Middle-east Arab News Opinion | Asharq Al-awsat

Opinion: Adviser, President Maze! | ASHARQ AL-AWSAT English Archive 2005 -2017
Select Page
Media ID: 55346216

From the beginning, the Iranian revolution chose to fight with its neighbors in the region that differ from it. However this region had no problem in cooperating or dealing with Iran. The explosive point, which came too early, was the ideology of exporting the revolution, and the problem is that this came too late because the Arab world has had enough of this ideology which contradicts reality, the respective context in each country, and the region’s international commitments.

Iran has invented the story of threatening the embassies on its land starting with the US embassy, which was broken into, a violation of international laws. It also invented the militias or the forces in power parallel to the state and do not hold any official status to use in conflicts, then it denounces responsibility.

Unfortunately, some have adopted the ideas of this scourge, and that is why countries in the Arab world started eroding for the sake of certain organizations which dispute the power and authority in place, leading to gang rule. Wars started igniting from what these groups were up to as the decision of peace or war was up to them, yet the entire country had to bear the outcomes, just like Lebanon did for Hezbollah’s actions.

Iran has also invented a complicated power system, which allows it to evade obligations, puzzling the world in the maze of adviser and the president, allowing it to evade responsibility.

The most prominent conflict years were the 80s and the Iraqi-Iranian war as countries suffered heavy losses in the human and economic levels, and the two countries ended up where they started without any gains until Saddam Hussein’s adventures inflicted great trouble within the international community and Arab countries. At that time, Iran benefited most, especially after the second Gulf war and the US withdrawal; it expanded its authority, it gained the loyalty of some militias, and it broadened areas in chaos.

All Arab countries were always suspicious of Iranian activity on their territory, especially of the attempts on planting groups allied to it into their societies. Nevertheless, Arab countries never questioned good intentions whenever there was an attempt of crossing bridges, especially during the times of Khatami and Rafsanjani.

Moreover, there was great anticipation for a change to occur with the beginning of Rouhani’s reign, but the winds blew in the opposite direction.

Iran now is a direct party provoking crises across Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and even Yemen by disseminating arms and weaponry, creating militias that threaten Arabian regional security and trying to create a new demographic reality that plays into its own interests.

However, given that Iran does not have a fair number of tools and forces enabling its domination, its strategy lies in both striking stability and weakening others.

Arab countries, meeting next Sunday, will not declare war on Iran under Saudi Arabian demand, because it simply does not reflect Arab strategy. Nevertheless, they will most likely resolve to sending out a serious message to Iran denoting that even patience has limits.

Solution is not difficult, it is based on a change of direction and a cooperative work to dilute tensions that Iran has set off, especially in Syria and Yemen. The only important thing is for Iran to hear the message, especially after Saudi Arabia’s clear decision to cut diplomatic relations and halt all flights and commerce to the country. What is truly hoped for is that Iran stops relaying contradicting signs it is used to sending, and for it to realize that the value of benefit and cooperative potential is more far-reaching than conflict and trouble making.