The Arab world is disappointed in America
Recently, Bahrain First Deputy Prime Minister Salman Bin Hamad Al-Khalifa, who is also the Crown Prince, explained to the United States that the Washington policy in the Middle East is “schizophrenic” (rightly said: schizophrenic) through the British newspaper The Telegraph. The characteristics of this policy, according to the prince, are variability and reactionaryness. And with this approach, the US administration will soon lose influence in the Middle East. What will the Middle East answer? Turn from the States to Russia.
What does the prince like about Russian politics? According to him, the Russians are “reliable friends”. America, pursuing a "schizophrenic" policy in the Arab world, risks losing influence there. The region will turn to Moscow. Some states in the region, he said, are thinking of developing multilateral relations, and not rely on Washington alone.
The Russians, on the other hand, proved their reliability by settling the crisis in Syria at the international level related to chemical weapons. Obama simply let Putin seize the initiative here.
Do not like the Arab world and the situation with Iran. A temporary agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran, signed by the “six”, caused an increase in tensions in the region.
Even before Washington differed unpredictability policy. In 2011, Bahrain condemned the White House to call for the ouster of Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president. But Mubarak was an ally of the West for many years.
Prince believes that in the U.S. there is no long-term strategic planning and policy is made only in the context of election cycles.
As a result, the key Middle East countries can shift to a close encounter with Russia.
In this connection, we can note that the statements of Russian diplomats, referring to the Middle East and in general to countries where the so-called “Arab spring” has passed, can be considered very timely.
10 December, the head of the International Committee Mikhail Margelov made at the Royal Institute of International Affairs (London). He explained to the audience that Russia's policy towards the Middle East and North Africa aimed at the preservation of international law.
According to him, Moscow is credited with “distrust of the ability of Arab countries to build democracy.” However, this is not true, noted Margelov. But Russia believes that "democracy should be the internal choice of these countries."
There are also features of democracy in the Arab world - such that the West seems illiberal. Nevertheless, according to Comrade Margelov, one should take into account historical and cultural characteristics of the Arab states.
Common position of the Russian Federation with respect to the Middle East and North Africa, according to the head of the Federation Council Committee are: to strengthen peace, stability and the rule of international law, etc. In the field of international problems Russia welcomes the collective principle. Libyan scenario shocked Moscow and Russia believes that NATO has no right to change the political regime.
A day earlier, the subject of the Middle East have affected Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and his Israeli counterpart Avigdor Lieberman. The meeting took place in Moscow.
Comrade Lavrov reaffirmed Russia's principled position: the solution of problems is possible through a broad national dialogue, eliminating violence and external intervention. In this context, the Geneva-2 conference is designed to facilitate the translation of the confrontation in Syria into the mainstream political settlement.
The Fund for Economic and Social Studies of Turkey has recently summarized the results of a survey that touched on aspects of the popularity of different powers in the region, starting, of course, from Turkey itself. Respondents noted the growing popularity of Russia and China. At the same time, the majority of respondents showed a negative perception of the “Arab spring”.
However, other analysts believe that in the Arab world now holds vacuum external force. That is, America is not the same, but Russia did not replace it in the Middle East.
In the article "Russia Cannot Replace America in the Middle East" ("The Financial Times") by David Gardner expresses the idea that the Middle East has its own ideas about who will leave and who will come to the region, and whether it will come.
Saudi Arabia, like Egypt, feels betrayed. The White House did nothing to prevent the overthrow of Mubarak. And when the army overthrew Mursi and the Muslim Brotherhood in June, Washington retained part of the US military aid worth 1,3 billion dollars a year, which was inviolable, being part of a peace treaty between Egypt and Israel from the year 1979. Israel, the author notes, is also dissatisfied: after all, he witnessed the end of tyrants, who had previously restrained people's dislike of the policies of the Jewish state.
Turkey and Saudi Arabia have broken up for Washington because of Syria. They are not happy with the "strange mixture of indecision and adventurism," through which Mr. Obama operates.
Recep Tayyip Erdogan has promised to buy a Chinese missile defense system that is incompatible with the technique NATO allies of Ankara.
Saudi Arabia has generally declared an "important shift" in relations with the United States, despite the long-standing alliance.
