Foreign Affairs: The Post-America Middle East: The Prospects for a Revival of Sectarian Conflict

Website published the

American Foreign Affairs (

)

at length the expected recovery of

sectarian conflict in the

Middle East during the

coming period, which he called "the post -

American withdrawal" from the

region.

The article - written by Vali Nasr, professor of international affairs and Middle Eastern studies at Johns Hopkins School of International Studies - explained that the slogan of the administration of US President Joe Biden, which calls for an end to "eternal wars" and its disengagement from the region to focus on the challenge posed by China;

It threatens to leave a political vacuum filled with sectarian rivalries, paving the way for a more violent and unstable region.

Nasr added that the struggle over geopolitical primacy between Shiites in Iran and Sunni Arab-led states, and more recently Sunni Turkey;

It is fueling conflict across the region, eroding social pacts, exacerbating state dysfunction, and stimulating "extremist" movements, saying both sides have used religious identity as a weapon for their own ends, to mobilize supporters and consolidate their influence across the region.

As a result, the Middle East - and the wider region - remains a box of gunpowder.

New waves of turmoil

He said that although Iran currently retains the upper hand, challenges to its position are increasing across the region, especially from new insurgencies in the "broken parts" of the region such as Iraq, Lebanon and Syria, and its anger at the moves of Tehran and its allies to tighten their grip on power. Terrorism has appeared in Afghanistan again.

The writer expected the outbreak of new waves of turmoil and bloodshed in the Middle East if a political process did not begin to defuse these tensions.

He also added that Israel's intervention in these sectarian conflicts alongside the Sunni forces only served to pour oil on the fire, pointing out that Israel's intervention makes regional stability more subject to the fate of the Iranian nuclear program.

He explained that Washington and Israel are already discussing "Plan B" if a diplomatic settlement over the Iranian nuclear program remains elusive, saying that this path would put Iran and America on a collision course, exacerbate sectarian tensions, deepen societal divisions, and provoke new conflicts from the Levant to Afghanistan. .

Nasr also says that Washington's desire to do less in the Middle East comes at a time when China and Russia are leaning towards the region, the "hard-line" government in Iran is increasing its "hardline", and the Sunni Arab states are finding themselves less confident than ever about US security guarantees .

He also predicted that, despite its best efforts, America would once again be drawn into the Middle East's many conflicts unless it paves the way for a more stable regional order, starting with a deal on Iran's nuclear program.

The invasion of Iraq was the beginning

The writer pointed out that it was the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 that allowed Iran to significantly expand its influence in the Arab world;

Since then, Tehran has expertly played on sectarian loyalties to enable a network of armed proxies that now stretches from Lebanon and Syria to Iraq and Yemen, empowering Shiites at the expense of Sunnis throughout the region and enhancing its influence over that of its Sunni rivals.

He said that Iran's nuclear program constitutes an umbrella that protects its proxies throughout the region, which in turn enhances Iran's influence further;

Thus, the more broad and flexible the nuclear umbrella, the more effective the agents working under its protection.

He added that the necessity of maintaining Iran's influence in the Arab world is an integral part of the strategic calculations of Iran's deep state, and the militias that Tehran has built for this mission are facts on the ground throughout the region.

But despite all of Iran's recent victories, the sectarian conflicts plaguing the Middle East are far from over.

American confusion

Nasr went on to say that America cannot mitigate all the dangers looming in the Middle East, but it must avoid making matters worse.

A smaller American role in the region may be inevitable, but the way in which Washington maintains its interests will be important;

For many in the Middle East, the US withdrawal is an abandonment by Washington of the region, where it previously defended against threats from the Soviet Union, Iran, the Islamic State and others.

This strategic confusion of America is an opportunity for Iran and its proxies, as well as an invitation to new participants in the battle, such as Russia and Turkey.

The nuclear agreement with Iran remains the most important deterrent to further instability in the Middle East.

deadlock—or worse yet;

Any breakdown of the talks would put Iran and America on a dangerous path toward a confrontation that will inevitably inflame the Arab world and fuel sectarianism.

For more than 4 decades, the United States has viewed the Middle East as vital to its national interests, and has forged alliances with Arab states to contain Iran, drive out Islamists, and manage the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

This was more successful when it managed to maintain a stable balance of power between Iran and its Arab neighbors.

The need for a return to American interest

Since Washington undermined this balance by invading Iraq in 2003, it has been trying to restore it in the face of other pressing global challenges, and is now abandoning this effort entirely.

There is ample reason to adopt this strategic reassessment;

Pursuing an elusive balance of power is very costly, especially since the Middle East is no longer vital to American national interests, but leaving the region to its own devices is a dangerous maneuver.

The writer concluded his article by emphasizing that without a new security arrangement, chaos and conflict will be the prevailing system, and that the return of armed “extremism” and the specter of further collapse of states, large and small wars over land and resources, and open conflict between Iran and Israel;

It will have catastrophic security and humanitarian consequences that will inevitably require renewed American attention.

He said that Washington should begin that task by defusing the conflict, which represents the greatest threat to the region;

confrontation with Iran.