War of words between Saudi and Iran is exacerbating regional crises

The rising tension between Saudi Arabia and Iran is a major cause of the problems plaguing the Middle East, argued Abdel Bari Atwan, the editor of the London-based news website Rai Al Youm.

The two countries are fighting proxy wars in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon and Palestine, and people of the region are paying the price in their blood, wealth, territorial integrity and stability, the writer contended.

The Iranian-Saudi conflict is not new. It dates back to 1979 when the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was overthrown.

It was later exacerbated when Tehran revealed its nuclear ambitions and it reached its climax in the continuing crisis in Syria and the Saudis’ loss of control of Iraq to Iran.

The Saudi leadership wants the Assad regime to fall by any means. To this end, it is using all its material resources and its regional and international alliances. On the other hand, the Iranian leadership is striving to foil such attempts and has so far succeeded by helping the Assad regime survive.

The Saudi-Iranian confrontation, the writer said, is taking its toll on the region, fuelling civil and sectarian wars and turning many countries into failed states. It is difficult for Riyadh to win in Syria and it is almost impossible for Iran to win in Yemen. And to say that ISIL was a by-product of the Riyadh-Tehran conflict would not be an overstatement.

According to the writer, dialogue is the only way out of this lethal whirlpool. Tehran and Riyadh have to bring all their disputes to the table and seek to reach an agreement to end the bloody conflict ravaging the region before it is too late.

Writing for the Jordanian daily Addustoor, Oraib Al Rantawi noted that the intensifying trade of accusations between the two countries not only augurs ill for bilateral ties, it could also intensify the crises across the region.

The writer observed that the expressions used by these regional foes in the latest war of words were probably unprecedented. Iran’s sway over these countries has been described by a senior Saudi official as “occupation”, while Iran levelled a similar set of accusations against Saudi Arabia.

Before this crisis, many analysts had expected a thaw in relations between them in the light of a few positive signs.

Those include a foreign minister-level meeting in New York in September, the ties between the former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and the Saudi palace, and the election of the moderate politician Hassan Rouhani as president.

However, such predictions turned out to be too optimistic as the developments playing out in the region are widening the rift between the rivals. The Houthi rebels’ takeover of nine governorates in Yemen’s north and a strategic seaport in the city of Hudeidah must have played a pivotal role in escalating the war of words. For years Yemen was part of Riyadh’s sphere of influence. But now Iran through its Houthi allies in the north is turning the table, with separation of Yemen to pro-Saudi south and pro-Iran north looming large.

The recent Saudi-Iranian escalation could also have been sparked by reports of an imminent US-Iranian rapprochement and the prospects of an agreement between the P5+1 – the UN Security Council permanent members plus Germany – and Iran over the latter’s nuclear programme, as well as Riyadh’s concerns that the American-led war on ISIL could result in a vacuum Iran and its allies might fill.

The editorial of the London-based Al Quds Al Arabi asserted that the recent tension between Riyadh and Tehran, which threatens to take their bilateral ties back to square one, cannot be understood in isolation from what is unfolding in the region.

It noted that Saudi Arabia’s recent diatribe against Iran came amid strained relations between Iran and the US over the situation in Iraq and the nuclear talks.

Iran has clearly mobilised its allies in Iraq against any possible American intervention there. It also rejected demands to reduce the number of its uranium enrichment centrifuges. Moreover, the editorial went on, the US-led coalition against ISIL came to a conviction that air strikes alone will not destroy the group.

But Iran is a main obstacle to a ground involvement in both Syria and Iraq, where it has greater power on the ground. As things stand, without some sort of agreement with Iran, the coalition does not seem to stand a chance.

Translated by Abdelhafed Ezzouitni

aezzouitni@thenational.ae