Current Affairs

The Arab people are seething about the conflicts in Lebanon and Gaza, they want more than their autocratic governments are willing to give. But there is also a realisation that the peace treaties that were set are keeping. The idea that Jordan, Egypt, Syria or the Gulf states would willingly join the war that Iran seems to be set on, is in the imagination of those writing articles rather than politicians.

Rather than follow the lead of Iran, Gulf States and those on the fringe of the conflict, have opened the door to possible negotiated stances that could change the way the Middle East will be in the future. Before the atrocities on 7^th October, Biden pushed hard for a peace in the region. Ideas at the time included building a nuclear reactor for the Saudis, guaranteeing US forces would protect the Saudi military if it was ever threatened and opening the door to Saudia Arabia to include new diplomatic initiatives.

Of course this came with the idea that Saudi Arabia would join the Abraham Accord and open its economy up to Israel. It would also mean a peace treaty between Israel and Saudi Arabia, but it was also an opportunity for the two states to recognise each other in a region that had been surprisingly stable for a number of years. But the 7^th October uprising got in the way and the Israeli’s set about punishing the Gazan’s with a war that has cost 40,000 plus lives with the deaths of 15,000 children. There has also been an uprising in the West Bank and the hard nosed members of the Israeli Prime Minister’s cabinet have argued loudly for an expansion of the settlements and ultimately annexation of the West Bank.

Of course these arguments go against the arguments of the West and the Middle East, however Saudi Arabia has said that if there was to be a two state solution they would certainly agree to being part of the Abraham Accord. This little trinket thrown into the arena for the warring states to consider has been mostly ignored. The members of Netanyahu’s cabinet have ignored the argument completely stating that they have objectives that are concentrating the cabinet, but they have not thrown away the opportunity completely to make peace with the largest Gulf country.

 Iran has a treaty with Saudi Arabia brokered by the Chinese state. Though there has been an agreement, there have been tensions, especially with the growing war between Israel and Iran. Iranian special envoys have visited Jordan and Saudia Arabia arguing for their airspace to be no go zones for Israeli missiles. But Iran, which is under immense pressure from its IRGC hardliners is in a transitional stage of its leadership. Khamenei is eighty six years old and suffers from bowel cancer, this has led to questions about where the state goes next. Khamenei’s speech to the faithful argued that Israel needed to be punished and the Iranian state was acting within the boundaries of international law. But the speech was also a rallying cry for the hardliners in the IRGC and an argument of who and what comes next once Khamenei has passed.

Iran’s problems are intractable, the problems that President Pezeshkian face is that he is a talisman to the state. He is neither leader nor head of state, he is a figurehead that does not really have any power, as large parts of government are under the power of the Cleric’s. Iran is a theocracy, which is divided between the clerical elite and civilians, with one side elected and the other appointed, but the unelected leadership has the power which parliament endorses through its remit to an electoral system that polled 35% of the national vote.

President Pezeshkian may open the economy, win greater freedoms for the populas, but he is answerable to the clerical elite. According to Sanan Vakil and Jon Alterman writing in Foreign Affairs, “Iran’s aggressive posture and isolation from the West is driven not just by the clerical establishment, which is a waning force, but by the security establishment, principally the IRGC.” Even then, the IRGC is split between an older more experienced cadre and a younger cadre. The older fought in the first Gulf war when Saddam Hussein attacked Iran and the two states fought a seven year war, which ended in over a million deaths. These members of the IRGC are seen as old and corrupt, which has empowered the younger cadre, who are more fanatical, and it is these IRGC members, who are are thought to have demanded the missile attacks on Israel.

The dynamics in Iran are leading to arguments about where the state goes next. The opening of doors by President Pezeshkian to bring about a wealthier Iran, which is beset by sanctions squeezing the life blood of the economy, is his argument. The opening of China is also a consideration for the state, but if Israel attacks the oil infrastructure, the state is determined by arguments of what the state does next. The younger cadre believe they can shut down the gulf and enforce a stranglehold on the world economy through pressure on the gulf states. The hardline argument flies in the face of parliament that is trying to open the economy up with arguments such as re-opening the nuclear deal and freeing the shackles that have to date held the state in a type of limbo, where it can only work in a sanctioned economy dependent on a black market.

The forces running through Iran are challenging its ability to become prosperous, but also questions challenge Iranians who are hamstrung by the states inability to manage inflation. The battle between the extreme arguments of where the state goes next are challenging the leadership of the state. If Khamenei’s son is to become the supreme leader when his father dies, then the state is buying into the arguments of the IRGC radicals and the future for the citizens looks bleak. But there are other discussions that are taking place and whether IRGC does seek to destabilize the government of President Pezeshkian, the notion that the state will move towards an atomic future is highly likely.

The CIA believe that it would take Iran a week to weaponise a nuclear weapon. This estimate is frightening as the war with Israel is taking a turn toward bombardment of each state. If the hardline push the argument for a harder outcome, the realisation that the states could escalate the conflict with more formidable weapons in the future must be the core argument to descalate the conflict.

These escalations will lead to further escalation in the Gulf as countries that are interested in gaining nuclear weapons proliferates across the region.

With the threat that Iran could gain a strategic advantage, Israel needs to find an argument that encapsulates the region. The idea of a strategic alliance with Saudi Arabia the richest country in the region, should bring about an argument that puts further pressure on Iran. The hardliners in Iran are likely to come to the fore if there is no peace and President Pezeshkian is unable to gain diplomatic arguments on the future of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. But the wars taking place at the moment are putting enormous pressure on those who argue for a peace in the region. Iran’s predicament is that it is isolated in the region and if the Israelis degrade Hezbollah and the other regional powers argue for a cessation, then there could be an opening for the Abraham Accord to include Saudi Arabia…..