British-American geopolitical strategies in the Middle East, and its impact on Saudi-Iranian relationships

Name:

Institutional Affiliation:

Date:

Introduction

A large part of the Middle East history has been shaped by the prevailing international conflicts over the years. These international battles have been related to the quest by the world superior nations to take control of the natural resources and the strategic location of the Middle East. The impact of the different nations that have been involved in the political issues of the Middle East has been so great because of lack of stable governance in the region¹. In particular, the British and the American involvement in the administration of the Middle-East has had a long-standing impact on governance in the region. Hal argues that the great powers have been involved in the administration of the forces of the issues that pertain to the governance of the Middle East, something that has greatly turned around the impact of their involvement in the affairs of governance². This main argument of this paper is that the involvement of the American and British powers combined with their military structures and the intellectual capability have adversely influenced the relationships in the South-Iranian and the rest of the Middle East.

According to Sabet the application of neorealism has been a great impact to the progress of the Middle East and especially the South-Iranian³. The six components of neorealism that have directly impacted the progress of the Middle East include anarchy, capability, structure, polarity, distribution of power, and national interest. The structure and anarchy are intertwined concepts which have played out in the Middle East. According to Guney, the involvement of the UK and the US powers in the affairs of governance critically affected the relationships that exist among the people of South-Iran⁴. Over the years, the UK and European powers have competed to have a say over the region. These powers were particularly interested in controlling the natural resource and the geostrategic location of the Middle-East. Over two centuries later, the impact of the UK and the US is still felt in the way that the region is administered⁵.

Resources and power in the Middle East

In regards to resources and geostrategic location, the Middle East is an important part of the world. The geopolitics of oil explains why the region has been lucrative for both the UK and the US powers. The oil resources, economic and political development all form an important portion of the influence that the region has had over the years.

One of the greatest resources of the Middle East is its geographical positioning. The region is found in the Anglo-Saxon concept of the Middle East. For some people, this region is similar to the Balkans and the Ottoman Empire. The region stretches from the West with Egypt and moves eastwards to Iran. For some people, it encompasses Yemen and Turkey. Stansfield argues that the fight against the Russian expansion protected the region against invasion from the Russians⁶. The resources in the region not only refer to fossils and mineral deposits but also the geostrategic power and demographics of the regional parties that are involved in the administration of those natural resources. The countries located in this region enjoy a central geographic location. As such, they play a big role in the political dynamics of their neighborhoods. These resources have been a key attraction for the rest UK and the US powers. Their intrusion into the region

A key component of the neorealism that has been applied by the UK and the US powers to the Middle East is capability. Marcus asserts that South-Iranian has been made to feel insecure and in constant need to be able to fend for itself⁷ . The perpetual feeling of the need to acquire capability has been something that has been used by the UK and the US to influence the South-Iran into adopting some of the controversial political steps. Freidman suggests that the region has been striving to achieve security from the potential attacks and which has simply been an idea that has been infused by the UK and the US powers⁸. Given the condition of the various states in the region, they have attained varying levels of capability while trying to respond to the geopolitical forces instilled by the European powers. Just like South-Iran, the Middle East countries have been involved in building their capabilities just to be in a position to overcome the capabilities of their neighboring countries. The idea of the distribution of the capabilities of the countries within the region is what has created the desire to have the countries engaged in finding security.

The US in particular has had a resounding influence on the operations of the South-Iranian because of a number of factors. The US devised 15 years for fighting to move out of the region by accepting defeat so that the region would govern itself. The withdrawal was meant to allow the region to focus on developing the geopolitical capacity to solve some of its own issues without the interference of the other external forces. One of the greatest benefits of this strategy was that it transformed the region by allowing it to accept reality and to deal with its own issues. It was also an opportunity for the rest of the South-Iran to withdraw from the consequences of the reign. The impact on the relationships in the region was that the Sunni world was more empowered and thus threatened the well-being of the US. Another strategy in which the US changed relationships in the South-Iran region was through the use of force to crush IS and set aside Iran. This was in a bit to isolate and discourage the participation of Iran in the nuclear programs⁹. This move by the government of the U.S was very detrimental to the performance of the Middle East region. The trade relations between the two states worsened with most of them focussing on the delivery of an agenda that was only required for the determination of the political welfare of the region. The United States has actively taken part in shaping the relationships that exist in the Middle East with other countries. The dedication to the governance structures which are vital to the trade interests has been birthed.

