Part of Quality Journalism

Quality journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce and despite all the hardships we still do it. Our reporters and editors are working overtime in Kashmir and beyond to cover what you care about, break big stories, and expose injustices that can change lives. Today more people are reading Kashmir Observer than ever, but only a handful are paying while advertising revenues are falling fast.



Observer News Service

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.