Skip to main content

China Casts Itself as Middle East Peacemaker

This is the first time that China has officially brokered an international accord, and also its first involvement in the Middle East: the US has dominated this area of strategic importance for more than 70 years, despite its pivot to Asia at the start of the century.

China’s success is partly due to favourable circumstances: Riyadh’s desire to assert its independence from Washington (especially after the US was slow to come to the rescue after terrorist attacks on its oil installations in 2019); and Iran’s concerns over its economic crisis as well as anti-government protests and threats of Israeli attacks on its nuclear facilities. There is also the growing tendency of countries of the global South not to follow the West’s lead.

This diplomatic initiative was driven by the need for hydrocarbons. Saudi Arabia became China’s leading supplier of oil; Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) also began supplying natural gas and oil.

Between 2002 and 2022, China’s foreign direct investment totalled $106.5bn in Saudi Arabia, nearly $100bn in Kuwait, and more than $64bn in the UAE.

Chequebook diplomacy has also paid off politically: at the UN Human Rights Council meeting in July 2020, none of these Arab countries voted to censure China for its repression of the (Muslim) Uyghurs in Xinjiang.”

In return China did not criticise the killing of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.

“China’s leaders are consistent, at least, emphasising that they don’t interfere in other countries’ domestic affairs as they assert their geopolitical vision.” 

China, according to Foreign Ministry spokesperson’s regular press conference (Beijing, 7 March 2023) has declined to enter into any political or military alliance that could create a ‘cold war mentality’ and ‘camp-based confrontation’.

“After the aggressive diplomacy of his second mandate (2017-22), Xi seems now to be putting greater emphasis on negotiation, even seeking to include countries the West has excluded.

The Iran-Saudi agreement may not withstand the region’s geopolitical tensions. Its first stress test will be Saudi Arabia’s security in regard to the war in Yemen.

The rebels [in Yemen] welcomed the agreement but are not likely to stop fighting the Yemeni government forces, which Saudi Arabia has been supporting.

The strength of the Iran-Saudi agreement will also be measured in terms of the two countries’ relations with Israel, which sees the rapprochement as dangerous to its future. Iran opposes any normalisation of relations with Israel and frequently criticises countries that have signed the Abraham accords.

If Tel Aviv, now isolated on the Iran nuclear issue, decided to implement its ‘plan B’ – a unilateral attack on Iran – Saudi Arabia and the UAE would have to convince Iran that they are neither accessories nor supporters.

Regardless, the resumption of diplomatic relations with Iran is a success for MBS. It confirms his independence from Washington and his ability to impose his will on the Sunni clerics who have always opposed any rapprochement with Shia Iran.”

—Le Monde Diplomatique, April 2023


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Qarmatians (Al-Qaramita)

By Nadeem Mahjoub Documentary film-makers G. Troeller and M. C. Defarge once asked a cabinet minister in South Yemen, why socialistic ideas were so readily acceptable in that part of the Arab world. He replied: “Because we have been communists for a thousand years! My mother was Qarmatian.” Official Muslim scholars and clerics, and many so-called moderates (whether individuals or groups) oppose sedition ( fitna ). Tensions and contradictions in society should be solved peacefully and even if the ruler was unjust and impious, it is generally accepted he should still be obeyed, for any kind of order is better than anarchy and sedition. “The tyranny of a sultan for a hundred years causes less damage than one year’s tyranny exercised by the subjects against one another.” Revolt was justified only against a ruler who clearly went against the command of God and His prophet.” 1 Here we look at not what happened in the minds of people who call for calm, oppose dissent and preach the re...
"A second position argues against transition, which is transitology itself. It is well known—especially among economists—as the sudden mobilization of a considerable mass of experts who are generally foreigners,generally Western, who come to preach the good word and to propose ready-made models of democracy. The science of the transition has become a financial windfall, a market. And the word transition has of course become a reflex of language, a term of reference, a call for tenders ( appel d’offres ) to which the whole society was supposed to respond.  Consequently, the reticence that one can express is the following: our history is framed, transition is a heteronomy. Every democratic revolution is henceforth supposed to take a unique, imposed path, which is, at the same time, indistinctly democratic and liberal (or neoliberal). A more or less non-“negotiable” package.  It is necessary to highlight the imposed character (and imposed from the outside) of this coming to t...

UK

"We are all in it together" A letter from a doctor to Boris Johnson published a few months ago: ' Johnson has contributed to thousands of deaths ' Related 'The greatest global science failure for a generation' 'Herd immunity' or lockdown

Finance

"The hegemony of finance—the most fetishized form of wealth—is only maintained by the public authorities’ unconditional support. Left to itself, fictitious capital would collapse; and yet would pull down the whole of our economies in its wake. In truth, finance is a master blackmailer. Financial hegemony dresses up in the liberal trappings of the market, yet captures the old sovereignty of the state all the better to squeeze the body of society to feed its own profits. " (my emphasis) —Cédric Durand, Ficticious Capital , 2017, p. 155 

Against Authoritarianism and Neoliberalism in Venezuela

“The current confrontation in Venezuela today is not between left and right.” “We are witnessing the transition from a government with authoritarian tendencies to a dictatorial regime.” “This is not a government ‘backed’ by the military, but, as Maduro himself has said, the government is led by a ‘civilian-military-police alliance’. “Those who continue to support Maduro, including parties and movements of the Sao Paulo Forum or the spokespersons of Podemos in Spain, are causing severe damage to the left in the region and the world. They are damaging anti-capitalist struggles in the broadest sense.” The US embargo is ‘in violation of international law’. This is a useless statement repeated a million times, and it has come back again during the ongoing Israel’s genocidal war. “[A]fter the failure of the current, self-defined “socialist” governments, Venezuelan society tends to associate any reference to socialism or the left with the corruption and authoritarianism of the Maduro governme...