There is a famous quote among Arab scholars. It is said that when the Umayyad Dynasty fell, they asked Abbasid Caliphate Abu Ja’far Al Mansur about the reasons for its demise, and this wise man cried out, “We handed over the small matters to adults and the big matters to the children, so we divided them between excess and negligence. Rather, he added with regret: We brought the enemy closer, hoping to gain his affection, and pushed the friend away, guaranteeing his loyalty. So, we suffered the treachery of the first and lost the loyalty of the second.”

However, many factors contributed to the fall of the Umayyad Dynasty. Its weakening started with the defeat of the Syrian army by the Byzantine emperor Leo III in 717 CE. Many other contributory factors, like the division among the rulers, intertribal feuds, economic factors, and the high rise of prices, besides the plague inflicted on the state, led to migration and the disintegration of the dynasty. The Abbasid dynasty defeated the Umayyad dynasty with the help of non-Arab Muslims and lasted from 750–1217 until the Ottomans took over.[1]

Nothing has changed from then to date, and the saga of Arab suffering continues. What is it like today compared to yesterday?

The transformation of the Arab nation from a sense of unity and solidarity to a fragmented collection of states is a significant aspect of modern Middle Eastern history. The concept of an “Arab nation” historically evoked a sense of shared identity, culture, and heritage among the region’s peoples. The centuries-long Ottoman rule over the Arab world is depicted as a period of stagnation and suppression of intellectual and scientific progress. The Ottoman Empire’s policies restricted the role of intellectuals, scientists, and progressive leaders, denying them opportunities for advancement and contribution to society.

The colonial legacy and the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916, named after the British and French diplomats who negotiated it, divided the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) into spheres of influence between the two colonial powers, disregarding local aspirations and identities. The content of the declaration seems no less distant or downright baffling. The prominent Jewish intellectual Arthur Koestler, repeating a frequent mantra, would call it “one of the most improbable political documents of all time,” in which “one nation solemnly promised to a second nation the country of a third.[2]

This betrayal of Arab leaders, who were promised independence in exchange for their support against the Ottomans, underscores the manipulative tactics of colonial powers in the region. This agreement, along with other colonial interventions in the region, laid the foundation for the modern nation-states in the Middle East, often drawing arbitrary borders that did not correspond to the ethnic or religious demographics of the region.[3]

The role of external powers, such as Britain, France, and later the United States, in shaping the political and economic landscape of the Middle East cannot be overstated. From colonial rule to interventionist policies, these powers have exerted significant influence over the region, often to further their strategic interests, leading to instability, conflict, and the suppression of indigenous movements for self-determination. The “birth of a ‘Jewish State’ in the heart of Palestine by Britain” alludes to the Balfour Declaration of 1917 in which the British government expressed support for the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. This declaration, coupled with subsequent British policies and the United Nations partition plan in 1947, led to the creation of the state of Israel in 1948, a development that has had profound consequences for the region, including ongoing conflict and displacement of Palestinian populations. The ongoing Israel war on Palestine is but a manifestation of the old policy, which will impact US and European Union influence in the region.

The transition from a unified Arab nation to a fragmented collection of states, shaped by colonial legacies and external interventions, remains a defining feature of modern Middle Eastern history, influencing regional dynamics and conflicts today. The struggle for control over the Arab world has been influenced by its rich natural resources, strategic geographical location, and historical significance as a crossroads between East and West. The Arab world is endowed with vast reserves of oil, natural gas, and other valuable resources. These resources have made the region a focal point for international competition and have attracted the interest of colonial powers seeking to exploit them for economic gain. Control over these resources has been critical to shaping the region’s geopolitical dynamics. The Arab world’s geographical location between Europe, Africa, and Asia has endowed it with strategic importance throughout history. Its position as a natural corridor between three continents has made it a crucial hub for trade, transportation, and military access. This has made the region a target for colonial powers seeking to control key trade routes and military chokepoints.

Colonial European powers, driven by economic interests and geopolitical ambitions, sought to maintain control over the Arab world by ensuring its fragmentation and division. By fostering internal divisions, supporting authoritarian regimes, and drawing arbitrary borders, colonial powers sought to keep the region weak and easily exploitable for their benefit. The United States, inheriting the legacy of colonial powers in the region, became a dominant player in the Arab world following World War II. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US emerged as the world’s sole superpower, further consolidating its influence over global affairs, including in the Middle East. American foreign policy in the region has often been driven by strategic and economic interests, mainly energy and Israel-centric, leading to interventions, support for friendly regimes, and efforts to maintain stability to ensure access to vital resources and ensure Israel’s dominance in the fragmented region. Israel’s expansionist policies, particularly regarding its treatment of the Palestinian-occupied territories, have long been a source of contention in the region. The Israeli government’s determination to achieve its objectives and its ongoing conflict with Palestinian groups exacerbate tensions and fuel instability, with potential repercussions for regional security and stability for years to come.

The future world order will likely be influenced by a combination of ongoing geopolitical trends and emerging challenges, particularly in West Asia.

The invasion of Iraq and subsequent events, such as the Arab Spring, have contributed to the destabilisation and fragmentation of modern Arab states. These events have led to internal conflicts, power struggles, and the breakdown of governance structures, creating fertile ground for extremist groups and regional tensions. The COVID-19 pandemic has further exacerbated existing crises in the Middle East, including economic stagnation, unemployment, and governance challenges. The pandemic has strained healthcare systems, disrupted supply chains, and exacerbated socio-economic inequalities, leading to social unrest and political instability in some countries. External regional players, including regional powers and global actors, have often intervened in the internal affairs of Middle Eastern countries to further their interests. This interference has fuelled internal conflicts, exacerbated divisions, and hindered regional stability and cooperation efforts. Additionally, competition for control over strategic resources, such as oil and gas reserves in the Mediterranean Sea, has intensified regional rivalries and conflicts.

Overall, the Middle East faces significant challenges and uncertainties in the years ahead, but opportunities also exist for positive change through dialogue, cooperation, and inclusive governance. The future world order will likely be shaped by how these challenges are addressed and how regional and global actors navigate the complex dynamics of the Middle East.

 

Regional Powers Influence

The West Asia and North Africa (WANA) region is characterised by the competing interests and ambitions of regional and global powers. The rise of Islamic parties in countries like Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt, often backed by Turkey and financial support from countries like Qatar and Saudi Arabia, reflects a broader trend of political Islam gaining ground in the region. The extent of external influence in shaping political outcomes in these countries is a subject of debate and concern, particularly regarding their potential destabilising effects.

Turkey’s pursuit of a Neo-Ottoman policy, coupled with its support for the Muslim Brotherhood, reflects Ankara’s aspirations to assert itself as a regional power and influence events in the wider Muslim world. This has led to tensions with other regional players and raised concerns about Turkey’s intentions and actions among Western allies. It was Turkey, the Pakistan of West Asia, that allowed its territories to be used by mercenaries from all over the world. It trained and armed them fully and sent them across Syria and Iraq. More than 1,37,000 mercenaries from more than 83 nationalities entered Syria and fought alongside ISIS and al Qaeda terrorist organisations. More than 6 million Syrians were forced to migrate outside Syria.

