| A new Middle East situation under drastic changes, Commentary |
The Americans like to say, "The 'September 11' incident changed the world." This is obviously a too exaggerated remark. "September 11" didn't change the world, but it did change America, and, due to changes to America, the Middle East was plunged as a whole into drastic changes. After the notorious terror attacks, the United States launched wars against Afghanistan and Iraq. The latter particularly exerted direct and tremendous impact on the Mid East. Over a century, the Middle East remains one of the world regions that harbor the most sophisticated contradictions, while the Iraq under Saddam regime is actually a confluence of Middle East clashes: its oil reserves rank world second; the Kurds question is serious; religious disputes cannot be more complicated; it is the "frontline of Arabs and Persians, as well as Arabs and Turkis"; and it is a focus in the conflict between Arabic countries and Israel (before the Iraqi war Israel had always regarded Saddam's Iraq its biggest threat). So, the US-launched war against Iraq simply trod the Middle East on its corns, dragging the region into another eventful season. Presently the Mid East situation displays the following features: First, the "strategic tacit agreement" long existed between America and Middle East regimes has been broken. The US open promotion of democracy in the Greater Middle East has made every country begin to worry about itself. After World War II, the United States has long fostering pro-American regimes in this region. Before "September 11", the United States didn't ask much from Middle East countries, and didn't care what system they pursued as long as they supported the US and were willing to maintain US interests in the region. As some people put it, for nearly 60 years America pushed a policy that "Islamic democracy is exception", under which, countries such as Saudi Arabia, a country apparently not living up to western democracy standards, were protected due to its pro-America stance. The "September 11", however, completely shattered the "existing framework". Americans could no longer hold themselves when they learned 15 out of the 19 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, a most reliable ally they once believed they had in the Middle East. As a matter of fact, as early as in November 2002, before the Iraqi war broke out, US President George W. Bush had began to talk glibly about the strategy of "Middle East democratization". The Bush Administration believed that lack of democracy in the Islamic world is a major cause of "September 11"-like tragedies. Therefore, promotion of American values on democracy and freedom should be the fundamental way for rooting out terrorism. Reforming the Middle East (in fields of politics, economy, culture, education, etc.) is unavoidable. Of course, the reform is multi-layered. For some countries such as Saddam's Iraqi, military means must be used to strike first and topple the regime; for Iran and Syria, regime should be finally toppled through military threats and various forms of sanctions; while for most Middle East countries, including such long-term pro-America countries as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, it needs to embark them on the road of western democracy through comprehensive reforms. Bush made it all the clearer after the Iraqi war, "countries including Saudi Arabia and Egypt must embrace democracy." The launch of "democracy in the Greater Middle East" means "Mideast leaders can no longer rule in their old ways", and the impact is huge. The Arab Summit Conference, originally scheduled in Tunis, last March, almost got aborted due to Arabic leaders' ambiguous attitudes toward "democratization". The meeting, finally opened a few months later, came to no happy ending since participants still remained "wide apart". "How to reform the Arabic world", as well as dramatic turbulence that would rise from the reform, have become a reality that must be faced, at present or in future, by countries in the region. Second, the Middle East has become a main theater of global terrorism and anti-terrorism. Since the United States has focused on the Middle East for its global anti-terrorism campaign, as the Iraqi war indicated, the Middle East region has naturally become the main theater of international terrorist activities and counter actions. After the Iraqi war, on top of such existing areas plagued by violence and terror as Israel and Palestine, a number of new "terrorism centers" appeared, including post-war Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Morocco. Anti-American sentiment surged unprecedentedly high in the Middle East after the Iraqi war, providing a breeding ground for the existence and development of local religious extremist organizations. What worth attention is that, as the "strategic tacit agreement" between the United States and local pro-America regimes was broken, the same silent understanding between pro-America regimes and local radical Islamic organizations was also shattered. The agreement that "I don't care what you do as long as you don't threat my ruling (especially in some monarchical countries)" can hardly continue. Even a country as Saudi Arabia was pressured by the United States to tackle terrorism seriously and as a result, triggered violent terror rebounds at home. With explosions coming one after another, the country has been plunged into turbulence. Saudi Arabia, along with other regimes, has been listed by some major western intelligence agencies as high-risk powers. Third, the existing geo-political pattern in the Middle East is under strong blast. Before the Iraqi war, the geo-political pattern here was in a state in which countries with matching power co-existed. Egypt, Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Syria, relying either on their "big size", or relations with the United States and the West, or important oil resources, were respectively playing a key role and forming geo-political balance in the region. But substantial change has taken place after the Iraqi war as the geo-political balance was broken. Countries as Egypt, Turkey and Saudi Arabia saw obvious decline in their strategic positions when the United States set up in the Middle East a new "diehard ally" -- the future Iraq, or the so-called "example of democratization". After the fall of the Saddam regime, countries as Iran and Syria began to face direct military threats. Past geo-political balance broken, Middle East countries engaged in a new round of "regrouping" out of their urge for survival. Diplomatic activities between countries were dazzling. Egypt and Iran, enemy to each other for over two decades, saw their leaders meet; Saudi Arabia had long seeing Iran as a huge threat, but relations between the two got improved; Turkey and Syria were rarely on good terms due to border disputes, but Syrian president paid an unprecedented visit to Ankara. All these are signs that regional powers are seeking for a way out when geo-political balance no longer existed. Fourth, the Middle East peace process has been pushed further away. Israel, catching the train of global anti-terrorism launched by the United States after the "September 11", pinned down Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat in his office at the West Bank from the beginning of 2002, thus halting real-sense Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. Since the end of last year, Israel dished out its "unilateral action plan", which, as a matter of fact, abandoned the peace process framed by the Oslo Accords and making the road to peace still longer. The article, written by Li Shaoxian, vice-president of China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, is carried on the seventh page of People's Daily, September 10. |
