Regional Powers Must Uphold Their Historical Responsibility to Achieve Stability in the Middle East

The Middle East is witnessing profound transformations in the nature of bilateral relationships between its countries and in the structure of multilateral alliances. This shift began notably with one of the region’s most significant reconciliations in decades—if not centuries—when Saudi Arabia and Iran resumed their relationship in March 2023 under Chinese sponsorship. This event has reverberated across various Arab-Iranian bilateral relationships, particularly with Egypt. It has also established new foundations for the nature of relations among the key and central states in the region.

After decades of conflict and negative rivalries that governed their interactions, these countries are now revisiting their positions, prioritizing their national interests, and recognizing the region’s need for a new phase of stability focused on comprehensive development and the neutralization of conflict factors and disputes. This has opened the door wide for everyone to propose and elaborate on new initiatives, provided they advance this shared interest.

Nevertheless, resolving conflicts in the Middle East or managing is a very complex issue due to political, economic and social factors. However, one of the main factors that often overlooked by the literature is the unique nature of the regional subsystem in the Middle East compared to any other region in the world. Especially in the nature of the relations between the central countries and those who share mutual history and one destiny. These countries tend to manage its relationships with one another based on principles of competition and mistrust, which fuels the existing conflicts and complicates their resolution. This dynamic prevents the region from transitioning from individual actions to collective efforts, which is essential for fostering development and prosperity.

This significant becomes clear when examining the history of the European continent, where the history of peace and war has been linked to the nature of the relationships between its major states, particularly Britain, France and Germany. When these countries of some of them were competing for dominance and political and religious power, the continent witnessed a series of conflicts, battles, and divisions: The Hundred Years’ War between England and France, 1337–1453; the multitude of Anglo-French Wars between England and France, from approximately 1109-1815; the Franco-Prussian War, 1870-1871; and the two World Wars, 1914-1918 and 1939-1945, which were both primarily centered in Europe.

However, the situation changed dramatically when European countries, despite their historical roots of hatred and conflict, felt a historical responsibility to save Europe and chose unity and integration over self-destructive nationalism. They came to understand the futility and ineffectiveness of wars and conflicts. Similarly, the Middle East will remain a battleground for its states and major powers unless regional powers—specifically Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, and Iran—decide to work towards its salvation. One of the best options available to these countries for changing the situation and confronting dominant powers is to explore the idea of an alliance.

This article will present this initiative as a concept worth considering, with the understanding that proposing such an initiative in the current context represents out-of-the-box thinking. The idea will face skepticism and criticism from various states, groups, intellectuals, and academics, as well as from those who benefit from the ongoing conflict and the dynamics of war, including Western powers and hegemonic entities that use all possible means to keep the Middle East as a domain of their influence and manage its conflicts.

The Middle East: A Major Arena for Great Powers

This initiative presents itself as a corrective idea for the historical colonial path that ruled the region without taking into consideration the interests of its people and countries. Since the dawn of history, the tribes, entities and countries relayed on the principle of geographic expansion at the expense of other neighboring entities, aiming achieve dominance and control, as well as to improve and develop their economic situation to gain further influence and expansion.

However, the most important factor behind any expansion has always view conquest as a deterrent to other powers, preventing them from doing the same. Perhaps we can say that these conquests are originally preventive wars waged by entities against those who has the power and the economic factors to compete with or control them. In other words, to prevent others from acquiring power and economic strength so that they do not become potential enemies in the future.

The Middle East has always been a target for the expansion of the empires and a major arena for the confrontation of the great powers due to its strategic location overlooking the Arabian Gulf, the Arabian Sea, the Red Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea. It also includes the most important international straits such as Strait of Hormuz, the only sea passage from the Arabian Gulf to the open ocean; the Bab el-Mandeb Strait that connects the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden and by extension the Indian Ocean; and the Suez Canal that connects the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea, making it the shortest maritime route to Asia from Europe. The region acts as a bridge connecting different counties and continents, gaining global economic significance with its estimated control of 66% of the world’s total oil reserves.

