Saudis to adopt new defence doctrine

Kingdom to focus on resisting Iranian influence in Mideast after US volte- face on arch enemy

Saudi Arabia will adopt a “new defence doctrine” focused on resisting Iranian influence in the Middle East, a senior diplomatic adviser warned on Monday, after the nuclear deal struck with Tehran by six world powers including the US.

As Britain urged the main regional powers to back the agreement, the Saudis offered their grudging support, with an official statement saying that it “could be a first step towards a comprehensive solution for Iran’s nuclear programme, if there are good intentions”. But the kingdom’s rulers remain deeply suspicious of Iran’s intentions — and almost equally wary of America’s diplomacy, especially since they were kept in the dark about the US contacts with Iran that preceded the Geneva agreement.

Dishonest

Nawaf Obaid, a counsellor to Prince Mohammad Bin Nawaf, the Saudi ambassador to London, accused America of dishonesty. “We were lied to, things were hidden from us,” he said. “The problem is not with the deal struck in Geneva, but how it was done.”

The response, said Obaid, would be a “new defence doctrine” based on containing Iran. Saudi Arabia “will be there to stop them wherever they are in Arab countries”, he said. “We cannot accept Revolutionary Guards running round Homs [ in Syria].”

His comments reflect Saudi fears that America’s overtures towards Iran could upset their own close alliance with Washington. Although Saudi Arabia has great wealth, its military strength is limited and its 75,000- strong army is barely a fifth of the size of Iran’s — forcing the country to rely on America as the ultimate guarantor of its territorial security.

“There is no absolute replacement for the US for Saudi Arabia as it casts around for allies, but there is a longer term project of looking to spread its focus,” said Daniel Levy, of the European Council for Foreign Relations.

Saudi Arabia’s worries are shared by Israel, which also believes that America is naive about the Iranian threat. But William Hague, the British Foreign Secretary, told MPs the agreement ensured that “elements of Iran’s nuclear programme that are thought to present the greatest risk cannot make progress”.

He added: “If Iran implements the deal in good faith as it has undertaken to do, it cannot use these routes to move closer towards obtaining a nuclear weapons capability.” He urged other countries to support the deal and warned against the consequences of undermining it.

The interim accord hammered out between Iran and global powers focuses narrowly on Tehran’s nuclear ambitions but the reaction across the Middle East points to a broader significance: the prospect of a geopolitical shift with repercussions across the region.

The process is still embryonic and may go nowhere. But the Middle East is already abuzz with speculation about a thaw between Washington and Tehran emerging from the Geneva talks.

Some analysts say it may turn out to be a “hinge” moment that — however gradually — alters the political landscape of the highly volatile region.

“This is already being seen as a kind of game- changer,” said Paul Salem, an analyst at the Middle East Institute, a Washington- based think tank. “This is not just about how much uranium is being enriched or when. It’s about a new alignment and its potential impacts in Syria, in Iraq, in Lebanon, in all the regional arrangements.”

Condemnation from Israel and angry silence from Saudi Arabia — both key US allies and avowed enemies of Tehran — highlight a profound disquiet over the new agreement. Antagonism between Iran and the US has been a major factor in the region’s web of alliances for more than three decades. Saudi officials view their kingdom and its allies as being engaged in a colossal struggle for regional influence between Islam’s two great branches.

Meddling ways

The Sunni- dominated Gulf countries accuse Shiite Iran of meddling from Syria to Lebanon to Bahrain. Riyadh plainly would prefer to see Iran consigned indefinitely to membership in an “axis of evil” than engaged in direct and seemingly amiable negotiations with the US.

“The Saudis and Jordanians are shocked by this American transformation,” said Fahd Khitan, an Amman, Jordanbased political analyst. “The Saudis and the Israelis are, perhaps for the first time, in a camp together.” While Saudi

❝ This is not just about how much uranium is being enriched or when. It’s about a new alignment and its potential impacts in Syria, in Iraq, in Lebanon, in all the regional arrangements.”

Paul Salem | Analyst, Middle East Institute

officials have kept their ire private so far, Israeli authorities have publicly denounced the preliminary nuclear accord with Iran as a “bad deal” and “historic mistake,” in the words of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

US officials have been careful in discussing wider regional implications. They’ve stressed that even while opening up this new diplomatic channel, they have kept the conversation focused narrowly on the nuclear issue — both in the public multinational negotiations and a series of secret bilateral talks between US and Iranian diplomats.

Hezbollah support

Other thorny issues such as Iran’s support for Hezbollah were not discussed, according to a senior administration official. The difficult case of Syria — where Iran and Saudi Arabia are major players in a proxy war — may give some indication of whether a broader reconciliation between the West and Iran is on the horizon.

On Monday, UN officials said it was not yet clear whether Iran would be invited to UNbacked Syrian peace negotiations scheduled for January 22. But a senior Obama administration official cast doubt on Iran’s participation. The parties at the table in the upcoming Syria talks must agree to support the transfer of power from Al Assad’s government to a transitional executive authority, language the US interprets as a call for Al Assad to step down.

Iran seems unlikely to abandon Al Assad and let Syria slip from its orbit. “If the West can talk to Iran about such a hugely sensitive issue such as Iran’s own nuclear programme, then I’m sure they can talk about what a transition might look like in Syria,” said Salem.