Donald Trump winning the US presidency has become the topic of the hour. I will discuss how his win could affect our region’s issues, most importantly the US relationship with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf-Arab countries as a whole.
Most of issues of relevance for both parties are mostly related to other states and different countries—terrorism, wars, Yemen, Syria and Libya— and there are no differences related to bilateral relations. To the contrary, the Gulf and President Barack Obama have always maintained good relations.
What is said about Trump’s position regards Islam or Saudi is not real. I don’t think he has stereotypical views upon which he will build his policies.
The departing President Barack Obama will pass on to Trump a controversial and complex issue with Saudi and Arab Gulf states. The Gulf never witnessed a dispute with Washington like they did with Obama, in relation to his policies in the region—Iran, Iraq, Syria and to a lesser degree Yemen.
Even when Obama proposed his great secret—the deal with Iran to stop its nuclear program—the Gulf states never rejected it, but expressed constraint on its political framework which included a very dangerous bargain that unleashed an extreme regime, allowing it to expand in the region with no accountability to the security of the allied states. Will Trump follow the footsteps of Obama and leave Iran threatening the security?
In my opinion, Trump wouldn’t have to commit himself to previous non-legally binding understandings, and he wouldn’t feel a personal commitment to the path of his predecessors, except JCPOA obligations, because it is an international agreement rather than a bilateral one between the two countries.
Iran will continue to enjoy trade in exchange for cessation of building on its nuclear project, but Trump is not obliged to leave the Iranians and the Russians to run wars in conflict zones outside their border. This explains Iran’s urgency to wage wars in Aleppo, Mosul, Talafar and others, before the president-elect, whose positions are not guaranteed, makes it to the White House.
I believe that what the Gulf wants is to stop military intervention in conflict zones. The Iranians will protest, citing the Turkish “intervention” in Iraq and Syria, and Saudi “intervention” in Yemen. Even these “interventions” could stop if Iran stopped. Efforts in the Yemen crisis were diplomatic crises, under the UN’s patronage, until Iran, through its allies, forcibly took control over the government forcing the Saudis and their allies to intervene.
The chaos in the Middle East jeopardizes the Middle East, the US and the world’s security so it is only natural for the Gulf to focus on Tehran destabilizing the region in their coming discussions, particularly the Gulf-US relationship could revive the old joint arrangement that rejects military adventures and resists alliances. Gulf states didn’t oppose Obama’s project to open up on Iran economically and politically until it turned out that he was turning a blind eye on its military adventures.
At the end Obama’s presidency, the Iranians are almost dominating four important Arab countries by military force: Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and is threatening Bahrain as well.
This is worrying the Gulf governments, escalating the region’s conflicts, and threatening more problems in Europe. Amidst the chaos fueling the sectarian divides, terrorism will certainly grow and will not disappear until the complete liberation of Mosul and Raqqa from Daesh’s grip.
Gulf states are waiting to play an influential role with Trump’s government in addressing regional issues, which it has taken upon its shoulders in the past decades, instead of resorting to military solutions.
Finally, when it comes to terrorism and extremism, Saudi is the first US partner in combating global terror, which is something Iran can’t do. They attempted to convince Obama with that, but couldn’t.
Everyone will notice that the Gulf is exercising major efforts to pursue the extreme ideological groups that are the source of objection by the consecutive American governments. These groups should not only be targeted in the Islamic and Gulf countries, but should also be pursued in the Western countries where they find the haven of freedom more than they do in our states.
• Abdulrahman Al-Rashed is a veteran and internationally acclaimed columnist. He is the former general manager of Al Arabiya news channel and ex-editor in chief of Asharq Al-Awsat.
Most of issues of relevance for both parties are mostly related to other states and different countries—terrorism, wars, Yemen, Syria and Libya— and there are no differences related to bilateral relations. To the contrary, the Gulf and President Barack Obama have always maintained good relations.
What is said about Trump’s position regards Islam or Saudi is not real. I don’t think he has stereotypical views upon which he will build his policies.
The departing President Barack Obama will pass on to Trump a controversial and complex issue with Saudi and Arab Gulf states. The Gulf never witnessed a dispute with Washington like they did with Obama, in relation to his policies in the region—Iran, Iraq, Syria and to a lesser degree Yemen.
Even when Obama proposed his great secret—the deal with Iran to stop its nuclear program—the Gulf states never rejected it, but expressed constraint on its political framework which included a very dangerous bargain that unleashed an extreme regime, allowing it to expand in the region with no accountability to the security of the allied states. Will Trump follow the footsteps of Obama and leave Iran threatening the security?
In my opinion, Trump wouldn’t have to commit himself to previous non-legally binding understandings, and he wouldn’t feel a personal commitment to the path of his predecessors, except JCPOA obligations, because it is an international agreement rather than a bilateral one between the two countries.
Iran will continue to enjoy trade in exchange for cessation of building on its nuclear project, but Trump is not obliged to leave the Iranians and the Russians to run wars in conflict zones outside their border. This explains Iran’s urgency to wage wars in Aleppo, Mosul, Talafar and others, before the president-elect, whose positions are not guaranteed, makes it to the White House.
I believe that what the Gulf wants is to stop military intervention in conflict zones. The Iranians will protest, citing the Turkish “intervention” in Iraq and Syria, and Saudi “intervention” in Yemen. Even these “interventions” could stop if Iran stopped. Efforts in the Yemen crisis were diplomatic crises, under the UN’s patronage, until Iran, through its allies, forcibly took control over the government forcing the Saudis and their allies to intervene.
The chaos in the Middle East jeopardizes the Middle East, the US and the world’s security so it is only natural for the Gulf to focus on Tehran destabilizing the region in their coming discussions, particularly the Gulf-US relationship could revive the old joint arrangement that rejects military adventures and resists alliances. Gulf states didn’t oppose Obama’s project to open up on Iran economically and politically until it turned out that he was turning a blind eye on its military adventures.
At the end Obama’s presidency, the Iranians are almost dominating four important Arab countries by military force: Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and is threatening Bahrain as well.
This is worrying the Gulf governments, escalating the region’s conflicts, and threatening more problems in Europe. Amidst the chaos fueling the sectarian divides, terrorism will certainly grow and will not disappear until the complete liberation of Mosul and Raqqa from Daesh’s grip.
Gulf states are waiting to play an influential role with Trump’s government in addressing regional issues, which it has taken upon its shoulders in the past decades, instead of resorting to military solutions.
Finally, when it comes to terrorism and extremism, Saudi is the first US partner in combating global terror, which is something Iran can’t do. They attempted to convince Obama with that, but couldn’t.
Everyone will notice that the Gulf is exercising major efforts to pursue the extreme ideological groups that are the source of objection by the consecutive American governments. These groups should not only be targeted in the Islamic and Gulf countries, but should also be pursued in the Western countries where they find the haven of freedom more than they do in our states.
• Abdulrahman Al-Rashed is a veteran and internationally acclaimed columnist. He is the former general manager of Al Arabiya news channel and ex-editor in chief of Asharq Al-Awsat.
