Divide and rule: Trump’s Middle Eastern doctrine as he stokes conflict
IF DONALD Trump’s advisers have been hankering after a cataclysmic war against Islam, it could be argued that they fired the opening shot this week on Trump’s Middle East tour.
When Trump addressed more than 50 leaders of Sunni Muslim nations in Saudi Arabia, he might not have declared war against the Muslim world, but he did encourage the Muslim world to go to war with itself – Sunnis against Shia. Isn’t that the most strategic way to weaken your enemies by getting them to fight one another?
By beating the drums of war between Sunni and Shia Muslims, Trump’s speech was in keeping with the more sinister agenda of his advisers, Steven Bannon and Steven Miller. Both perceive Muslims as the enemy of the Judeo-Christian world.
The advisers penned Trump’s speech delivered in Saudi Arabia and authored the executive orders that sought to ban citizens from Muslim countries from entering the US.
Trump’s speech was peppered with references to the battle between good and evil, and was formulated in such a way that on the surface it pitted the peace-loving world against that of Islamist extremists.
But rhetoric aside, by announcing an unprecedented arms deal with Saudi Arabia to the tune of $110 billion (R1.4 trillion), and referring to a huge arms deal with Qatar, Trump made no secret of the fact he is arming the Sunni powers of the Gulf to the teeth.
Trump simultaneously called on “all nations of conscience to work together to isolate Iran.”
Understanding full well the role of Iran as a leading Shia nation, Trump’s speechwriters knew that by demonising Iran and painting it as a fundamental evil in the world today, it was a call to arms to the Sunni Muslim nations against the Shia.
The narrative fits in perfectly with that of the House of Saud, which for decades has felt threatened by Iran which it perceives as militarily superior, and with whom it competes for hegemony in the region.
The Sunni-Shia tension run deep and might have reached a climax with the proxy war in Yemen where the Saudi-led coalition is decimating the country in order to ensure that the Houthis, which are backed by Iran, are prevented from governing the country.
For the House of Saud and the rest of the Gulf monarchies, being able to boast of American protection and military hardware also gives them a sense of protection against their own people.
They have populations where approximately 65% are under the age of 30, and there is a growing yearning for more open, democratic and accountable governments. Any forms of dissent are harshly dealt with, as was the case of one social media blogger who was sentenced to 1 000 lashes.
Trump’s pronouncement that the US and Saudi Arabia share the same values was particularly disingenuous. He also blamed Iran (not Islamic State) for fuelling sectarian conflict in the region.
In the meantime a day before Trump’s speech, Iran held democratic elections where 45 million of its people went to the polls to decide on their political representatives. There is no such democratic process in Saudi Arabia which is run by a monarchy which is all-powerful.
Perhaps stoking conflict between Sunnis and Shia in the Persian Gulf is less ideological for Trump than it is for his advisers.
It is possible that Trump’s objectives are largely transactional, as such unprecedented arms deals will win him kudos back home and spur the military industrial complex, create jobs and grease the wheel of his support base.
Depicting Iran as a clear and present danger whips up nationalist support back home against an envisioned enemy. The fact that the Iran nuclear deal is working well, and the Rouhani administration has been seeking warmer relations with the US is irrelevant to Trump and his inner circle.
Consider the scenario if Trump were the peacemaker he makes himself out to be. If he were able to bridge the divide between the Shia and Sunni communities in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf, a large part of the Muslim world would be united. In the minds of Trump’s ideologically extremist advisers, this would be untenable given their belief that Muslims seek to control the US through its mosques and are planning attacks within the belly of the US that will weaken the US and western civilisation.
It is worth bearing in mind that the clash of civilisations that Bannon believes is around the corner will bring a war of gargantuan proportions if Bannon is to be believed. The obvious strategy would be for the US to set about weakening the enemy camp in any way it can, which would mean sowing divisions and war between the Sunnis and Shia.