A dynamic and geographically shifting concept, the Middle East today refers to the region encompassing the Arab world, including countries in the Arabian Peninsula and the Fertile Crescent, extending from Iraq in the east to the Levant in the west, and including the Nile Valley and North Africa, as well as three non-Arab countries: Turkey, Iran, and Cyprus.

After the dawn of Islam in the Arabian Peninsula, a new dimension was added to the conflict, especially as it spread to the rest of the Middle East, where a majority of the people converted to Islam before it expanded as far as Vienna and extended in all directions, including the establishment of the Islamic Caliphate in the Andalusia region of southern Spain. This expansion was accompanied by a flourishing scientific and cultural movement that Muslims contributed to the Western world.

The Christian West perceived this as an existential threat to Western Christian civilization, leading it to launch the Crusades to crush the Islamic Caliphate in Europe. Following the Crusades, there was a counterattack, this time launched within the heartland of Islam in the Middle East.

Since the early 19th century, the influence and interventions of major Western powers began to alter the course of events in the Middle East. These interventions can be seen as a preventive war against the return of Islam to Europe and to contain it within the boundaries of the Middle East. The goal was to redraw the map of the region in a way that would serve Western ambitions to control its resources and potentials, ensuring that the region would not have the opportunity to advance and develop. Consequently, this would prevent the Middle Eastern countries from competing with Western powers for global leadership.

To achieve this, the major European powers focused on three regional powers: the Ottoman Empire, the Persian Empire, and Egypt. They played these states against one another, supporting some against the others. For example, they backed the Ottoman Empire against Egypt, not out of support for the Ottomans, but to prevent the Egyptians from extending into the Levant. After successfully achieving this, they then turned on the Ottomans and dismantled the empire, returning the Turks to their previous borders.

Similarly, Britain allied with Russia to expel Persian influence from the Caucasus, a mountainous isthmus of land sandwiched between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, and restored it to the borders of modern-day Iran. In 1840, Egypt was prevented from establishing a connection between Arab Asia and Arab Africa when the army of its de facto ruler, Ottoman Albanian Governor Muhammad Ali Pasha, was forced under the Treaty of London to withdraw from the Levant, a region in the Eastern Mediterranean that includes parts of modern-day Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine.

These colonial actions contributed to the establishment of Israel in Palestine and the mandate system over most of the region. Following the collapse of the European empires and the rise of U.S. dominance, America continued the same European policies of keeping the region perpetually volatile by managing the Arab-Israeli conflict without resolving it or allowing its resolution.

Introductions of the Alliance

Historically, Turkey, Egypt, and Iran have been strategic powers in the Middle East. However, since the advent of Islam and the unification of Saudi Arabia, the kingdom has gained regional and international respect, enhancing its regional presence to fill the vacuum left by the decline of Arab states such as Syria and Iraq. This positions Saudi Arabia as a key player in any power alliance in the region. Nevertheless, this initiative faces complex and intertwined challenges. The four regional powers today are struggling with their relationships as well as with the international forces dominating the region, particularly Iran, which is both internationally isolated and not trusted by its neighboring states.

Turkey, though allied with the West through its NATO membership, is cautious of Western actions and policies to the extent that it coordinates with Russia, NATO’s staunch adversary. Meanwhile, Egypt, despite its peace treaty with Israel, is subjected to Western efforts to prevent it from regaining its central role in the region, partly to protect Israel, which the West treats as the third regional power alongside Turkey and Iran. And Saudi Arabia, which has established itself as a regional power, is now reordering its approach and balancing its relationships with the major powers to maintain equal distance from all.

The bilateral relations between these four countries are not always harmonious, and there are differences and conflicting interests among them. A fundamental factor behind these disputes is the influence of international relations, interests, and power in the region that consistently seeks to exacerbate conflicts between these states. This influence has led to sectarian differences and varying levels of respect for free speech and human rights, sometimes resulting in citizens being deprived of their basic rights in their own countries under the pretext of ethnicity or sect.

