Unconventional alliances in a Three dimensional chessboard

italiatelegraph

 

 

 

 

Written by : Amjad Ismail Al-Agha

 

In order to understand the geopolitical changes in the structure of the Middle East, we must delve into the American strategy that is fixed at times, and which is often changing. The American strategy, even if its adopted tactical approach differs, as a solution to the Middle East crises, however, the facts and rapid developments impose a scene, the bulk of which revolves around new alignments in form and content.

Washington realizes that there is no return to its historical glory in light of the nature of the existing alliances in the region, which have produced regional powers with regulating effects of the geopolitical map in the Middle East. And based on America’s strategic failure in the region, it has become necessary to search for new alignments that would be a reason for building tactical alliances, which in their essence constitute the other side of the US strategy in the Middle East.

Consequently, the region is ready for regional polarizations based on the common interests and goals in each axis, which indicates that the map of regional alliances will be governed by the nature of interests. For example, Israeli and Saudi interests may intersect in the issue of limiting Iranian influence in the region, and Washington, within this part, will directly supervise this tactical alliance between Riyadh and Tel Aviv, in order to form driving factors that achieve the continuation of American hegemony in the region, through these Alliances.

Moreover, the Middle East region has become mired in wars, which in turn have led to a lack of focus efforts to support the Palestinian cause and return the occupied lands. As for the developments that took place in recent years, they emphasized the absence of a real initiative to support the Palestinian cause, and the absence of innovation in the approaches and orientations of the parties involved in the conflict. Including external actors who adopted the Palestinian cause during the second half of the twentieth century, and considered it a secondary issue at the present time. In sympathy for the high price paid by the Palestinian cause, as a result of the diplomatic transformations in Egypt and Jordan towards Israel, which led to a dramatic change in the nature of the conflict with the Israeli entity.

In this context, the nature of the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has taken a different path from the essence of the conflicts taking place in the Middle East chessboard, and after the Arab-Israeli conflict was removed from the agenda of some Arab governments, which made the Arab peoples lose a reason to unite them, At the same time, it created a reason for the many alliances and privileges.

Hence, the paralysis of the Arab-Israeli conflict could find the rapprochement between Israel and many Arab countries favorable conditions for its promotion, in a scenario that was engineered in line with the common threats between the two countries.

In fact, the most decisive factor in entering into formal relations between Riyadh and Tel Aviv is the possession of a common enemy between them. History has shown that this fact is able to unify the most hostile ideas and the most closed positions. It should be noted here that Saudi Arabia is an active regional power influencing many Middle Eastern files, which made it lead a geopolitical conflict against Iran, especially since the latter views Israel in the region as the party that invaded the Middle East, and within a historical juncture that controlled Islamic holy places. In addition, it is the party that works to practice repression against the Palestinians. Consequently, it became clear that the shape of the conflict in its political scene may be reflected in the form of alliances of axes.

italiatelegraph


Potrebbe piacerti anche
Commenti
Le opinioni espresse nei commenti sono degli autori e non del italiatelegraph.
Commenti
Loading...