There are more than two million kids in refugee camps in neighbouring countries who never went to school and are subjected to exploitation. The Syrian refugees live in pathetic conditions and are denied basic needs to survive. While Syria is trying to liberate its territories from the USA-Turkey occupation and rebuild Syria to encourage refugees to return, the USA continues to impose harsh economic sanctions, making life hood more difficult for citizens.

Israel, on its part, continues its policy of weakening Syria, supporting the jihadists, and opening makeshift hospitals on the occupied Syrian Golan. At the same time, it pursued a policy of attacking Syria military installations, killing Syrian civilians, Lebanese fighters, and Iranian advisors till the last attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus that killed a prominent Iranian official in violation of the Geneva Convention.

Ever since the Iranian revolution in 1979, removing CIA agents, closing the Israel embassy in Tehran and opening a Palestinian embassy instead, Iran has been subjected to harsh economic and military sanctions by the US, and carrying out, along with Mossad Israel intelligence, covert operations targeting scientists and prominent figures.

Iran’s efforts to expand its sphere of influence in the region, particularly through its support for groups like Hamas in Palestine-occupied territories, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and various factions in Iraq and Syria, have contributed to the formation of what is often referred to as the Axis of Resistance. This axis represents a challenge to Western interests and alliances in the region and has prompted reactions from other regional and global powers.

The mysterious demise of the Iranian president and foreign minister in an American-made B212 chopper crash, along with senior officials, added more challenges to the already volatile situation in the region. The investigation team will find out whether the death was due to a technical fault in the chopper that carried the president and his team or whether it was an act of terror carried out by an adverse state that caused the tragic incident. The outcome of the investigation will determine the course of events in West Asia.

 

Global Power Competition

The evolving dynamics in the WANA region, including the growing influence of regional players and the involvement of external powers such as Russia and China, have implications for global power dynamics. The United States, in response to perceived challenges from Russia and China, may seek to rally its allies, including through NATO, to counterbalance these forces and maintain its influence in the region. The Russian influence in the region increased significantly in spite of the West pressure

The NATO countries made a new International Security Arrangement in June 2022. The new Strategic Concept describes the new security reality facing the Alliance, reaffirms NATO’s values, and spells out NATO’s key purpose of ensuring the Allies’ collective defense. Russia remains a threat to NATO members, and China’s growing influence politically, economically, and militarily is a matter of concern for future systemic challenges.[4]

China, seeking a wider role, succeeded where the US failed in the rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran and was able to strike a deal that eased the tension between the two leading Islamic states. Beijing kept a good relationship with the region’s stakeholders and avoided political intervention in any country’s internal affairs. The Belt Road Initiative (BRI) changed China’s doctrine. It started searching for a foot on the ground in countries that fell in the line of the route and trying to find fault lines of the West’s mischievous in the region without crossing the redlines set by the US, which considered itself the custodian of the gulf region. The recent China-Arab States Cooperation Forum held in Beijing on May 30, 2024, highlighted the importance of achieving security and stability, ending internal interference in the affairs of each nation, respecting the sovereignty of the state, stopping the Israel war on Gaza, and calling for a peaceful solution and a two-state solution to the conflict. All these political issues of mutual concern should cement the economic and trade bonds between the two nations.[5]

The tension between China and the US/Western world has reached a peak, fuelled by China’s growing competition, particularly in technology (5G), the arms market, infrastructure, and strategic connectivity projects.[6] The partial withdrawal of US forces from Iraq has implications for regional power dynamics and the balance of power vis-à-vis Israel and other actors in the Middle East. The potential strengthening of resistance forces against Israeli occupation is viewed as a threat to the strategic partnership between the US and Israel. In US perception, the threat of terrorism still looms large in Iraq as ISIS is still active and any US troops’ withdrawal will leave a vacuum that Iran could exploit. The US inflamed tensions after the killing of Qasem Soleimani and Muhandis Abbas, leader of the Popular Mobilization Forces, on January 3, 2020. The Iraqi government demanded the US remove its troops and refused to allow its territory to become a battleground between the US and Iran.

 

Syria: A Forgotten War

Syria holds a pivotal position in the Middle East due to its geographical location, history, and cultural diversity. Situated at the crossroads of Asia, Africa, and Europe, Syria serves as a bridge between the continents. Its location has made it a crucial centre for trade and cultural exchange throughout history. The country’s geography includes fertile plains, mountains, and access to important waterways like the Euphrates River, which have sustained civilisations for millennia.

Syria boasts a rich historical heritage dating back to ancient times. It is often referred to as the “cradle of civilisation” due to the numerous ancient cultures that flourished within its borders, including the Mesopotamians, Egyptians, Phoenicians, Assyrians, Greeks, and Romans. These civilisations have left behind a wealth of archaeological treasures, including the ruins of Palmyra, the ancient city of Aleppo, and the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus. Syria is home to a diverse array of ethnicities, religions, and languages. The majority of the population is Arab, but there are also significant Kurdish, Armenian, Assyrian, and Turkmen communities, among others. This diversity is reflected in Syria’s linguistic landscape, with Arabic being the official language and other languages like Kurdish, Armenian, and Aramaic also spoken by various communities. Syria is one of the few places where ancient languages like Aramaic are still spoken. Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus Christ, continues to be used in small villages such as Maaloula, Jabaadin, and Bakhaa, primarily by Christian communities. This linguistic heritage is a testament to Syria’s long and complex history. Syria was safe and peaceful by all means till US foreign intervention and policy of clean breaks implemented and started supporting and funding banned Muslim Brotherhood organisation secretly, and turning Syria into Afghanistan in the making.

The brutal war in Syria began in 2011. Syrians, inspired by the Arab Spring uprisings in other Arab countries, began peaceful demonstrations demanding a better life and greater political freedoms. They hoped this would lead to government reforms. However, the situation escalated when the West, along with regional allies like Turkey and some Arab states, intervened. They provided billions of dollars in support, training and arming various rebel groups, including some extremists. This intervention, intended to topple the Syrian government, contributed significantly to the violence.