As for the possibility of rapprochement between the United States and Iran, this “perspective” evokes horror in Israel and Saudi Arabia. These states are convinced that the Shiite Islamic Republic is threatening them, and will accept only the surrender of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the change of the ruling regime there.
And what is there to offer the Middle East Russia? Difficult to understand, the author writes.
Hence the "problem of vacuum".
Yes, we can note the wrong behavior of the United States and the West in Syria in general, yes, the barbarians are already at the gate. In such circumstances, Russia, the analyst notes, "looks good." Her strength is that she “always supports the Assad regime,” which today “wins one military victory after another.” In Putin, the author writes, “a simple strategy, and he clearly adheres to it.”
But Obama is no longer believed because of the notorious “red lines”.
Thus, the analyst brings his readers to the conclusion that the Middle East was formed foreign policy vacuum. U.S. weakened, Obama's actions cause mistrust, but Moscow did not have the capacity to replace the Washington region.
Judge passed another important regional component. Russia's economy is really tied to hydrocarbons, while Iran managed to move closer to the West via Geneva.
The other day, the US Congress decided not to impose additional sanctions against Iran, and even earlier the United States gave Tehran "indulgences" of seven billion dollars. If Tehran starts supplying oil to the world market in the future, then its world price may fall. Some stock market analysts are confident that the decline will be large. It is difficult to say how these predictions come true. However, it should be noted that in this vein the rapprochement between the United States and Iran (or, more precisely, the West and Iran) is not accidental. In the light of the intensified “cold war”, which, as it turned out, was not ending, Washington and Brussels decided to bring down world oil prices in order to “get” Russia and Putin personally, who for some reason is listed in the USA and Western Europe as a forerunner of the communist “USSR 2.0 ”, although in reality it’s the least like this prophet: oligarchy reigns happily in Russia and the last remnants of everything Soviet are uprooted - the concept of the Great October Socialist Revolution will not even appear in new school textbooks. In any case, it is beneficial for the West to weaken Russia: after all, the West still wants to set the tone for the planet. Washington and Brussels became decrepit, but they are not going to give up. They will not “coexist peacefully” with both “socialist” China and “Soviet” Russia. The current dragging of Ukraine from the CU into the EU, including through large IMF loans, is one of the serious attempts to disrupt integration processes in the post-Soviet space. In March, the 2014 of the year will be the end: most likely, the West will be achieved by hook or by crook, and Ukraine’s association agreement with the EU will be signed. In Brussels, they are well aware that the friendship of Kiev with Moscow is severely tested by gas debts ...
So, the question arises: what kind of policy can Russia pursue in the Middle East? What is profitable for her today? Iran is an ally of Syria, which Moscow supports. The Iranian nuclear issue The Kremlin proposes to solve, too, only by diplomatic means. Yes, the policy is simple. But Tehran is a significant raw material rival of Moscow, and in this sense, the Kremlin would benefit from its infringement. In addition, it is quite possible to assume that after protracted sanctions, the IRI will start selling oil, as they say, “without brakes”: inflation is unstable in the country, the economic situation is unstable, and the budget urgently needs currency. Stock traders panic for a reason.
Syria is a different story. If Assad remains in power, if the Islamist thugs and their sponsors from Saudi Arabia lose, Qatar will not draw a gas pipeline to Turkey and beyond. As a result, Europe will continue to grumble, but pay Gazprom and be supplied with Russian blue fuel.
It is clear that there can be no uniform policy in the Middle East. Each regional player and each external player have their own selfish interests. And that's fine.
Another thing is that, through the mouth of Comrade Lavrov, Russia stands for the solution of regional problems through national dialogue, which excludes external intervention. This is also normal, and such a civilized practice must be adhered to by any state that has international interests. To rob and arrange colonies everywhere is from the history of another time. Even the rocket plantation of "democracy" seems to be a thing of the past. Just because of the economic depression.
Foreign vacuum in the Middle East is not. U.S. will not go there: they have there ally Israel, they have there petrodollar contractual basis, they military bases there. Russia will not replace the U.S., but international role will still get bigger. Former unipolar world in the eyes transformed into a multipolar.
What does the prince like about Russian politics? According to him, the Russians are “reliable friends”. America, pursuing a "schizophrenic" policy in the Arab world, risks losing influence there. The region will turn to Moscow. Some states in the region, he said, are thinking of developing multilateral relations, and not rely on Washington alone.
