Was NATO born dead?

Abdullah Al-Emadi

Many observers believe that the "Arab NATO" project advocated by US President Donald Trump - though some see it as the project of his predecessor Barack Obama - was born or came to life dead.

Since it was preached and announced, only the differences between some of its main members, specifically between Saudi Arabia and Egypt, have emerged from the media.

The Middle East Strategic Alliance project, abbreviated in English translation by MESA or "Arab NATO" as it was called, includes the six Gulf states as well as Egypt and Jordan.

His idea of ​​America and its hidden goal is to protect US interests in the first place, and a broad entrance to Trump, which aims to achieve more electoral promises to the American public through the withdrawal of billions of dollars through the establishment of this alliance and through preparing and equipping it with equipment, weapons,

The announcement of its apparent objective is to counter Iranian expansion, aggression or threats, as well as terrorism surrounding the region in general.

The death of Arab NATO .. ​​Causes and factors
But why do observers see that this alliance has been born dead, and if not it is to the rapid death closer? The reason for this is several things:

First, the six Gulf states are not in harmony and agreement on the common enemy. While Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain believe that the enemy here is Iran, and dealing with it must be firm and military, Qatar, Kuwait and Oman are the opposite, and Tehran is a regional force that must be respected first. Second, it sees the importance of dialogue and understanding with it, as the only way to deal with it.

Secondly, Egypt and Jordan believe that entering into creating and making enmity with Iran is not one of their political priorities or agenda, but basically there is no reason for them to do so with a regional power and adopting positions that are compatible with the agenda of Riyadh or Abu Dhabi.

Thirdly, the rapid and seemingly invisible dispute gradually surfaced between Saudi Arabia and Egypt, one of the reasons for the postponement or failure of the alliance to start on the ground. Riyadh sees its right under the leadership of the alliance, while Cairo finds it difficult to subject the Egyptian military weight under the leadership of a country that has no sales and experience in the field of wars such as Saudi Arabia.

In addition, Cairo is aware of the Arab apathy, particularly of Saudi Arabia, and the efforts of other Arab parties to abort the project presented by Egypt through the Arab League in 2015. It represents the establishment of an Arab force to protect the region, prompting Cairo to do what can be expressed towards Arab NATO, one by one".

Riyadh is alone in front of Tehran
After this complicated and usual Arab dispute, things are getting worse and the atmosphere in the region is deteriorating after repeated incidents of sabotaging tankers and hitting Aramco oil refineries. Riyadh then calls for three summits in two days in Mecca last Ramadan; a Gulf and Arab summit and an Islamic summit.

The stated goal is to address all forms of terrorism. In fact, it was a Saudi call and an attempt to mobilize as much Arab and Islamic support as possible to confront Iran. However, the three summits ended with little consequence.

It is possible that the Saudi Arabian failure to invest in the Arab-Muslim community in the three summits has complicated and complicated relations with many Arab capitals: Cairo, Amman, Doha and Rabat, as well as several Islamic capitals.

Saudi Arabia appeared to be alone in the face of Iran, with the exception of President Trump, who no longer hesitated to publicly announce his country's readiness to protect Saudi Arabia, but at a price, putting Riyadh in a state of blackmail with no bottom or end.

To confront Iran with dialogue
But it is noteworthy that after the Arab NATO project faded, the qualitative shift that emerged from the voice of the UAE - Saudi Arabia's strongest ally - came just days before Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs Anwar Gargash wrote that tension in the Gulf could only be tackled politically.

This is what he wrote and asked for a role for the regional powers in the truce, which many observers considered prudent and wise. It needs a real translation on the ground. It may even call on the Gulf states - and the UAE itself, which is besieged by Qatar because of Iran - to re-read the reality of the Gulf more deeply, About the American vision of this reality.

What can be said in this tense Gulf reality is that the conflicting interests of the six Gulf states with each other, their differing views and differences towards Iran, and Saudi and UAE attempts to attract Arab forces from outside the region, such as Egypt and Jordan, to the tension with Tehran are all factors that do not help unify A certain vision to deal with a regional power such as Iran that can not be overcome or entered into in a long-term conflict, no matter how American and other media appear to portray to the world the fragility of this power.

The war in Yemen and some recent incidents in the region have proved that the language of bullets and fire will not solve things, with the emergence of the importance of closing the ports on the war criminals or hawks on the American and Gulf sides.

The latest position of President Trump - the leader of the most powerful military empire in the modern world - and his inclination towards calm and understanding, is an important sign that judging the mind in such tense and flammable conditions at any moment is better than thousands of minds and efforts to extinguish what has been Ignition.