The war has caused immense suffering for civilians. All sides have been responsible for atrocities, including the bombing of civilian targets, use of child soldiers, and destruction of public infrastructure. The UN has confirmed the use of chemical weapons by extremist groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda. However, the West has falsely accused the Syrian government of the same, aiming to demonise the government and topple the President. This complex situation has fuelled a humanitarian crisis, forcing millions of Syrians to flee the country and has raised fears of Syria’s fragmentation.[7]

The conflict in Syria has now become a focal point for various regional and international actors due to its strategic significance and complex web of alliances. The West and the US see the Syrian government led by President Bashar Al-Assad, as a key ally of Iran and Hezbollah, and therefore, they aim to weaken Iran’s influence by supporting opposition forces in Syria. Conversely, Russia perceives the fall of Syria as potentially empowering Turkey and increasing Islamic influence in the region, which could align with US and Western interests in containing Iran. As a result, both Russia and Iran came to support. Along with the Syrian army, the Lebanese Resistance Forces and the Iraqi popular fronts, have succeeded in neutralising ISIS and al Qaeda. However, the US occupied Northern Eastern part of Syria and created a separate enclave to create an autonomous Kurdish region led by separatist faction PKK which is designated by US itself as a terrorist outfit. The PKK shelters more than 55,000 ISIS cadets while looting Syrian oil and natural resources.

The concept of redrawing the map of the Middle East, as proposed by some US scholars and military experts, reflects efforts to reimagine regional boundaries and configurations in alignment with perceived strategic interests. This includes considerations such as ethnic and religious demographics, as well as geopolitical objectives. However, such proposals are highly contentious and raise significant ethical, political, and practical challenges.

 

India‘s Strategic Considerations

The spillover of Israel’s war on Gaza was felt at the Red Sea with regular attacks by Ansar Allah (Houthi) of Yemen, who threaten all ships to Israel till it stops its war on Palestinians. They started attacking by drones and missiles on military and commercial vessels, which led to the militarisation by the West of the Red Sea and to the launch of military operations by Western navies in a bid to protect the mercantile shipping transversing in the area. The US Navy deployed two aircraft-carrier task groups to the region. The US, along with the United Kingdom, Bahrain, Canada, France, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Seychelles, and Spain, launched Operation Prosperity Guardian (OPG) in response to the Houthi-led attacks on shipping in the Red Sea.[8]

With the geopolitical situation becoming increasingly complex and uncertain, India, driven by oil and food security and as a trusted ally in the gulf region, has been quick to grab the opportunity and secure its presence in the Gulf states by signing bilateral agreements with each one to protect its national interests. Moreover, India has strengthened its ties with the US and has become actively involved in Gulf security by signing several security deals, conducting joint military exercises, and free trade agreements. With the US becoming more focused on the Indo-Pacific Oceans, Asia could offer a solution. Under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, New Delhi has become more concerned about asserting its strategic supremacy in the region, competing with Beijing, and positioning itself as the natural power to establish security and ensure new partners in the Indian Ocean region. India has presented its credentials to neighbouring countries, increased the number of trips by its warships to regional countries, carried out military exercises, and provided military equipment and training. India has also engaged in joint surveillance and invested in ports to gain regional respect and influence.

 

Future Scenarios

The West Asia and North Africa States (WANA) region stands at a critical juncture, with competing interests and ambitions shaping its future trajectory. The actions of regional players, such as Turkey, Israel, and Iran, as well as the responses of global powers like the United States, will continue to influence events in the region and impact broader geopolitical dynamics. Possible scenarios include continued instability and conflict, attempts at regional reconciliation and cooperation, or the emergence of new power dynamics driven by changing geopolitical realities.

The future trajectory of West Asia will depend on how various internal and external factors interact in the coming years. Efforts to address root causes of instability, such as governance failures, socio-economic inequality, and regional rivalries, will be crucial in shaping the future of the region.

 

Author Bio: Dr. Waiel Awwad is a Senior International Independent Journalist & Political Analyst; Former President, FCC South Asia and a Distinguished Advisor (West Asia), Tillotoma Foundation.

 

References:

[1] The Abbasids maintained an unbroken line of caliphs for over three centuries, consolidating Islamic rule and cultivating great intellectual and cultural developments in the Middle East in the Golden Age of Islam. The Fatimid dynasty broke from the Abbasids in 909 and created separate line of caliphs in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, and Palestine until 1171 CE. Abbasid control eventually disintegrated, and the edges of the empire declared local autonomy. The political power of the Abbasids largely ended with the rise of the Buyids and the Seljuq Turks in 1258 CE. Though lacking in political power, the dynasty continued to claim authority in religious matters until after the Ottoman conquest of Egypt in 1517. (7.4: The Abbasid Empire – Humanities LibreTexts).

 

[2] https://worldaffairs.blog/2018/04/21/debunking-10-lies-about-syria-and-assad/

[3] https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/martinkramer/files/forgotten_truth_balfour_declaration.pdf

[4] https://www.nato.int/strategic-concept/

[5] https://www.britannica.com/event/Sykes-Picot-Agreement

[6] https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202406/01/WS665a545da31082fc043ca533.html

[7] https://mecouncil.org/publication/middle-east-and-the-future-of-international-politics-me-council/

[8] https://www.idsa.in/issuebrief/The-Indian-Navy-and-Maritime-Security-in-the-Red-Sea-SNAhmed-190224

West Asia, a term distinct from the more politically charged “Middle East,” encompasses several sub-regions. These include Anatolia, the Arabian Peninsula, Iran, Mesopotamia, the Armenian highlands, the Levant, Cyprus, the Sinai Peninsula, and the South Caucasus. The Isthmus of Suez in Egypt separates this region from Africa.

The term “West Asia” appears to have gained traction in contemporary geopolitical and economic discourse since at least the mid-1960s.^[1] As of 2008, the population of West Asia was estimated at 272 million, with projections reaching 370 million by 2030.^[2] The region is predominantly Arab, Persian, and Turkish, as reflected in the dominant languages: Arabic, Persian, and Turkish, each with roughly 70 million speakers. Smaller communities speaking Kurdish, Azerbaijani, Hebrew, Armenian, and Neo-Aramaic languages contribute to the region’s linguistic diversity.^[3]

While Islam is a unifying thread across much of West Asia, the region boasts a rich tapestry of religious traditions. Christians, Jews, Baha’is, and Zoroastrians all have a presence here. Even within Islam, there’s a spectrum of denominations, with Sunni and Shia being the most prominent. Furthermore, Islamic practices can vary significantly across cultures, even within these main branches. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is a critical player in West Asian regional politics. Established in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, in May 1971, it’s the second-largest intergovernmental organisation globally, after the United Nations, with 57 member states spanning four continents. As outlined in its charter, the OIC’s core mission is to represent the Muslim world, safeguard Muslim interests, and promote international peace, security, harmony, and interfaith dialogue. The organisation has emerged as a prominent voice for the Muslim world in global political discourse, offering its perspective on strategies relevant to Muslim-majority nations.

Geographically, West Asia stretches from the eastern Mediterranean, encompassing countries like Syria, Jordan, Iran, and Iraq, to the Arabian Peninsula, including Saudi Arabia. Due to the enormous number of ethnicities within this region, a comprehensive profile would be pretty extensive. Iraq’s population, for instance, is comprised of 76% Arabs, 19% Kurds, and a remaining 5% of Turkmens, Assyrians, Armenians, and smaller groups.

