History News Network

Breaking News

Departments

Deja vu — Judith Apter Klinghoffer

Judith Apter Klinghoffer

MIDDLE EAST CONUNDRUMS

Jules Crittenden correctly points out that we are at a crossroad in our engagement in Iraq. We either disengage or begin to fight. I hope Bush is going not only to make a clear rhetorical choice but will make sure his choice is the one his underlings follow. Otherwise, it will again be all for naught. Also, Iraq cannot be secured without taking on Iran. It never could. Trying has already cost thousands of American, Iraqi , Lebanese, Israeli and Palestinian lives and is bound to cost more. Sorry, but that is the reality as I see it.

Hillel Frisch sent me a most interesting analysis of The Palestinians and the Second Lebanese War. While I do not agree with the premise that each Middle Eastern combatant acts independently, I find his comments about the Palestinian regional relations especially compelling:

Relations between Hizballah and the Palestinians are problematic, largely due to their source of funding. Hamas and Hizballah compete over the same Iranian purse. Both realize that Iranian interests and their own do not always coincide and that this gap is greater for the Hamas than it is for Hizballah.
Hamas' main problem in its relationship with Iran is linked to Egypt. For the Palestinians, Egypt is the most important Arab state. Thus far, Egypt, a realist player par excellence, has turned a blind eye to Hamas-Iranian cooperation on the assumption that bleeding Israel is more important to Egyptian interests than the penetration of Iranian influence into the Palestinian arena through Hamas, or even the implications of Hamas' power on Egypt's domestic attempts to contain its local Islamists, mainly the Muslim Brotherhood. Hamas knows there are limits to this relationship, which they can transgress at their peril. Egypt is the life-line to Iranian aid. Once the Egyptian state feels too threatened by this relationship it could move against Hamas with great force.
Since the establishment of the Hamas government, Jordan has been firmly against Hamas in part because of the impact this relationship is likely to have in strengthening what they perceive as the Shiite arc/heterodox alliance in the Middle East.
Gulf States with Shiite populations—Bahrain, Kuwait, and Qatar—are weary of Hamas after the Lebanese war. For them, the war is perceived to have strengthened Shiite Hizballah. This skepticism is apparent since the establishment of the Hamas government. An International Monetary Fund study on aid and transfers to the PA in the past year reveals that all Arab state finances have gone to President Abbas. Saudi Arabia, which is engaged in a cold war with Iran in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan, is a critical actor in this regard. Consider the likely impact on Gulf-Hamas relations as a result of the rise of the main Shiite party in the recent Bahrain elections.
An Israeli analyst presciently noted that the Gulf States are in a tacit alliance with Israel as a means of "balancing" the Iraqi and Iranian threat. This unspoken association is likely to be strengthened from the growing Iranian nuclear threat, increasing domestic Sunni/Shiite polarization, and the penetration of Iranian influence into the Palestinian arena at great cost to the Palestinians.

Posted on Monday, January 8, 2007 at 1:46 AM | Comments (4) | Return

Home Newsletter Submissions Advertising Donations Archives Internships About Us FAQs Contact Us All Articles