Saudis bring Iran, US closer
together By M K Bhadrakumar
The tussle between the brain and the brawn
is a constant feature of international politics.
The "Turkic" and "Persian" streams of
consciousness on the Central Asian landscape
provide a fine example. The tussle between Israel
and Iran has been no less acute - or between the
late Saddam Hussein in Iraq and the Iranian
leadership.
Bahrain developments bring to
light all over again the Iranian trust in "brain"
- how to optimally deploy intellectual resources
in situations where fools rush in with might and
armor, full of passionate intensity. If someone in
Washington cares to watch, Tehran's moves since
March 15 offer a case study for reaching some
major conclusions about how Iran lives and works.
But that is going too fast, too far. At
the moment, what matters is
Iran's stakes in Bahrain.
Bahrain's population comprises a majority of
Shi'ites - as much as 70% - and although they are
drawn more toward Najaf in Iraq than to Qom in
Iran for spiritual guidance, almost one-third of
them are Arabs of Persian origin whose welfare is
a matter of legitimate concern to Tehran.
Second, the United States Fifth Fleet is
berthed in Bahrain and among its vital tasks, it
"spies" on Iran. Indeed, a key vector of
US-Bahrain strategic ties is also their
intelligence tie-up over Iran. Naturally, the
"liberation" of Bahrain from the clutches of US
domination is a matter of national security
priority for Tehran.
Overlapping this
comes the broader question of US regional
influence in the region. Moving on further are
Iran's aspirations to be a regional power and
Saudi Arabia's dogged refusal to accommodate Iran
in the Persian Gulf region, of which the Gulf
Cooperation Council (GCC) is a living embodiment.
Iran keeps pressing for habitation within
a common Persian Gulf "home". In the Iranian
perspective, a "regime change" in Saudi Arabia
would make that country more "authentic" and far
more amenable to accommodation with Iran. Indeed,
any gravitation toward republicanism - away from
archaic monarchies - on the part of regional
states would make them more receptive to the
Iranian ideologies of resistance, justice and
freedom and Iran's regional role would thereby get
a fillip.
But a break-up of Saudi Arabia -
or any of Iran's neighbors - is not in Tehran's
interest. No doubt, Tehran would be horrified if
the forces of religious militancy or terrorism
exploited the regional turmoil to gain ascendance.
These are traditional parameters of the
Iranian approach to the Persian Gulf region. Thus,
there is no question of an Iranian intervention in
Bahrain strategically or tactically. (Bahrain used
to belong to Iran.) Tehran has no problem
anticipating that if it steps forward and does
something on the ground by way of opposing the
Saudi military presence in Bahrain, it would be
walking into a trap. Riyadh and Washington are
combing the Bahrain scene to spot even a trace of
Iranian involvement.
The morning after the
Saudi military intervention in Bahrain on Monday,
Tehran already had its script ready. It was almost
as if a long-expected event happened, finally.
Iran seems to have had no doubts that Saudi
response to the Bahrain developments would be in
terms of muscle power and Tehran's response needs
to be "brainy" and political.
The
following directions of the Iranian strategy
emerged. One, the Bahrain crisis cannot be
caricatured as sectarian Sunni-Shi'ite strife. Any
such characterization would make Iran a partisan
and isolate it from the Sunni Arab street, which
would suit Iran's detractors very well. Iran's
aspiration to identify (and even claim a degree of
leadership) with the "Arab awakening" would be
frustrated. Even more, the political thrust of the
Middle East uprisings - "regime change" - might
get obfuscated.
Two, following from the
above, Iran's religious establishment refrained
from commenting on the Bahrain developments. This
is a smart thing for yet another reason that it is
the Custodian of the Holy Places who has opted for
muscle play and Iran would prefer to let time take
its toll and allow the Bahrain developments to
evolve into an acute "Muslim issue". The Custodian
shot his own foot and can only bring ridicule upon
himself over time when his troopers are seen on TV
screens slaughtering Muslims in a foreign country
- no matter his weak plea that he has a GCC
mandate to do so.
Three, Iran's main focus
is on "internationalizing" the issue. This is not
to be branded as an Iran-Saudi bilateral issue.
Thus, Iran's Foreign Ministry is in charge.