 

Sectarian strife

West Asia is a critical region in modern history, plagued by inter-state and intra-state conflicts that significantly impact global strategic landscapes. Two key factors contribute to the high degree of unpredictability in these conflicts. Firstly, the vast reserves of hydrocarbons have exposed the entire region to the political and strategic manoeuvring of Western nations, primarily led by the United States. More recently, China has entered the fray, playing the “pro-Muslim card” in its oil diplomacy, with a visible presence in Saudi Arabia and Iran, the world’s top two oil producers.

The 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, deeply rooted in the country’s Shia traditions, marked a turning point in contemporary regional politics, igniting sectarian consciousness. The revolution manifested the growing prominence of political Islam in West Asia, challenging the “secular” enticements of pan-Arabism and pan-Islamism that had dominated the 1960s. Iranian jurists framed the revolution as “Islamic,” not a purely sectarian claim. As Talmiz Ahmad writes, “Many Sunnis initially viewed it as a successful mobilisation of Islam against a Western-backed secular regime, while others saw it as promoting the interests of ‘the poor and the oppressed.'”^[4]

Drawing a parallel, Tunisian Islamist intellectual and political leader Rashid al-Ghannoushi linked the Khomeini revolution to the “global Islamic project” championed by prominent figures of political Islam like Abul Ala Mawdudi and Hassan al-Banna (founder of the Muslim Brotherhood). In their view, Islam provided a strong foundation for seeking freedom for their people from authoritarian and colonial control.^[5]

 

Salafis and al Qaeda

In Saudi Arabia, Salafis, followers of Ibn Taymiyya’s teachings (1263-1328), are increasingly represented by a younger generation of scholars. These scholars defer to established Salafi jurists but consider themselves more knowledgeable not only in religious matters but also in contemporary issues like history, politics, and world affairs. A significant Salafi faction advocates for violence to establish their ideal Islamic society. Their ideology traces back to the “global jihad” organised in 1980s Afghanistan by a coalition of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the United States.^[6]

To bolster this state-backed jihad, thousands of young Muslims flocked to Afghanistan’s battlefields. There, they received indoctrination in Salafi Islam alongside weapons and subversion training. The Soviet withdrawal and subsequent collapse were hailed by jihadists as a victory of Islamic monotheism over Western atheism, or more simply, Islam’s triumph over the West. The fall of an atheist power, in their view, confirmed the righteousness of their fight. Returning home, these Arab Salafis, influenced by the “Sahwa” ideology (meaning awakening or introspection), demanded reforms in 1994, envisioning a “conservative Islamic democracy.”^[7]

With the backing of the religious establishment (ulema), the Saudi regime cracked down on the Sahwa movement in 1994. This forced jihadists to emerge from the shadows of Sahwa al-Islamiyya. In August 1996, Osama bin Laden, a previous supporter of Sahwa, issued his “Declaration of Jihad against the Americans occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places.”^[8] This declaration served as the foundation for a new “global jihad” led by al-Qaeda. Bin Laden viewed the conservative religious scholars (ulema) as instruments of the Saudi state, used to suppress “genuine” scholars who were truly committed and willing to fight for their beliefs. Two years later, in February 1998, al-Qaeda further escalated tensions with their announcement that “killing Americans and their allies, civilians or military personnel, is an individual duty for every Muslim wherever possible.” Talmiz Ahmad concludes that this declaration served as a rallying cry for global jihad, culminating in the events of 9/11 and its subsequent spread across West Asia and North Africa.^[9]

 

Conflicts

West Asia occupies a critical position on the world stage, holding immense strategic, political, economic, and religious significance. Its energy resources and strategic location make it particularly important for the United States and emerging powers like India and China. The region boasts a rich history, having served as the cradle for numerous civilisations. However, for the past two centuries, it has become a battleground for the interests of major foreign powers. In present times, West Asia faces growing instability due to a multitude of conflicts. The ongoing tensions between Israel and Hamas, the hostility between Iran and Israel, the civil war in Yemen, and the presence of Iranian-backed militias in Lebanon all contribute to the region’s volatility.

 

The Sykes-Picot Agreement

After the downfall of the Ottomans, their former territory was divided among the victorious allied powers, chiefly Britain and France. The Sykes-Picot Agreement was a 1916 unofficial treaty between the United Kingdom and France, with assent from the Russian Empire and Italy, to define their mutually agreed spheres of influence and control in an eventual partition of the Ottoman Empire. The primary negotiations leading to the agreement occurred between 23 November 1915 and 3 January 1916, on which date the British and French diplomats Mark Sykes and François Georges-Picot initiated an agreed-upon memorandum.

The agreement effectively divided the Ottoman provinces outside the Arabian Peninsula into areas of British and French control and influence by the Sykes-Picot line. The agreement allocated to Britain the control of what is today southern Israel and Palestine, Jordan and southern Iraq, and an additional small area that included the ports of Haifa and Acre to allow access to the Mediterranean. The Arabs were not consulted abut the border change. Consequently, hostile tribes and factions were lumped together, a breeding ground for perpetual conflict.

 

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Historical Impasse

The Palestinian territory holds significant religious significance for Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, with Jerusalem serving as a holy city for all three. It enshrines some of their most sacred sites. In 1917, during World War I, the British government issued the Balfour Declaration. This declaration announced support for the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, then an Ottoman territory with a relatively small Jewish population. The declaration significantly boosted global Jewish support for Zionism and became a cornerstone of the British Mandate for Palestine, which later gave rise to Israel and the Palestinian territories.

The Balfour Declaration is widely considered a primary cause of the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a dispute that has tragically claimed tens of thousands of lives and displaced millions. The conflict’s intractability often stems from the British government’s perceived contradiction of its previous assurances to the Arabs of Palestine regarding their role in governing the new nation.^[10] Palestinians aspire to establish an independent state, ideally encompassing at least a portion of historical Palestine. However, achieving this goal remains elusive due to several factors such as Israeli defense of its borders and its control over the West Bank, the Egyptian-Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip and internal political divisions within Palestine.

 

The Syrian Imbroglio

Syria is home to diverse ethnic groups and religious denominations such as the Syrian Arabs, Turkmen, Kurds, Assyrians, Circassians, Armenians, Greeks and Mandaeans, with Arabs being the largest ethnic group. Syria’s religious groups include Sunnis, Alawis, Shiites, Christians, Jews, Mandaeans, Druze, Salafis, Ismailis and Yazidis. The largest religious group is Sunni Muslims. In 1963, there was a Ba’athist coup d’état after which the Ba’ath Party maintained its power. From 1963 to 2011, the country was in a state of emergency, which meant that citizens did not have constitutional protections.

