By Eric Vandenbroeck
The Sunni-Shia struggle is starting to
reach heights never before seen in the modern era.
From the Iranian point of view, the situation is perhaps worse than
during the war with Iraq in the 1980s because at the time Tehran had major
influence on the other side of Baathist Iraq in Syria and Lebanon, providing
Iran with some respite. In the current situation, where Iran's influence in
Syria (and by extension, Lebanon) is slipping, Tehran is looking at a return to
the days of the Ottoman-Safavid rivalry, when
the entire Persian western flank from Iraq to the Mediterranean was in hostile
hands. This time it is not the Turks who the Iranians have to worry about; in
fact, Ankara is also fearful of the Saudis' use of jihad against the Iranians
in Syria, which is bound to produce jihadism.
For Iran, the possible impending collapse of
the Bashar al Assad regime in Damascus represents a massive event and -- in
the words of Ali Akbar Velayati, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's top
international affairs adviser -- a
red line. Those remarks, issued last week, were a message to the Saudis
that the Kingdom is looking at a major regional sectarian conflict if it
continues to support the dozens of jihadist militias fighting the Syrian
regime. The suggestion is that it is better for both sides to seek a negotiated
settlement. The Saudis responded a few days ago when their foreign minister,
Prince Saud al-Faisal, on Tuesday said that a political resolution to the Syrian
crisis was unlikely -- a signal that Riyadh is not interested in
negotiations.
From the Saudi point of view, this is a historic opportunity to
decisively roll back Iranian encroachments from the Sunni Arab world. The Arab
Spring and the Saudis' own succession impasse are increasingly creating
uncertainty, and the Saudis want to be able to tackle the Iranian threat so as to be in a better position to manage the Kingdom and
the Arab world. Riyadh also knows that demographics in Syria work in its favor
-- the country is at least 60 percent Sunni -- which it is complimenting by
sending jihadists who share its view of Iran, the Shia and the Syrian regime to
the country.
Nationalist and secular-leaning forces want to topple al Assad but do
not want to fight the Shia and Iran. Therefore, the Saudis are once again
flirting with jihadist and sectarian militias who will not only fight in Syria
but will also take the battle to Iraq and help weaken the Shia-dominated
political order there.
Tehran has few options. It has to fight back
and, in the event that there is no deal, it has to mount a powerful insurgency
to prevent its enemies from controlling Syria. It is also trying to strengthen
its position by shaping regional perceptions that Riyadh is pursuing a
sectarian agenda in the hope that it can capitalize on uneasiness among states
like Turkey, Qatar and Egypt that do not share the Saudis' anti-Shia and
anti-Iranian stance. Finally, it is working on highlighting the al Qaeda
threat, hoping to get the United States and the West to abstain from an
aggressive push against the regime in Damascus.
The Americans do not want al Qaeda to benefit from the crisis in Syria.
As it is, they have a jihadist problem in the Maghreb, Sahel, Afghanistan,
Pakistan and Yemen. There is also the rise of political Islam in the form of
the Muslim Brotherhood, especially in Egypt, which is adding to the uncertainty
in the region.
But Washington also has an interest in undoing the effects of regime
change in Iraq and weakening Iran. Therefore, it will cautiously use the
sectarian fault line running through the region to try to maintain a difficult
balance of power. What this means is that a major, long-term geopolitical
conflict along the northern rim of the Middle East is highly likely.
For updates click homepage
here