Written by Nasser Kandil,
Until the year 1970, the era of Gamal Abdul Nasser has enabled the conducting of the Middle East with a regional system that based on Moscow and Washington’s management of the contradictions and the understandings of two opposite allies. One is led by Abdul Nasser and the other is led by Tel Aviv, Riyadh, Ankara, and Tehran at the days of Shah. But with the departure of Abdul Nasser Moscow got out practically from the region despite the presence of the strength of the Soviet Union and its distinctive relationship with each of Baghdad and Damascus, so that paved the way for the emergence of a regional system in the Middle East led by Washington and dominated by the Saudi-Israeli bilateral, where the official opposition is in Syria and the force that is beyond the system is represented by Iran, while Ankara and Egypt took aside. This system has succeeded in remaining till the year 2000, but the collapse of the Soviet Union did not prolong its duration, in the year 2000 the liberation of the Southern of Lebanon formed a geostrategic shift in the Middle East where the status of the Israeli force fell dramatically, so as a result the region entered in two decades of chaos, during them Washington did what it could to restore this system which based on the Saudi-Israeli bilateral, the wars, the chaos, and the disorder prevailed in a hope of the emergence of a new system that restores the stability according to the rules that secure the US vital interests in this most sensitive and most important region in the world.
After the war in Afghanistan, the war on Iraq, the war of July 2006 on Lebanon and its resistance, and the wars of Gaza Russia emerged as a new aspiring force with the arrival of the President Vladimir Putin in the year 2000, Iran started to recover from the consequences of the wars and the sanctions and be present as a regional force. Syria rose as a sponsor of the resistance with the decline of the peace agreements with Israel which Camp David formed its first outcomes. While Turkey along with Recep Erdogan and his party has raised since the year 2000 through an Islamist project that belongs to NATO and based on the Organization of the Muslim Brotherhood, it anticipates to play an imperial role by employing this organization in meeting the US need to reproduce new regional system for its favor, which Ankara anticipates to lead it and to secure the interests of its parties either those who are in the bank of Washington or Moscow and Tehran with which it kept good relationships.
The last ten years formed a test that ended with a great failure of the Arab Spring along with the new Ottoman system; the steadfastness of Syria was the millstone in changing the directions. As a result, it seemed clear that despite the scream and the noise there is no longer what can be employed to change the balances. The signs of the disintegration in Washington alliance were shown through the emergence of Turkey from one bank to another through taking the responsibility of the full partner in Astana system which is run by Russia and sponsored by Turkey and Iran. The conflict has turned to the Gulf through the open Saudi-Qatari confrontation. Washington seemed unable to have a valid way to cooperate with Tehran and to have a clear formula to absorb and to restore the relationship with Turkey, so it condemned itself with failure in leading any new regional system which must inherit the wars which reached to their final stages.
Moscow succeeded in having control on the Turkish-Iranian relationship, it fixed the language of interests in it strongly, it succeeded through this language of interest to grant Turkey a national security issue entitled the prevention of the emergence of Kurdish entity on its borders, while it granted Iran an issue of recognition of it as a crucial player in the Middle East, and in keeping the stability in it, as well as in solving its unsolved issues. Therefore, the understanding on its nuclear program has formed the first fruits of this equation. Moscow put its rules to deal with the other crucial players in the Middle East map, it made the issue of security after the recovery of Syria and the growing force of Hezbollah and Iran the first concern of Israel which no one has the ability to dispel it comparing with Russia which has the ability to discuss its requirements and to control its issues, even by applying harsh conditions on Israel, while Washington does not have but to provide money, weapons, and reassurances that do not affect the major considerations of the wars. Russia headed toward Egypt while it has the actual support for it to resolve the situation in Libya despite it is being in confrontation with Turkey which Moscow is keen on a relationship with it, while Washington is standing on the NATO bank which supports the government of Firas Al-Sarraj which is supported by Turkey and which is fought by Egypt, it supports the army led by Khalifa Hafter. Saudi Arabia was the only party in the equation which Moscow tries to attract it toward the engagement.
Apparently it seemed that Riyadh summits and its transactions with the US President Donald Trump will alienate Riyadh away from Moscow, in fact it seemed that what Trump has to present to Saudi Arabia is just the words, the coverage of profits from inside the Royal family as inaugurating the Crown Crown Prince or opening fire against Qatar, while the cost of this relationship on Saudi Arabia in the light of the aggravated economy, deficit in budgets and reserved reserves makes the financial concern the first Saudi interest especially in the stability of the oil market where Riyadh and Moscow are the largest producers of oil in the world, so without the understanding with Moscow the oil price will not improve and thus the incomes of Riyadh.
During these few days Moscow was ensuring Astana system with an Iranian-Turkish partnership, it makes an understanding with France the most important European country in the Middle East, it tries to have major understandings with Egypt and Saudi Arabia, having the concerns of both of them and the solution, moreover, it has a similar key to the Israeli concerns as it has to Turkey under the title that more manipulation with the Syrian geography through employing Al Nusra front and others will legitimize the opposite positioning in this geography. As the Kurds according to Turkey, this will make this geography a source of more concern through the approach of Hezbollah to the Southern borders of Syria, so the investment on forming the central Syrian country whatever are the disagreements is the guarantee of the stability needed by everyone.
Before a month of the summit of the two Presidents Putin and Trump Russia is arranging its issues for a project of new regional system for a new Middle East, while Washington is bearing the burdens of its feared allies and its threatened interests, so charging Russia to manage the stability is the closest way to keep the interests and to reassure the allies.
Translated by Lina Shehadeh,