Several political scientists, military experts, and journalists have stated that the Syrian Civil War is primarily rooted in a feud between Russia and the United States and their allies in the region over natural gas pipelines passing through Syria on their way to European markets.^[11] The ongoing conflict in Syria is widely described as a series of overlapping proxy wars between the regional and world powers, primarily between the United States and Russia as well as between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Iran, a Shia country, sees Assad, a Shia, as its closest ally in the Arab world. Russia has carried out airstrikes against the protestors and supports the Syrian government in the UN. Syria has Russia’s only Mediterranean naval base and an airbase, apart from other military interests. Foreign Shia militias are recruited by Iran from Yemen, Afghanistan, and Iraq to fight in Syria.  A coalition (SNC) of anti-government factions, based in Turkey, aims to set up a civil and democratic state in Syria. Several Gulf States have recognised the Coalition (SNC) as the legitimate government of Syria. The USA gives weapons, training, and military assistance to the rebels. Following the defeat of ISIS, the United States exited Syria. The Syrian government and rebel groups opposed ISIS and, after the latter was defeated, took over the territory that ISIS had previously controlled.

 

Iran-Israel feud

The downward spiral of Israel-Iran relations began with the 1979 Iranian revolution. Iran’s new Islamist regime viewed Israel as a Western colonial outpost and Zionism as a version of imperialism. Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982 led to Iranian support for the creation of Hezbollah in Lebanon. After the end of the Cold War, Israeli strategy shifted from engaging with states on its periphery to building on its 1979 peace agreement with Egypt. Towards that end, it chose to perpetuate Iran’s isolation, viewing opposition to Iran as promoting nascent Arab-Israeli cooperation. A significant concern of Israel is Iran’s nuclear programme, which it considers an existential threat. Periodic statements by Iranian leaders of decimating Israel reinforce such concerns.

Iran’s hostility to Israel also extends to the Arab states who are trying to befriend Israel. Consequently, Tehran has raised militant outfits and deployed them as its proxies against the Arab states: Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip, Shi’ite militias in Syria and Iraq, and the Houthis in Yemen. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force—a branch of the Iranian Armed Forces, manages these proxies. To support these proxies, Iran has made massive investments in raising vast stockpiles of rockets, missiles and drones. The use of proxies provides Iran deniability and shields it from accountability for its destabilising policies.^[12] In 2019, the US State Department designated the IRGC as a whole as a foreign terrorist organisation (FTO).

 

Hamas-Israel bellicosity

Hamas, an acronym for Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiya (Islamic Resistance Movement), is the largest and most capable militant group in the Palestinian territories. It emerged in 1987 during the first Palestinian uprising, or intifada, as an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestinian branch. The group is committed to armed resistance against Israel and the creation of an Islamic Palestinian state in Israel’s place. Hamas has been the de facto governing body in the Gaza Strip since 2007. It was designated as a terrorist organisation by the US State Department in October 1997.

In attacks on Israel as well as against ISIS and other Salafist armed group members based in Gaza, Hamas uses improvised explosive devices, short- and long-range rockets and mortars, small arms, and also man-portable air defence systems, antitank missiles, and unmanned aircraft. It also resorts to kidnapping, cyber espionage, and computer network exploitation operations. The October 7, 2023, attack by Hamas on Israeli civilians resulted in the deaths of 1,189 Israelis, with several Israelis also taken hostage, which led to the present Israel-Hamas war.^[13] Israel’s military retaliation has killed at least 36,096 people in Gaza, mostly civilians, according to the Hamas-run territory’s health ministry.^[14]  Despite efforts by the US towards that end, there appears to be no end to the conflict. West Asia thus remains mired in a cycle of violence, fuelling regional tensions and rivalries between regional entities. As the hub of international trade and transit, the region’s instability adversely impacts global trade.

 

India-West Asia relations

India has significant stakes in the region, including energy, trade, and the large India diaspora. West Asia accounts for 70% of India’s imported energy demand. It is the gateway to landlocked and energy-rich Central Asia. The proposed North-South International Corridor will pass through some West Asian countries, bringing prosperity to their peoples. Economic links between India and the GCC nations are strengthening and increasing mutual reliance. India’s third and fourth-largest commercial partners are the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. India has the world’s third biggest Muslim population, with Saudi Arabia as an important pilgrimage destination. Six West Asian nations (UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and Bahrain) account for over 70% of all Indians living abroad. Their remittances help stabilise the Indian economy.

India has invested in Iran’s Chabahar port, which will serve as a commerce bridge connecting India, Iran, Central Asia, and Afghanistan. India has strong defence and security relations with Israel, which benefits its security and military modernisation efforts. West Asia is an essential aspect of India’s Indo-Pacific maritime realm. Naval cooperation is already gaining traction, with Oman granting Indian naval warships berthing rights in the Gulf of Aden to combat piracy. And finally, close collaboration with West Asian states is significant for India to fight radicalism and growing terrorism.

 

Conclusion

West Asia is the most militarised region of the globe. Energy resources and religion are at the root of conflicts. Several peace formulae have been proposed over the years but have failed. For durable peace, the foremost condition is that all denominations must accept that everybody has a right to live and prosper. External forces must curtail their interference in bilateral or multilateral engagement in disputed areas. Iran must disband or withdraw its proxies from the entire region. Many world powers and the UN strongly recommend the formula of creating two states in Palestine.

For India, peace in the region is a vital concern. India has good relations with the Arab states and Israel and is thus in a position to play a positive role in any future peace initiative to bring about a lasting solution to the many conflicts plaguing the region.

 

Author Bio: Shri K N Pandita has a PhD in Iranian Studies from the University of Teheran. He is the former Director of the Centre of Central Asian Studies, Kashmir University.

 

References:

^[1] The Tobacco Industry of Western Asia, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service, 1964.

^[2] Data for “15 West Asian countries”, from Maddison (2003, 2007). Angus Maddison, 2003, The World Economy: Historical Statistics, Vol. 2, OECD, Paris, ISBN 92-64-10412-7.

^[3] Laing-Marshall, Andrea (2005). “Assyrians”. Encyclopedia of the World’s Minorities. Vol. 1. New York-London: Routledge. pp. 149–150. ISBN 978-1-135-19388-1

^[4] Turmoil in West Asia, IDSA Monograph Series No. 50 April 2016, p 8-9

^[5] Brigitte Marechal and Sami Zemni, The Dynamics of Sunni-Shia Relationships:

Doctrine, Transnationalism, Intellectuals and the Media, Hurst & Company, London, 2013, p. 228.