The Russians, on the other hand, proved their reliability by settling the crisis in Syria at the international level related to chemical weapons. Obama simply let Putin seize the initiative here.
Do not like the Arab world and the situation with Iran. A temporary agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran, signed by the “six”, caused an increase in tensions in the region.
Even before Washington differed unpredictability policy. In 2011, Bahrain condemned the White House to call for the ouster of Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president. But Mubarak was an ally of the West for many years.
Prince believes that in the U.S. there is no long-term strategic planning and policy is made only in the context of election cycles.
As a result, the key Middle East countries can shift to a close encounter with Russia.
In this connection, we can note that the statements of Russian diplomats, referring to the Middle East and in general to countries where the so-called “Arab spring” has passed, can be considered very timely.
10 December, the head of the International Committee Mikhail Margelov made at the Royal Institute of International Affairs (London). He explained to the audience that Russia's policy towards the Middle East and North Africa aimed at the preservation of international law.
According to him, Moscow is credited with “distrust of the ability of Arab countries to build democracy.” However, this is not true, noted Margelov. But Russia believes that "democracy should be the internal choice of these countries."
There are also features of democracy in the Arab world - such that the West seems illiberal. Nevertheless, according to Comrade Margelov, one should take into account historical and cultural characteristics of the Arab states.
Common position of the Russian Federation with respect to the Middle East and North Africa, according to the head of the Federation Council Committee are: to strengthen peace, stability and the rule of international law, etc. In the field of international problems Russia welcomes the collective principle. Libyan scenario shocked Moscow and Russia believes that NATO has no right to change the political regime.
A day earlier, the subject of the Middle East have affected Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and his Israeli counterpart Avigdor Lieberman. The meeting took place in Moscow.
Comrade Lavrov reaffirmed Russia's principled position: the solution of problems is possible through a broad national dialogue, eliminating violence and external intervention. In this context, the Geneva-2 conference is designed to facilitate the translation of the confrontation in Syria into the mainstream political settlement.
The Fund for Economic and Social Studies of Turkey has recently summarized the results of a survey that touched on aspects of the popularity of different powers in the region, starting, of course, from Turkey itself. Respondents noted the growing popularity of Russia and China. At the same time, the majority of respondents showed a negative perception of the “Arab spring”.
However, other analysts believe that in the Arab world now holds vacuum external force. That is, America is not the same, but Russia did not replace it in the Middle East.
In the article "Russia Cannot Replace America in the Middle East" ("The Financial Times") by David Gardner expresses the idea that the Middle East has its own ideas about who will leave and who will come to the region, and whether it will come.
“The growing strength of the Arab and Israeli allies that the United States is no longer a reliable ally in intricate intrigues and evil rivalry in the Middle East raises assumptions about the return of Russia there. Some people saw a turning point in last week’s widely publicized visit by the Russian foreign and defense ministers to Cairo. The visit took place 41 a year after President Anwar Sadat expelled Soviet military advisers from 20000 from Egypt. If this is so, then it is completely incomprehensible where Egypt can turn, as well as other allies in America who are disillusioned with America like Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel. ”
Saudi Arabia, like Egypt, feels betrayed. The White House did nothing to prevent the overthrow of Mubarak. And when the army overthrew Mursi and the Muslim Brotherhood in June, Washington retained part of the US military aid worth 1,3 billion dollars a year, which was inviolable, being part of a peace treaty between Egypt and Israel from the year 1979. Israel, the author notes, is also dissatisfied: after all, he witnessed the end of tyrants, who had previously restrained people's dislike of the policies of the Jewish state.
Turkey and Saudi Arabia have broken up for Washington because of Syria. They are not happy with the "strange mixture of indecision and adventurism," through which Mr. Obama operates.
Recep Tayyip Erdogan has promised to buy a Chinese missile defense system that is incompatible with the technique NATO allies of Ankara.
Saudi Arabia has generally declared an "important shift" in relations with the United States, despite the long-standing alliance.
As for the possibility of rapprochement between the United States and Iran, this “perspective” evokes horror in Israel and Saudi Arabia. These states are convinced that the Shiite Islamic Republic is threatening them, and will accept only the surrender of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the change of the ruling regime there.