Consequently, this can undermine a citizen’s loyalty to their homeland in favor of a country aligned with their sect, thereby creating opportunities for one country to intervene in the affairs of another under the guise of protecting followers of that sect. Similarly, ethnic groups may feel marginalized and oppressed, leading them to seek separation from their homeland.

This raises many questions: How severe are the differences between these countries? Is there a possibility for these four regional powers to overcome their disagreements? And do these countries have an interest in forming internal alliances to weaken the impact of external interventions?

I know that solidifying relations between Turkey, Egypt, Iran, and Saudi Arabia is a difficult and complex process, but I do not think it is impossible despite the opposition of Western powers to the formation of a strong entity in the Middle East that might threaten their influence and vision of the region remaining a hotspot of conflict and divergence.

However, the sense of regional stature and responsibility felt by each of these four countries has inevitably created a degree of distance between them and the major powers, particularly the United States, which tends to classify countries as either allies or adversaries. It is evident that this distance is beginning to shift in response to the interests of these regional powers and their anticipated roles in the emerging global order, which is starting to take shape in the aftermath of the Ukraine war.

This new world order is expected to be multipolar, which might compel European Western countries, especially the major ones, to reconsider their strategic positioning as either an emerging independent major power or remaining aligned with the United States through NATO.

It is now possible to observe numerous commonalities among these four regional powers that will help pave the way for a candid dialogue that gradually narrows the gaps between them. This could lead to a stage that allows the establishment of a joint initiative or alliance aimed at reducing external interventions in the region. Such a coalition would undoubtedly contribute to resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which has been managed internationally for more than a century, and it would open the door to achieving security and stability in the Middle East while expanding developmental, educational, and economic projects.

Recent developments in positive relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, between Egypt and Turkey, and between Saudi Arabia and both Egypt and Turkey reflect the inherent desire of these four powers to coordinate and collaborate. This is fundamentally what prompts us to propose such an initiative.

What is needed and essential is means to pave the way for enhancing and deepening this cooperation. It cannot be achieved suddenly or quickly. It requires ample time to present the idea through a series of periodic seminars that bring together a group of thinkers, intellectuals, and historians from the Middle East. The goal would be to critique, refine, and strengthen the idea of regional unity with recommendations that would increase its chances of success and acceptance by political institutions. This would lay the groundwork for a meaningful and purposeful dialogue to realize this initiative, potentially leading to the establishment of a High Commission for the Middle East (HCME) modeled after the European Commission.

Below are the principles, concepts, and foundations that must be researched, addressed, and universally applied within the four countries to serve as the basis for creating similar systems that reduce disparities, help establish clear and transparent relations in the development and advancement of the region, and provide security, stability, and progress for its people.

First, the alliance between the four countries should include explicit principles stating that the open and unlimited cooperation between them will not be used to interfere in the internal affairs of the member states. It should respect the sovereignty of each country over all its citizens, particularly ethnic, religious, and sectarian minorities. This is complemented by the countries’ commitment to equality among all their citizens in rights and duties, regardless of their ethnic, religious, or sectarian affiliations. This should significantly address the root causes of sectarian conflicts at both the state and individual levels since it guarantees individuals their rights to practice their religious rituals and integrate into their societies and nations without interference or intrusion from external parties.

Second, monitoring the economic situation in each country in the region and providing collective assistance to ensure:

1- The safety of infrastructure that provides essential services of equal quality to everyone.

2- Helping less developed countries to enhance their capabilities by involving them in developmental, industrial, and agricultural projects in a complementary manner, as well as supporting them in developing their technological capabilities.

3- Ensuring the elevation of individual living standards, which opens the way to protect the middle class in each country in the region.

Third, establishing a unified and agreed-upon strategy through which the four regional powers regain the control over the Middle East, adopting a unified regional stance to deal with international concerns while considering the interests of the region’s people. This involves leveraging the region’s energies, resources, and wealth to achieve a better future for the coming generations.

Fourth, agreeing that the Christian component in the Middle East is a fundamental part of the region’s demographic composition. Christians should have their full right that other citizens enjoy, and effort should be made to stop the Christian emigration from the region. 