^[6] Turmoil in West Asia, loc, cit. p.25

^[7] Guido Steinberg, “Jihadi-Salafism and the Shias”, in Roel Meijer (ed.), Global

Salafism, Hurst & Company, London, p.117

^[8] Turmoil in West Asia, loc cit. P 25

^[9] Loc. cit p. 26

^[10] For a full description of Israeli oppression of Palestinian Arabs see ‘1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight’ on Wikipedia

^[11] https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/syrian-civil-war/

^[12] US States Department official website: https://www.state.gov/reports/country-reports-on-terrorism-2021/iran/

^[13] AFP – Agence France Presse May 28, 2024: https://www.barrons.com/articles/new-tally-puts-oct-7-attack-death-toll-in-israel-at-1-189-3e038de6

^[14] For a fuller description of the Israel-Hamas wars including the tragedy of 7 October 2023, see ‘Hamas attack October 7 a day of hell on earth in Israel’ by Samual Forey, Le Monde, October 30, 2023

Abstract

The world is in the throes of an intensifying contest between what seems to be a crumbling old order (USA-led West) and a rivalrous new Axis that is struggling to be born: China-Russia-Iran-North Korea (CRIK). This article seeks to analyse the nature of the emerging power play in terms of the following:

• Geo-Strategic Context
• CRIK as a Geopolitical Conglomerate
• The Wider Karma Bhoomi: BRICS & The Global South
• Pushback by the USA led West
• Prospects for the Future

At the Kremlin on 22nd of March 22, 2023 Forging A New Strategic Compact Xi Jinping: “There are changes happening, the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years. Let’s drive those changes together. Vladmir Putin: “I agree.”

 

Geo-Strategic Context

Award-winning journalist John Pilger recounts Chairman Mao’s fervent appeal to Washington in 1944: “China must industrialise; this can only be done by free enterprise. Chinese and American interests fit together economically and politically. America need not fear that we will not be cooperative. We cannot risk crossing America; we cannot risk any conflict.” He received no reply^[1].

Mao’s successors, a while later, decided to join the system and beat the USA at its own game—capitalism & innovation—and are now in bed with its bête noire Russia to challenge the American-led order. Russia and China sense opportunity, perhaps even smell blood, at the prospect of a visible decline in American power and are coming together in the hope of hastening the latter’s fall. We are, therefore, in a new kind of Cold War—one in which to quote Henry Kissinger, we are now closer to the mountain passes than the foothills^[2] (he said this in 2020). By 2021, in Dr. Kissinger’s view, the Cold War had moved “through the mountain pass,” and was now “on a precipice.”^[3] In this war, one protagonist is the USA-led West. In the antagonist camp, China has replaced the Soviet Union, and is partnering with its successor, Russia (the prickly past, notwithstanding), in a very consequential ‘friendship without limits.’ Iran and North Korea (the hop over of Iran is significant because not very long ago, when the JCPOA was being negotiated, Russia, USA, and China were on one side while Iran was on the other) have strengthened the sinews of this New Axis significantly. Three decades after the end of the first Cold War, the USA finds itself in a volatile rivalry with the two other nuclear powers—China and Russia, in a world far more complex and dangerous than it was a half-century ago^[4]. The evolving power play has created the precise construct that Kissinger had warned about—a Bear-Dragon tandem in such delightful synchrony, that the USA is now faced with a humongous challenge: that of the Russian storm and the Chinese climate change, all together and all at once.

The New Axis has not only performed well in the Ukrainian and West Asian theatres of war but is also looking towards the global south (125 countries, 80% of the global population, 40 % of global GDP) as its wider ‘Karam Bhoomi’ with a rapidly expanding BRICS (the five original members have become ten and as many as fifty-nine from Thailand to Nigeria and Turkey are waiting to join) as the chosen instrument of delivery.

The state of global dysfunctionality today is so severe that there is a real possibility of the world getting divided into two sets of rules, orders, economies, and the internet. This potential division could have far-reaching implications for global affairs.^[5]

What, then, is the nature of the New Axis? Is it merely a short-term convergence of interests, or are we witnessing the birth of a new, long-term geopolitical conglomerate? What are its objectives? What has it achieved thus far? What are the possible pointers and prospects for the future? These questions invite us to delve deeper into the complexities of this emerging global power axis.

 

CRIK As a Geopolitical Conglomerate

The centrepiece of the Axis is China, where, behind the patina of capitalism, there is still a Communist Party in charge, one driven by Marxism and Leninism.^[6] Yet, the Axis seems to be driven less by ideological congruence and more by a desire to challenge the USA, its worldview, and what some analysts describe as ‘a hyper power stomping all over the world.’^[7] Noted Chinese commentator Eric Lee, claims that Chinese ambitions are modest in relation to its weight – “We do not want to run the Asia-Pacific, let alone the world. All we want is that America should stop dominating the Asia-Pacific and the world”. Aggression and hegemonic ambitions are not Chinese culture, he asserts. “We built the Great Wall to keep the barbarians out, not to invade them.”^[8]

Putin and Xi have met more than forty times; they are focused on combining their power and influence to stand up to the United States, frustrate US ambitions and speed along what they believe is America’s inevitable decline.^[9] The Sino-Russian relationship is closer than at any time since the Korean War. It was in 2014 that the proximity began to grow – Russia, under sanctions after the annexation of Crimea, was looking for friends, and Xi was beginning to get more assertive about his foreign policy. Between 2013 and 2021, China’s share of Russian external trade doubled from ten to twenty per cent; between 2018 and 2022 Russia supplied 83 % of China’s arms imports – helping the Chinese military grow its air defense, anti-ship and submarine capacities significantly to make it a formidable military instrument in the Western Pacific.^[10]

The full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 accelerated the process; the meeting in the Kremlin of March 2023, alluded to at the head of this article, may have sealed the romance with a kiss. North Korea, Iran and China, cumulatively, have contributed in substantial measure to the military resurgence of Russia in the Ukraine conflict. North Korea has supplied Hwasong-11A missiles and artillery munitions (2.5 million rounds), while the Iranians have supplied more than 3,700 low-cost Iranian drones. Three hundred thirty of these drones are now being manufactured locally, in Tatarstan (in Russia), every month for use in the Ukrainian theatre. The Iranians have leveraged the data generated in the Ukrainian theatre, carried out qualitative upgradations, and demonstrated the consequential prowess on Apr 14, 2024 (the missile-drone barrage on Israel). China, too, it is now clear as daylight, has supplied an array of military equipment to resurge the Russian war effort and re-invigorate its military-industrial complex: engines for drones, parts for jet fighters, radar & communication jamming equipment, precision machine tools, micro-electronics (for use in missiles & glide bombs) as also CNC machines (while the technical translation is ‘computer numerical control’ in practice the terms alludes to computer-controlled instruments used for metal processing and manufacture of munitions and aircraft).

