Middle East, Labyrinth of Alliances

Respect for the concept of complexity requires caution when attempting to analytically approach a region that has emerged as a result of historical deposits, strategic interests, religious superstructures, and cultural backwardness, in addition inhabited by a young, oppressed population, deprived of life prospects. Added to this is the strong anti-Western resentment caused by European colonialism, American imperialism, and current Israeli abuses.

As elsewhere, even in the Middle East, identity factors include language, ethnicity, skin color, religion (and subfamilies), the interweaving of which serves local satraps and external forces, primarily the United States with its large military bases.

Religion, the harbinger of messianic horizons, occupies a central place in Middle Eastern identity, being both the victim and the protagonist of fanaticism, sociocultural backwardness, and anti-modern attitudes through which ecclesiastical and secular oligarchies of all kinds flourish, while subordinate classes survive in the void of social demands and political consciousness.

A possible way out of economic backwardness faces chronic political instability, which depends on the privileges of the ruling classes. Instead of fighting the polarization of wealth, lack of work, and poor prospects, the lower classes are seduced by the illusion of ethnic or religious rebellion, falling prey to sectarianism and migratory exploitation. Transnational capitalism also thrives here through predatory activities supported by US warmongering in complicity with local oligarchies.

Even terrorism, an offshoot of this system, is rooted in frustration and injustice, the poisoned fruit of neocolonial intervention, attracted by regional wealth but insensitive to the fate of these people. Effectively preventing and neutralizing terrorists, as we must do, is not enough.

In a region of turbulence that stretches from the Caspian to the Mediterranean to North Africa, the parties’ knowledge defies Aristotelian logic: Israel is against the Palestinians, in fact more against Hamas than the Palestinian National Authority (PNA). Egypt supports the PNA but not Hamas and has weakened relations with Israel. Hamas and Iraq have the same enemy – Israel, but they do not have very good relations with each other. Turkey is not indifferent to Hamas’s agenda, but has softened relations with Israel. Hezbollah has poor relations with Sunni countries and is allied with Iran and Syria, which in turn are ruled by the Shia/Alawite minority (which some say is not even part of Islam, like the Lebanese Druze or Turkish Alevis), remaining a relevant context in Lebanon.

Iraq criticizes Saudi Arabia (SA) but is close to Egypt, which, however, has good relations with Riyadh. El-Sisi has some problems with Iran, he does not trust Assad, but especially Ankara (which is actually on the opposite side of Libya). The SA is closer to Iran, Iraq, and Syria (but not to Hezbollah), has pragmatic relations with Israel (to a lesser extent after the events in Gaza), but is suspicious of Turkey. The SA funds Hamas but is an enemy of the Muslim Brotherhood, which, despite pursuing various national programs, has united in favor of Hamas and against Israel. The latter is an enemy of Hezbollah that is backed by Iran, which funds Hamas, receives money mainly from Sunni monarchies, and is hostile to both Assad (protected by the Russians) and the remnants of the so-called moderate Syrian opposition. The latter, supported at the time by the United States, the Gulf states, and the SA, then merged into the Islamic State, which still exists in the Syrian northwest. Tehran has neutral relations with El-Sisi (the enemy of Hezbollah), proceeds from tense relations with the monarchies of the Persian Gulf (with the exception of Qatar), supports the Yemeni Houthis (Zaidi Shiites), attacked by the SA without a UN mandate, but with American help. Turkey is an enemy of Assad, whom Iran clearly supports, although Turkey and Iran share strong ties for anti-Kurdish reasons (mortal enemies for both) and for economic and energy reasons.

Iraqi Kurds enjoy strong autonomy (thanks to the Peshmerga army) and have relaxed relations with Ankara, although the latter does not trust the Kurds as such, and all supporters of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (Turkish) in the long-standing fight against Turkish nationalism. For ethnic reasons, Iraqi Kurds, who are predominantly Sunni, are hostile to Iraqi-Sunni Arabs, and for ethnic-religious reasons, they are also hostile to Iraqi-Shiites. In Iran, where 90% are Shiites but only 50% are ethnic Persians, the Kurds are divided between Sunnis and Shiites, but they all dream of an independent state when conditions allow it.

Many have flaunted the fight against ISIS. However, the Gulf monarchies and the Americans seek primarily to overthrow Assad and reduce the role of Iran and Hezbollah in the cynical game with the Islamic State. In Rojava, Ankara is battling Syrian Kurds, potential magnets for its Turkish comrades. This is a nightmare scenario of pan-Turkism, lagging behind history and unable to recognize the political viability of 25-30% of the country’s population.

Sunnis, opposed to Shiites (whether Iranians/Twelvers, Alawites, Alevis, Ismailis, Houthis, and others), are in turn divided among themselves: Wahhabis against Salafis, Al-Qaeda against Sunni governments; Muslim Brotherhood against other brotherhoods and against the Wahhabi-Saudis; however, emirs, princes, and religious or secular sovereigns become allies against anyone who infringes on their class privileges.

On paper, the United States is the enemy of ISIS and al-Qaeda (depending on convenience, in fact), but above all, the enemy of Hamas and Hezbollah, both adversaries of Israel. Hezbollah is a US terrorist group that distinguishes the military from the political and has an ambassador in Lebanon, where the Party of God is in government with Sunnis, Druze, and Christians. However, Hezbollah is not a terrorist organization for Europeans and Turks.

USA adheres to chaos theory, which, however, is not chaotic at all. Dividing friends and enemies, it keeps the value of the dollar high, sells weapons to everyone, and strengthens the imperial position with eternal conflicts. It supports El-Sisi and is hostile to Syria, where the illegal presence of American soldiers serves to steal oil from Syrian wells. The same soldiers who in Iraq guarantee predatory oil production by US oil companies as compensation for the illegitimate anti-Saddam war of 2003. Despite this, Iraq is on good terms with Syria, which was once a friend of Iran and Hezbollah, all enemies of the USA, which, as long-term ally, supports Israel’s repressive policies in Palestine for strategic reasons (in case of regional conflicts) and interdependence (the Israeli lobby, primarily AIPAC*, has a strong influence on American media and politics**).

Russia and Turkey have recently established good agreement (even with the Ukrainian scenario). The intolerance of Turkey, a NATO country, towards Washington’s arrogance is growing, even suspecting it of organizing the failed 2016 coup. By importing increasing amounts of Russian gas and oil, Erdogan has built good relations with Moscow, which in turn is developing a dream of a crack in Turkey/NATO-USA relations.

What should be done with this conundrum?

A shake-up, stemming from common sense, political ethics, and the piece of international law that countries managed to construct at the end of World War II – and which the United States, seeing it as an obstacle to its bulimic domination of the world, constantly seeks to dismantle – would like outside powers to leave the region, starting with the United States, “the nation ordained by God to rule a troubled world,” according to the pathological exaltation of the American right.

Only when (neo)colonial interference disappears can we hope for a gradual balance among the countries of the region and imagine, on the basis of values driven by human progress, the (re)construction of their institutional systems within a framework that prioritizes peace and equality. This isn’t all, but it would be a lot. However, for this to happen, it is necessary to have political and economic counterbalances (BRICS?) capable of containing the American unipolar hegemony that is poisoning the planet.