Religious composition of the Middle East

The leaders in the Middle East have made sure that the religious composition adds to the factors that are turning around their relationships with the rest of the world. The U.S and the UK powers tried to adversely interfere with the formation of the religious groups but since they were deep-founded, it was difficult for them. The strategy that was applied to influence the religious composition was to limit the forces and apply the divisions in the different religious groups in the region. With this technique, the US got into a position in which it was turning around the peace and stability that the nations around the South-Iran were enjoying. Getting in the way of peace was something that influenced many of the groups that lived in the areas. The U.S applied the end to justify the means under which the cooperation in the Middle East was destructed by the American and the UK geostrategic politics. The United States sided with the oppressive and murderous side of the divide e during the civil unrest that occurred just before there was finally peace in the region. The involvement of the various agencies in the matters of governance of the region also brought about the impact of the rest of the world. Most significantly, the threat of Pan-Arabism to Saudi Arabia and Iran was sought to unite all of the Arabs in the region. This was after a turbulent experience with the external powers which were aiming at forcing the natives into some of the peace initiatives that had not been a cohesively been created by all the relevant parties. The first conflict ever to erupt was between Nasser and the anti-royalist stance which contributed to the overall discord in the two teams. The friction related to the administration of the freedom of worship was also a factor of influence that played a key role in the relationships in the South-Iran region. One particular instance that soured the relationship between Cairo and Riyadh was when the pro-Nasserist’s believed that they were the most active within the kingdom¹⁰. The move by the two opposing sides of the rule to, later on, come into an agreement about their status was magical and let to some durable peace. According to Cerioli, for some good time, there was cooperation between the two teams giving the region an ample time to settle some of the pressing geopolitical issues that have been longstanding in the region¹¹. The influence of either of the teams was equivalent to cold because neither of them was willing to back down yet still no one has actively engaged in the correcting some of those pressing issues.

The measures

There were a number of interventions that were made to deal with the rising tensions in the region which proofed to be adversely affecting the general international relations of the region. The teams that are involved in brokering peace and stability in the region are committed to ensuring that there are safety and unity in the whole region of the South-Iran. Mark explains that one of the major boosts to achieve this goal was the control of the sale of arms by the US, Britain, and France¹². This not only ensured that that lethal weapons were being handled by the right people but also the number of weapons in the region was well-controlled thus posing a limited danger to others. The view of the Middle East by the UK and the US powers has also changed over time. Before then, the Middle East was viewed as a very complicated region in which precautionary and control systems should have been developed. The threat that the region posed to the rest of the world was so huge that there had to be controls instilled for some of the nations that are associated with it in trade ties. The composition of the team with experts is what critically turned around the team to allow for the increased lobbying for peace and stability groups in the region to be strengthened.

One of the most successful ways that relationships have been strengthened in this region is to rely on Israel. This is because Israel has been positioned as a hub that can be used to stop or control the Arab socialism. Arab socialism plays a key role in making sure that the different levels of governance make an important step in the realization of the dreams of uniting the entire zone. The social and political strategies of the zone have been tied to the level of commitment which has been accorded by the concerned leaders around the world.

References

Bahi, Riham, “Iran-Saudi Rivalry In Africa: Implications For Regional Stability”, Middle East Policy, 25 (2018), 26-40 https://doi.org/10.1111/mepo.12374

Brands, Hal, “Why America Can’t Quit The Middle East”, Hoover Institution, 2019 <https://www.hoover.org/research/why-america-cant-quit-middle-east> [Accessed 2 September 2020]

Freidman, George, “US Strategies In The Middle East | Geopolitical Futures”, Geopolitical Futures, 2020 <https://geopoliticalfutures.com/us-strategies-in-the-middle-east/> [Accessed 2 September 2020]

Guney, Ailyn, “The ‘Greater Middle East’ As A ‘Modergeopolitical Imagination In American Foreign policy”, Tandfonline.Com, 2020 <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14650040903420370> [Accessed 2 September 2020]

Marcus, Jonathan, “Why Saudi Arabia And Iran Are Bitter Rivals”, BBC News, 2019 <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-42008809> [Accessed 2 September 2020]

Mark, Willy, “Middle East Geopolitics”, Baripedia.Org, 2018 <https://baripedia.org/wiki/Middle_East_Geopolitics> [Accessed 2 September 2020]

Osiewicz, Przemysław, “Ideological Determinants Of The Current Saudi-Iranian Rivalry In The Middle East”, Przegląd Politologiczny, 2016, 115 <https://doi.org/10.14746/pp.2016.21.2.9>

Rashed, Dina, “Geography, Resources And The Geopolitics Of Middle East Conflicts”, E-International Relations, 2019 <https://www.e-ir.info/2019/05/24/geography-resources-and-the-geopolitics-of-middle-east-conflicts/> [Accessed 2 September 2020]

Pham, J. Peter, “China’s “Surge” In The Middle East And Its Implications For U.S. Interests”, American Foreign Policy Interests, 31 (2009), 177-193 https://doi.org/10.1080/10803920902966842

Sabet, Amr G. E., “Geopolitics Of A Changing World Order: US Strategy And The Scramble For The Eurasian Heartland”, Contemporary Arab Affairs, 8 (2015), 163-180 https://doi.org/10.1080/17550912.2015.1018717

Stansfield, Gareth, “UK Strategy In The Gulf And Middle East After American Retrenchment”, Insight Turkey, 20 (2018), 231-247 https://doi.org/10.25253/99.2018204.10