In the first six months of 2023, Russia received drone shipments from Chinese trading companies valued at USD 14.5 million, while Ukraine received only USD 200,000 worth of similar shipments. The performance of Russian airpower having been denied the supply of tailor-made, high-end components from the West, due to sanctions, was for a long-time under-whelming. Due to a successful transition to dual use, cheaper, Chinese electronics, it has made a strong comeback in the Russian counter-offensives in Avdiivka and Kharkiv.^[11] Russian reciprocity has been equally noteworthy – it is helping North Korea, for instance, in the launch of satellites/spaceships and has de-frozen North Korean financial assets lying in Russian banks. President Putin’s visit to North Korea in June 2024 (his first to Pyongyang in 24 years) is more than a propaganda coup for Kim – the strategic partnership that has been concluded is one of Moscow’s strongest security commitments in Asia, one that pledges “military and other assistance” if one of the signatories is invaded or in a state of war. Cheong Seong-Chang, an analyst at the Sejong Institute, a think-tank in Seoul, has compared the Kim-Putin pact with the South Korea-US mutual defense treaty.^[12] In reaction to the pact, South Korea has said it is considering supplying weapons to Ukraine, while an American senator has called for the re-deployment of nuclear weapons to the Korean peninsula.^[13]

Meanwhile, North Korea has been upping the ante, along both the land (DMZ – Demilitarised Zone) and maritime frontiers (NLL – Northern Limit Line) with South Korea. North Korea could also prospectively play a very significant role in the Taiwan contingency – activating the Korean peninsula, so as to keep the South Koreans tied down. If South Korea follows up on its offer to supply arms to Ukraine, given its deep stockpiles of howitzers and artillery munitions, it could be critical for Ukraine’s war effort. In sum, the Putin-Kim pact will have grave implications – not only for stability in the Korean peninsula but also for the trajectory of the war in Ukraine.

The other areas of collaboration namely food supplies, energy, space and the nuclear domain also sends signals that Russia is prioritising Pyongyang over the international non-proliferation regime and Russia’s obligations as a member of the UN Security Council. Russia has also vetoed the renewal of a UN panel that monitors compliance with Security Council sanctions against North Korea.

Iran and Russia, similarly, came together to keep Syrian President Bashar-al-Assad in power, in the wake of the civil war in 2011. Russia has signed major energy agreements with Iran to shield Tehran from the effects of US sanctions; it is now among the top suppliers of weapons to Tehran and is its largest source of foreign investment. Russian exports to Iran rose by 27% in the first ten months of 2022. China, too, has stepped up oil purchases from Iran significantly since 2020. Iran has been purchasing North Korean missiles since the 1980s; more recently, North Korea has supplied weapons to Hezbollah and possibly even the Hamas. There also is evidence to suggest that Chinese engineering know-how has been used in the design of the Hamas tunnels in Gaza. China, Iran, and Russia have held joint naval exercises in the Gulf of Oman for three years, most recently in March 2024. Trilateral naval drills involving Russia, China, and North Korea in the Seas of Okhotsk, Japan, and the East China Sea are also on the anvil.

More importantly, the deepening cooperation between the Axis nations has helped to circumvent the foreign policy tools (sanctions) that the West crafted to contain them; it has provided political top cover at forums like UN and is also being used to sharpen the information narrative through instruments like TikTok. It is becoming increasingly difficult to isolate the CRIK nations individually when they work together. The collective nuclear arsenals of the CRIK nations, it may be noted, in a few years are estimated to be twice as large as that of the United States.^[14]

There is also wider contestation, driven strongly by the desire to shape what comes next. With Western sanctions blocking Russian access to European markets, Russian businesses have turned to China –industrial valves used mainly in the oil & mining sectors, offer a low-cost alternative to the European brands. Bilateral trade between Russia and China was USD 240 billion last year with the Chinese shipping cars, industrial machinery and smartphones to Russia. Russia, in turn, has replaced Saudi Arabia as the largest oil supplier to China.^[15]

Russia has transmuted into a war economy that is now churning out more munitions than the USA and the entire West put together. While Russia’s annual defense spending has grown to USD 386 billion, the economy is also growing at 5.5% annually; with inflation running high at 7.4%, foreign investment has collapsed, and with trade with the West having been cut off, Russia has been pushed deeper into China’s economic embrace^[16]. According to President Zelensky, at the Russian prompt, China used its considerable influence to sabotage the recently held, Ukraine Peace Summit in Burgenstock.^[17]

While the slogan is multi-polarity, in practice, we are seeing the Axis challenging the foundational precept of American power – the freedom of the American Military to roam the globe, especially where such freedom intersects with the perceived spheres of influence of the Axis nations: Chinese ‘core interests’ in Taiwan and the South China Sea; Russia’s ‘near abroad’ – Novorossiya, so to speak; the Iranian proxy enterprise in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria & Yemen; as also the Korean peninsula. Concurrent escalation in the four theatres is fragmenting American power in significant ways. For example, whether this is a consequence of skilful CRIK statecraft or a series of geopolitical coincidences, is of course a matter of speculation. The dilemma before the Americans is whether they fight in three theatres or focus on winning in one. The USA must prioritise its strategic engagements – it does not have the military bandwidth to fight in two, let alone three theatres.^[18] With a debt pile of USD 35 trillion and debt servicing pegged at USD 1 trillion (that which exceeds its defense budget at $950 billion), there is little wriggle room for the Americans to grow that bandwidth across multiple theatres.

The Russo-Chinese pitch is for a new polycentric, multi-nodal (nodes that engage and not poles that are in perpetual contest) world order that is more reflective of the globe’s diverse cultural and civilisational identities, as opposed to a monochromatic, Western view of the world. The Axis is not a formal grouping, yet it is one that is growing in strength and co-ordination. The growing intensity of the Sino-Russian co-operation is clear from the joint manifesto signed between Presidents Vladmir Putin and Xi in early 2022 that spoke about a ‘friendship without limits’ and called for ‘international relations of a new type,’ in other words, a multipolar system that the United States no longer dominates.

During President Putin’s recent visit to Beijing in May 2024, there were references to a ‘new era.’ A sweeping joint statement laid out roadmaps for the countries’ alignment on a host of issues including energy, trade, security, and geopolitics with specific references to Ukraine, Taiwan and conflict in the Middle East. The statement proclaimed that China-Russian relations have stood “the test of rapid changes in the world, demonstrating strength and stability and are experiencing the best period in their history,” the two leaders calling each other “priority partners.” Quite symbolically, Putin attended trade and cooperation forums in Harbin, the capital of China’s northeastern Heilongjiang province bordering Russia’s Far East. This region erupted in conflict between China and the Soviet Union in 1969. Putin also met with the students and faculty of the Harbin Institute of Technology; a university sanctioned by the US government in 2020 for its alleged role in procuring items for China’s military.

In terms of outcomes and delivery however, the Axis has been far more effective than even formal alliances, certainly more effective than NATO, it would seem; the ‘arsenal of the Axis’ is doing far better than the ‘arsenal of democracies.’ China’s industrial production capacities (value added) in 2004 were half that of the USA; today, they are two times larger. In natural consequence, the Chinese military- industrial complex today, is 5-6 times more efficient than its American counterpart. Cognisant of the renewed potency of the Russian war machine, the Americans have decided to undertake manufacture of artillery munitions on a war footing. Even with full scaling up they shall be able to deliver only 1.5 million rounds/month to Ukraine by the end of 2025; the Russians are currently producing 5 million rounds per month. Two days before the fall of Avdiivka, an operational audit of two Ukrainian brigades was carried out: one had a bare 15 artillery rounds left, the other had a mere 42 mortar rounds in its kitty.

