Davood Ahmadzadeh – The Middle East Analyst

The meeting was apparently aimed at examining US President Donald Trump’s plan to create a new coalition with the Arab states called the Arab-Hebrew NATO. Trump referred to his plan in his address to the UN General Assembly. Some analysts evaluate the US talks with the Arab states as a serious sign that the establishment of such an institution is going to be materialized.

Creation of coalitions by Saudi Arabia in the region against Iran’s interest dates back decades ago; the first such coalition was the formation of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council. After the victory of the Islamic Revolution of Iran and the fear of the Arab regimes, especially Saudi Arabia, from the spread of the revolution into the Arab conservative countries, Riyadh decided to establish the PGCC in 1981 in order to confront the disruption of the status quo. 

During the eight-year Iran-Iraq war, the council, under Saudi leadership, tried to prevent the emergence of the Islamic Republic’s regional power through continuing the war and inflicting financial and human losses to Iran.

In any case, after Saddam’s defeat in the eight-year war and in spite of the financial and military support to Saddam Hussein in pursuing his regional goals, the council’s strategy backfired as the weapons provided by the Arab regional Sheikhs to him turned into a leverage for the Ba’athist army to invade and occupy Kuwait.

Formation of failing coalitions

Despite the Saudi kingdom’s failure in forming effective coalitions against Iran in the region under US strategic policies in the post-Saddam era, Saudi Arabia attempted multiple times to compensate for Iraq’s power vacuum by urging Egypt and Syria to join coalitions and involve them in a group of 2+6 military and security discussions. But in spite of these efforts, the formation of such coalitions has failed due to numerous disagreements among them.

In any case, the creation of coalitions and alliances against Iran has been one of the main regional strategies of Saudi Arabia over the past decades. Traces of this strategy can be found in Trump’s visit to Riyadh, the gathering of political leaders of some Arab countries in the region, and the meeting of US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo with his Arab counterparts on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly and consultation on the formation of an ‘Arab-Hebrew NATO’.

Indeed, after the defeat in proxy wars in Syria, Iraq and Yemen, Saudi Arabia has once again initiated a discussion on a new military alliance called the Arab-Hebrew NATO under the guidelines of the United States and Israel with the aim, as the Saudis hope, to confront Iran’s regional influence through employing invasive regional security policies.

Ambiguities of Arab-Hebrew NATO project for its creators

The argument about the increase of Saudi military and identity clout has led to a regional conflict with Iran and the new security mechanism of ‘Arab-Hebrew NATO’ project which is supposed to be pursued with the greater participation of Sunni Arab states of the region such as Egypt, Jordan, and Morocco, is meant to be used by Riyadh to contain Iran’s power and confront it geopolitically. Given the failing Saudi coalition experience in Yemen and also the lack of participation of powerful Arab states such as Egypt and Sudan, it can be anticipated that the Arab-Hebrew NATO would be seen as a demonstration of incremental Saudi military and security power against Iran.

With the purchase of advanced US military equipment, Saudi Arabia is trying to sponsor the leadership of Arabs in the region against Iran. The main point is that their urge to confront Iran is the principal reason for planning the formation of the Arab-Hebrew NATO project.

The possibility of forming such an alliance, both in practice and in the field, is faced with serious ambiguities: first, countries that have participated in coalitions against Iran, over time, had disagreements in certain military and security decision-making, and the United States’ intention in leading an Arab-Hebrew NATO project is perhaps to rescue anti-Iran military alliances. In coalitions in both Syria and Yemen, one can easily notice disagreements between Saudi Arabia and its allies in advancing strategic plans in the military and security fields. An obvious example is the emerging tensions surrounding the continuation of war in Yemen, as well as the unofficial exit of Qatar from PGCC; second, new regional security formation under the name of the Arab-Hebrew-NATO project is planned only because of security concerns of Saudi policymakers and is faced with structural and operational obstacles in their implementation.

 The radicalization of security in the Middle East

As noted, the Qatari exit from PGCC, disputes between the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia in the alliance against Yemen, and the lack of serious engagement by some Arab countries, such as Egypt and Morocco, in the Saudi military invasions in the region, are among obstacles on the way to the materialization of an Arab-Hebrew NATO plan.

In the meantime, if we consider the unlikely scenario that Trump’s plan will materialize, this could disrupt the balance of power in the region and cause security threats against Iranian interests. Obviously, behind the scenes of the Arab-Hebrew NATO plan, hidden hands of the Israeli regime can be seen, the main objective of which is to bring together the Arab countries and the Zionist regime in the region. This can also bring along tensions not only against Iran but also against Turkey and Russia, as the main actors in the region, especially in Syria and Iraq.

In case that the Arab-Hebrew-NATO plan materializes, it can be considered as a sign of radicalization of security in the Middle East region.