As Bahraini government security services cracked down hard on popular protests against the ruling Al-Khalifa family in February 2011, the U.S. Department of Defense quietly considered alternative basing options for the Fifth Fleet, stationed permanently in Bahrain since 1995.
There are numerous, unmistakable signs that the crisis in Syria is moving to a new phase, one that will push Washington further to the sidelines. Not least among these fresh developments is the rapidly evolving situation in Syria’s northeast, where Washington’s Kurdish allies are slowly but surely reconciling with the Assad regime.
Last week, major news outlets reported that China National Petroleum Corporation had acquired French oil and gas company Total’s share in the development of Iran’s South Pars gas field, citing an elusive article published by Iranian state news agency IRNA.
Following the Syrian government’s full reconquest of the country’s south, there are real signs that Russia intends to reduce its presence and responsibilities in Syria. Moscow has not stated this openly, in contrast to its three previous drawdown announcements. Each of these announcements came after a major victory, such as the recapture of Aleppo from rebels or eastern Syria from ISIS, and did not result in any tangible reductions. Despite an absence of fanfare, however, recent developments and statements indicate that a partial drawdown is already underway.
Even though energy production and exports are the lifeblood of all Arab states in the Gulf, the present crisis between Qatar on the one hand and Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Egypt on the other has had very little influence on the economics of oil and gas either internationally or within the region. However, the countries involved have a lot to gain from a resolution of the conflict, particularly if it leads to greater energy market integration.
In this week’s Monday Briefing, MEI experts Charles Lister, Alex Vatanka, Randa Slim, and Marvin G. Weinbaum provide analysis on the US’s silence amid the Assad regime’s expansion, the Iranian president’s trip to Europe, the uptick in violence after Iraq’s elections, and the upcoming Pakistani parliamentary elections.
As international companies leave Iran under U.S. pressure, the Iranian government is scrambling to salvage as much foreign investment as possible. The top leadership in Tehran believes the solution is to engage with Russia, China, and the “east” to replace the West’s hesitant commitment to the Iranian market. But this eastward approach is a pipe dream, and there is plenty of history to prove it.
Several countries have engaged in a flurry of diplomatic moves in recent days to prevent combat between Israeli and Iranian forces in southern Syria from escalating into full-scale war. MEI senior fellows Robert Ford and Charles Lister join host Paul Salem to discuss these moves and the state of the Syrian conflict.
What lies ahead for Afghanistan: the various scenarios
The way forward in Afghanistan seems as unclear as it has ever been. An outright military victory against the Taliban and other insurgent groups appears to be unachievable. The prospect of insurgents overrunning the country soon appears similarly unlikely. At the same time, a negotiated peace seems presently improbable. At least on terms outlined by the Kabul government and international community, the Taliban shows little interest in reconciliation.
While armed nonstate actors and proxy militias have been grabbing most headlines in recent years, the risk of interstate war in the Middle East is rising at an alarming rate. This includes the risk of war between Israel and Iran, Saudi Arabia and Iran, and possibly the United States and Iran, or the United States and Russia. Tensions between Israel and Iran have boiled over several times in recent weeks in Syria, risking a serious escalation between the two countries.
In Sunday’s elections in Lebanon, Hezbollah and its allies gained more than half the seats in Parliament. After a result like that, an old canard in Washington is likely to resurface with full force: the idea that U.S. policy in Lebanon is a disaster. Don’t buy it. In fact, of all the investments the United States has made in the Middle East over the past decade, Lebanon has generated the greatest returns.
What impact will the Trump administration’s new arms sales policy, named “Buy American,” have on the Middle East, historically one of the major destinations for U.S.-made weapons? Michael O’Hanlon, senior fellow and director of research for the Foreign Policy program at Brookings, and Bilal Saab, director of MEI’s Defense and Security program, join host Paul Salem to discuss.
