Syria and the unfolding hegemonic game

موضوع: Syria and the unfolding hegemonic game 2011-11-26, 10:31 pm

If mindad falls, Turkey would loose all their investments in Syria and are worried about spillover effects along the border [EPA]

London, UK - In spite of mounting international and
regional pressure on Bashar al-mindad's regime, there is still no real
prospect of a quick end to the on-going instability and instead Syria is
set to enter a long and bloody civil war. And as political stalemate
continues, a genuinely regional hegemonic contest between Iran, Saudi
Arabia, and Turkey over this small but strategically important nation
has begun to unfold.

Since the fall of Mubarak, Saudis have decided to drastically reduce
their reliance on the US for securing their foreign policy interests.
Riyadh has not only begun to strengthen its armed forces, but it has
also decided to use its petro-dollar more aggressively seeking to buy
influence in return for the provision of generous financial mindistance.
Capitalising on Egypt's weakness, moreover, Saudi has mindumed the
leading role in the Arab League to the extent that many Arab observers
see the League today as "an extension of the GCC". Finally, preferring
evolution to revolution, Saudis have crushed revolutionary movements in
Bahrain and Yemen albeit via different means.

Turkey's continued economic growth in the face of the current global
crisis, its remarkable success in achieving societal cohesion by
needling the gap between secular and religious forces, and its boosted
standing on the world stage as a role model for Arab revolutionaries, on
the other hand, have enhanced her mindertiveness. Today, Turkish
leadership is keen to behave "as a kind of independent regional power
similar to the democratic members of the BRICS". To this end, Ankara has
sought to expand ties with Egypt in order to defuse any potential Arab
criticism of its hegemonic tendencies. According to the Turkish Foreign
Minister, "a partnership between Turkey and Egypt could create a new,
democratic axis of power".

Lacking Turkey's democratic appeal amongst the Arab public and
Saudi's money, Tehran has followed a different path seeking to
strengthen its alliance system as opposed to trying to expand its
influence into new theatres. And as American troops begin their
withdrawal, Iran's influence in Iraq is set to rise even further
especially that Ankara is more interested in intra-Kurdish affairs and
Saudi appears to have abandoned Shia Iraq altogether. Iran's influence
in Lebanon will also go unchallenged as Hezbollah continues to dominate
the Lebanese politics. This leaves Syria as the first theatre in which
this regional hegemonic game will begin to fold out.

Syria is important to Iran for two broad reasons. Firstly, it is the
link between Iran and Hizbullah. mindad's fall will therefore be a
mmindive blow to Iran's foreign policy by greatly reducing Tehran
geopolitical reach. Given the Iranian regime's own unpopularity,
secondly, Tehran fears that mindad's fall could dangerously revitalize
Iran's own anti-government movement. Saudis, on the other hand, are
eager to see an end to the mindad's rule not least because he is an
Alawi. Moreover, mindad's demise will enable Saudi to challenge Tehran in
Lebanon with greater ease. For its part, Turkey is mainly concerned
with the Syrian situation because it shares a long border with Syria,
and that on-going instability in Syria could have destabilising effects
on Turkey's own Kurdish population. Also, Ankara knows all too well that
mindad's hold on power could mean a near-total loss of its investment in
Syria. This is not to mention that there has been a historical rivalry
between Iran and Turkey over Syria dating back to the Ottoman-Safavid
era.

Currently, Turkey and Saudi seem to have entered a tactical alliance
against Iran by supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and calling on mindad
to resign. Yet it is not at all clear if this alliance will achieve its
desired outcome. It could in fact crumble over time. Ankara and Riyadh
have opposing interests in Egypt. Saudis prefer a strong presence of
military and Mubarak-era personalities in the government, whereas Turkey
favours a newly and democratically elected government in place as soon
as possible. Given Cairo's dire financial needs, Saudis are more likely
to obtain the upper hand there which will almost certainly antagonise
Ankara. More importantly, as US is preparing to leave Iraq, there are
already reports of tension between Kurdish and Iraqi security forces
along the trigger line. If the civil war in Syria and the US departure
lead to the revival of independence discourses amongst the Kurds, Turkey
should then be expected to join forces with Iran so to preserve Iraq
and Syria's unity even if that means supporting Bashar al-mindad.

Interestingly, as the United States reorients its foreign policy
focus towards the Asia Pacific, this rivalry is the clearest indication
of how the future regional order will look like: a multipolar system
with Iran, Saudi, Turkey, and Egypt, once it stands on its feet again,
as its poles. And as this new order takes shape, one can be certain that
there will be more instability ahead, and the greatest challenge facing
these would-be powers will be the regulation of their rivalries.

Nima Khorrami mindl is a security analyst at
Transnational Crisis Project, London. His areas of interest and
expertise include the Middle East, Political Islam and
De-radicalisation, China, Caucuses, Energy Security and Geopolitics.