Amjad Ismail Al , Agha
In order to understand the geopolitical changes in the structure of the Middle East, we need to delve deeper into the sometimes constant, often changing U.S. strategy. The U.S. strategy, while its tactical approach is different in resolving Middle East crises, the facts and rapid developments impose a landscape, mostly centered on new alignments in form and content.
Washington recognizes that there is no return to its historical glory in the nature of the alliances in the region, which have produced regional powers with geopolitical implications in the Middle East. Based on America’s strategic failure in the region, it is necessary to look for new alignments, which will build tactical alliances, which are the other side of U.S. strategy in the Middle East.
The region is therefore prepared for regional polarization based on common interests and objectives in each axis, suggesting 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 reducing Iranian influence in the region, and Washington, within this part, will directly oversee this tactical alliance between Riyadh and Tel Aviv, in order to form driving factors, achieving continued U.S. hegemony in the region, through those alliances.
Moreover, the Middle East region has become mired in wars, which in turn have led to a lack of focus on efforts to support the Palestinian cause and restore the occupied territories. Developments in recent years have underscored the absence of a genuine initiative to support the Palestinian cause and the lack of renewal in the approaches and orientations of parties immersed in the conflict, including external actors who adopted the Palestinian cause during the second half of the twentieth century and currently considered it a secondary issue. In response to the high price paid by the Palestinian cause, due to diplomatic shifts 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, Palestinian-Israeli conflict has taken a different course from the substance of the conflicts in the Middle East chess, and after the Arab-Israeli conflict has been removed from the agenda of some Arab Governments, which has lost the Arab peoples a reason to unite them, and at the same time has created a reason for many alliances and privileges.
Thus, the paralysis of the Arab-Israeli conflict could find the rapprochement between Israel and many Arab states in a scenario engineered in accordance with the common threats between the two countries.
In fact, the most decisive factor in entering into the crucial relations between Riyadh and Tel Aviv is the possession of a common enemy. History has shown that this fact is capable of unifying more hostile ideas and more closed positions. Saudi Arabia is a regional actor influential in many Middle Eastern files, leading a geopolitical conflict against Iran, especially since the latter views Israel in the region as the one that invaded the Middle East, at a historic juncture that has taken control of sacred Islamic places, as well as the one that is cracking down on Palestinians. It has therefore become clear that the form of conflict in its political landscape may manifest itself in the form of non-traditional axis alliances.
English
Español
Deutsch
Français
العربية