Fifth, developing scientific, educational and awareness plans to rebuild the individual, addressing the issues that have plagued people in the Third World and have been a major factor in colonial Western interference in our societies. This interference, which serves external objectives and agendas, has corrupted our peace, divided our peoples, recruited unrest, and incited violence that has led to the common and corrosive practice of conspiracy, conflict, betrayal, and injustice among us.

Sixth, studying the best ways for other countries in the region to join the HCME initiative in support of the aforementioned foundational principles and agreed-upon content. The process of accession should be governed by regulations, laws, and systems that take into account the region’s conditions and cultural and religious heritage. Lessons can be drawn from the European Union’s accession criteria to achieve balanced development across cultural, economic, and other areas.

Seventh, believing that it is possible to agree on the establishment of a High Commission for the Middle East as an international political body representing the entire region.

What If the HCME Initiative Comes True?

As the international stage is being prepared for a new multipolar world system, the HCME initiative aims to secure a place and presence for Middle East countries within that system and subsequently for the Arab and Islamic civilization. This need is both urgent and necessary, and it deserves a chance to be considered and developed. It would enable the Middle East and other Arab regions to become a global power based on Islamic civilization, free from extremism in all its forms. The region, with its resources, energies, and unity, has the potential to become an international powerhouse, reducing the impact of external factors on its destiny and engaging with major powers as equals.

This initiative deserves a chance to draw from history and past experiences, with the hope that the leaders and decision-makers of these countries will support, as did their far-sighted predecessors, the principle of unifying, advancing, and developing the region. This would end the Western exploitation of its resources and wealth, allowing the region to govern itself based on the interest of its own people, free from the dictates of the Western countries that aim to advance their own interests at the expense of other nations.

Israel’s Exclusion From the HCME Alliance

Despite being a regional power and being treated accordingly by the international community, the idea of the initiative and the timing of its proposal are fundamentally linked to addressing the situation resulting from Israeli policies that reject peace. These policies play a significant role in the continuation of instability and security tensions in the region, as Israel remains an occupying power in Arab and Palestinian territories, practicing apartheid against its Palestinian citizens as well as against Palestinians whose lands were occupied in 1967. Additionally, to undermine the two-state solution and extinguish any glimmer of hope for achieving peace in the region, Israel continues to forcibly take Palestinian land and illegally expand settlement construction in the West Bank and Jerusalem.

Conversely, the initiative keeps the option open for Israel if it chooses to integrate into the region and become a true partner in a just, comprehensive, and final peace. Achieving this will require Israel to obey international laws and implement international legitimacy resolutions, foremost of which is ending the occupation and enabling the Palestinian people to exercise their inalienable rights, including their right to self-determination and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state on all its territories Israel has occupied since 1967. This is considered the minimum required for Israel to implement, as recognized by international legitimacy and stated in UN resolutions.

These demands are also conditions set by each of the four regional powers: Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, and Iran. These countries are keenly aware that the Middle East will not become a major power on the international stage nor will it be stable and secure as long as Israel remains defiant against international law and ignores the essential rights of the people in the region.

Finally, nations and civilizations have always risen through ideas, creativity, and development, forging their paths through science, knowledge, and culture. As outlined above, the beginning of the process to shape this initiative involves commissioning a group of research centers to organize brainstorming sessions with historians, researchers, intellectuals, and thinkers from the region, particularly from the four key countries, as well as others. The goal is to explore the relationships between these four countries, identify existing goals and points of agreement, and propose suggestions for their development, while also diagnosing the tensions between each country and the others, investigating their causes, and finding ways to alleviate or resolve these tensions.

Additionally, the research should delve into the opportunities to develop the High Commission of the Middle East initiative. If external obstacles are known, what are the potential internal barriers? What are the means to neutralize these obstacles? In light of the results of this research and studies, the planning process would begin to organize a series of conferences to explore and study the importance of an alliance of regional powers to launch a unified and independent Middle East as one of the poles of the great powers club.