And what is there to offer the Middle East Russia? Difficult to understand, the author writes.
Hence the "problem of vacuum".
Yes, we can note the wrong behavior of the United States and the West in Syria in general, yes, the barbarians are already at the gate. In such circumstances, Russia, the analyst notes, "looks good." Her strength is that she “always supports the Assad regime,” which today “wins one military victory after another.” In Putin, the author writes, “a simple strategy, and he clearly adheres to it.”
But Obama is no longer believed because of the notorious “red lines”.
“The time of American unlimited influence in the Middle East seems to be coming to an end, but it’s hard to believe that Russia will be able to replace the United States. Even in the Soviet era, Moscow managed only the role of interference. Today, when its economy is built almost exclusively on oil and is in the second technology division, Russia has become a second-rate power. And no one gives preference to Russian weapons systems when you can buy American ones. ”
Thus, the analyst brings his readers to the conclusion that the Middle East was formed foreign policy vacuum. U.S. weakened, Obama's actions cause mistrust, but Moscow did not have the capacity to replace the Washington region.
Judge passed another important regional component. Russia's economy is really tied to hydrocarbons, while Iran managed to move closer to the West via Geneva.
The other day, the US Congress decided not to impose additional sanctions against Iran, and even earlier the United States gave Tehran "indulgences" of seven billion dollars. If Tehran starts supplying oil to the world market in the future, then its world price may fall. Some stock market analysts are confident that the decline will be large. It is difficult to say how these predictions come true. However, it should be noted that in this vein the rapprochement between the United States and Iran (or, more precisely, the West and Iran) is not accidental. In the light of the intensified “cold war”, which, as it turned out, was not ending, Washington and Brussels decided to bring down world oil prices in order to “get” Russia and Putin personally, who for some reason is listed in the USA and Western Europe as a forerunner of the communist “USSR 2.0 ”, although in reality it’s the least like this prophet: oligarchy reigns happily in Russia and the last remnants of everything Soviet are uprooted - the concept of the Great October Socialist Revolution will not even appear in new school textbooks. In any case, it is beneficial for the West to weaken Russia: after all, the West still wants to set the tone for the planet. Washington and Brussels became decrepit, but they are not going to give up. They will not “coexist peacefully” with both “socialist” China and “Soviet” Russia. The current dragging of Ukraine from the CU into the EU, including through large IMF loans, is one of the serious attempts to disrupt integration processes in the post-Soviet space. In March, the 2014 of the year will be the end: most likely, the West will be achieved by hook or by crook, and Ukraine’s association agreement with the EU will be signed. In Brussels, they are well aware that the friendship of Kiev with Moscow is severely tested by gas debts ...
So, the question arises: what kind of policy can Russia pursue in the Middle East? What is profitable for her today? Iran is an ally of Syria, which Moscow supports. The Iranian nuclear issue The Kremlin proposes to solve, too, only by diplomatic means. Yes, the policy is simple. But Tehran is a significant raw material rival of Moscow, and in this sense, the Kremlin would benefit from its infringement. In addition, it is quite possible to assume that after protracted sanctions, the IRI will start selling oil, as they say, “without brakes”: inflation is unstable in the country, the economic situation is unstable, and the budget urgently needs currency. Stock traders panic for a reason.
Syria is a different story. If Assad remains in power, if the Islamist thugs and their sponsors from Saudi Arabia lose, Qatar will not draw a gas pipeline to Turkey and beyond. As a result, Europe will continue to grumble, but pay Gazprom and be supplied with Russian blue fuel.
It is clear that there can be no uniform policy in the Middle East. Each regional player and each external player have their own selfish interests. And that's fine.
Another thing is that, through the mouth of Comrade Lavrov, Russia stands for the solution of regional problems through national dialogue, which excludes external intervention. This is also normal, and such a civilized practice must be adhered to by any state that has international interests. To rob and arrange colonies everywhere is from the history of another time. Even the rocket plantation of "democracy" seems to be a thing of the past. Just because of the economic depression.
Foreign vacuum in the Middle East is not. U.S. will not go there: they have there ally Israel, they have there petrodollar contractual basis, they military bases there. Russia will not replace the U.S., but international role will still get bigger. Former unipolar world in the eyes transformed into a multipolar.
Information