Foreign Minister Ali Salehi is constantly on the
phone. Iran has formally approached the United
Nations (UN) and Organization of Islamic
Conference (OIC) - and, interestingly, the Arab
League (AL) where Iran is not a member country. AL
secretary general Amr Moussa finds himself in a
fix after having taken a strident stance over
Muammar Gaddafi's use of violence in Libya. Tehran
knows Moussa won't have the courage to lift his
little finger against Riyadh, but it is
nonetheless keen to introduce the Bahrain issue
into the pan-Arab agenda.
In
communications to the UN, the OIC and the AL,
Salehi asked rhetorically: "How can one accept
[this] that a government has proceeded to invite
foreign military forces for the crackdown of its
own citizens?" He pointed out that the "military
invasion" of Bahrain was not in accord with
international law - no matter which country
undertakes it and on what specious plea. He said
the UN was obliged to take immediate decisions to
end the incursion to defend its charter and the
basic rights of the Bahraini people.
Tehran has also recalled its ambassador to
Bahrain "to discuss the latest developments" and
the Foreign Ministry called in the heads of
missions of Saudi Arabia and Bahrain in Tehran.
Four, Tehran will do it utmost to stir up
the Arab street against the Saudi military
intervention in Bahrain. Iranian media coverage of
daily events is extensive and is widely
disseminating it in the Arab world. There have
been public demonstrations in Lebanon, Iraq and in
the eastern provinces of Saudi Arabia.
It
is a big embarrassment to Riyadh that the leading
Saudi Shi'ite cleric, Sheikh Hassan al-Saffar,
voiced "dismay" over the Bahrain situation -
"bloodshed, violation of sanctities and
intimidation of people" - and called for dialogue
and a political solution.
Tehran got a
huge boost in its political campaign on Wednesday
when Iraq's Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, who
rarely intervenes publicly in politics, called on
the Bahrain regime to stop the suppression of
unarmed civilians. Sistani said problems should be
solved through peaceful means. Iraq's Prime
Minister Nuri al-Maliki also stepped in to
criticize the Saudi intervention. Iraqi Shi'ite
cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's followers have taken to
the streets in large numbers.
Maliki's
statement merits attention in having a hidden
warning also to Washington. He said the Saudi
intervention "will contribute toward complicating
the situation in the region, in a way that instead
of resolving issues could led to inflaming
sectarian tensions".
Significantly, the
same warning has been sounded by Iran's Defense
Minister Ahmad Vahidi, who said the Saudi
"invasion" of Bahrain would heighten tensions and
adversely affect regional security and stability.
"If such miscalculated and legally unjustified
actions become a norm, the region could turn into
a center for incendiarism [sic], hostility and
conflict." The message seems to be addressed to
Washington.
Tehran appears encouraged by
the regional mood. President Mahmud Ahmadinejad
spoke out for the first time on Wednesday, 48
hours after the Saudi intervention: "This military
invasion is a foul and doomed enterprise ...
Regional nations will hold the US government
liable for such an atrocious behavior. The US is
suffocating the world nations to rescue the
Zionist regime."
Ahmadinejad's criticism
of the US is noticeably restrained under the
circumstances and is more in the nature of an
appeal. Curiously, one of the first things the
Iranian Foreign Ministry did was to call in the
Swiss ambassador who takes care of the "Iran
Section" in the embassy in Tehran.
Anyway,
US President Barack Obama, too, voiced an opinion
within hours of Ahmadinejad's remarks. White House
spokesman Jay Carney revealed that Obama spoke by
phone to Abdullah and King Hamad of Bahrain and
"expressed his deep concern over the violence ...
and stressed the need for maximum restraint".
Carney added: "The president also stressed
the importance of a political process as the only
way to peacefully address the legitimate grievance
of the Bahrainis and to lead to a Bahrain that is
stable, just, more unified and responsive to its
people. The president reiterated his support for
the national dialogue initiative led by Bahraini
crown Prince Salman."
Obama's predicament
is acute. The Wall Street Journal reported on
Wednesday that Abdullah disregarded US advice and
sent in the troops to Bahrain. Reading very
carefully between the lines, Tehran senses Obama's
dilemma.
Rhetoric is one thing and Tehran
will make the most of it, but it cannot be lost on
the Iranian "brains" that for the fourth time in a
row within the past six weeks, Iran and the US are
finding themselves on the same side of the fence -
on Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, and now Bahrain. The
big question is whether Obama notices it.
Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a
career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His
assignments included the Soviet Union, South
Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan,
Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.
(Copyright 2011 Asia Times Online
(Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