A conceptual battle between the two systems, framed within the dynamic of democracy vs delivery, has also begun.^[19] The Chinese argue that while the West champions individual freedoms, the Chinese prioritise broader societal order over personal liberties. They posit that in the USA, politicians are at the mercy of capitalists; China they argue, while it fosters the spirit of free thinking, innovation and enterprise, is not hostage to capitalist greed. That should explain the party-market standoff and the taking down of Big Tech to include big names like Jack Maa. In terms of poverty alleviation and social delivery, the Chinese system, they claim, is better than the West. The Axis nations reject the Western brand of democracy, while insisting that individual states have the right to define democracy for themselves. They oppose external meddling in their internal affairs, the expansion of US alliances, the stationing of American nuclear weapons abroad, and the use of coercive sanctions^[20].

Though the current alliance may not be permanent, the shared goal of challenging the U.S.-led world order serves as a strong enough glue to keep it together for the foreseeable future, perhaps the next decade.

 

The Wider Karma Bhoomi

China and Russia in particular and the wider Axis, are also moving the game for impact and influence to other areas of the world, including the Global South. In Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Middle East, the Axis is making significant inroads. Look at how CRIK in general and China in particular, are chipping away at American attempts at containment, through some very smart, agile, fleet-footed responses. When ASEAN was formed in 1967, it was seen as a pro-West grouping. Yet, it was China that proposed an FTA with ASEAN in 2000. While ASEAN’s trade with the US grew from USD 135 billion in 2000 to USD 450 billion in 2022, trade with China boomed from USD 40 billion to USD 975 billion in the same period. Today, the ASEAN-China trade relationship dwarfs the EU-US relationship, valued at USD 950 billion.^[21] China is the top trading partner for over 120 countries, including those traditionally aligned with the West and, more importantly, those seeking economic independence from Western dominance.

The BRI, RCEP, and AIB are the instruments of the alternate economic corridor that China is seeking to create—one designed ingeniously to tether China’s phenomenal manufacturing capacities with the material/needs of the world. We can gauge the success of such a strategy from the rapid expansion of BRICS and from the number of countries wanting to join the Shanghai Co-operation Organization (SCO) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU). Turkey, a member of NATO, has evinced interest in joining BRICS,^[22] due to slowing economic growth in Europe and to the expanding opportunities in BRICS. The contribution of the BRICS economies to the global economy at 36%, exceeds that of the G-7.

There are other contests, too, though still in their relative infancy: De-dollarisation and new avenues of Energy Convergence. The re-set of the petro-dollar by Saudi Arabia, which has moved away from trading in oil exclusively through the dollar, could be an indicator of things to come. At the recent St Petersburg International Economic Forum (05-08 June 2024), President Putin said that the BRICS would soon develop an alternate payment system immune to unfair sanctions from the West.^[23] China is a good market for Siberian gas now that Europe is not buying energy from Russia- described by Western commentators as a ‘gas station.’ In fact, Russia seems determined to prove that it is far more muscular and influential strategically than a mere ‘gas station.’

 

The Pushback: USA-led West

The above notwithstanding, it needs to be noted that the USA continues to be formidable: it accounted for 25% of the world’s GDP in 1980, and it still does.  The Chinese economy has grown at the expense of Europe and others, not the United States. Seven of the world’s largest big tech companies continue to be American. America still has the world’s largest, technologically most adept military, albeit one that of late has been delivering sub-optimally: a grand initiator of conflict but a rather poor finisher. The Liberal Order, we must remind ourselves – USA, Europe, Australia, Japan, South Korea, and Singapore still account for 65% of global GDP, 75% of global military spending and 95% of ideation/global agenda setting.^[24]

There is an attempt to ingest the hub and spoke alliance-partner framework with a fresh dose of energy and resolve: the USA-South Korea-Japan Tri- lateral, Quad, Squad, the resilience of the Filipinos in the Second Thomas Shoal are pointers to the fact that Chinese maritime prowess will not be allowed to break out from the first island chain with ease; IPACOM meanwhile, has been talking of a ‘hellscape’ to deter a prospective Chinese invasion of Taiwan. ‘Brain dead’ NATO also seems to be regenerating to life. On June 19, 2024, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg warned that, “when they are more and more aligned – authoritarian regimes like North Korea and China, Iran, Russia – then it’s even more important that we are aligned as countries believing in freedom and democracy.”^[25] NATO trendlines seem to be in synch with the sentiments of its Secretary General: by the end of this year, 18 NATO member states will enhance their defense expenditure to 2% of GDP. NATO is also debating the prospect of making 3 % the floor of defense spending.

The West, in general, is gearing up for the prospect of war; there is talk of a draft in Europe. So, the fight for ascendancy will be grim. Nobody has greater respect for the Americans as a comeback nation than the Chinese themselves. They know that it is way too early to proclaim victory. Xi’s challenge, therefore, is not only deeply thought through but also firmly undergirded by an order of his own making—CRIK is just the beginning.

 

Prospects for the Future

The next decade is critical. The two conflicting orders, one led by the USA-led West and the other defined by CRIK, are poised for intense competition, multiple crisis as also an intense clash of wills, which could also spillover into conflict. Great sagacity & wisdom will be needed to avoid wider war, as also considerable acumen to craft what may at best may an uneasy peace. Either way, we must brace up for the greatest show in human history.

In Cold War 1.0, a number of countries to include India, chose to be non-aligned and kept a distance from either bloc; while the moral persuasions of the non-aligned were strong, since they lacked geo-strategic heft, their material influence was not quite as material. In the current Cold War, countries like Brazil, South Africa, and India have reflected a new reality with sufficient heft, influence, and strategic autonomy to shape outcomes meaningfully. The salience of these global swing states in the ensuing contest between the two orders will be potent.

An assessment of the relative strengths of the two orders suggests that while the West, particularly the USA, will retain its supremacy, it will lose its hegemony. The USA needs to make strategic adjustments whence it is no longer the undisputed numero-uno. CRIK is not asking for a seat at the table; they are looking to build their table, one with their own rules. Therefore, the world could be headed towards an unusual experiment – one where a liberal international order sans a hegemon and CRIK learn to co-exist. The hazards arising out of the challenges of climate change, a nuclear catastrophe and now the horrific consequences of irresponsible AI, must drive the contest towards a thoughtful modus vivendi. Détente 2.0 – a smart admixture of engagement, deterrence and containment – may be the wisest way of stabilising Cold War 2.0.^[26].

 

Author Bio: Lieutenant General Raj Shukla, PVSM, YSM, SM, is a former General Officer Commanding-In-Chief – Army Commander – of the Indian Army’s Training Command (ARTRAC). He is presently ‘Member UPSC,’ w.e.f. 18th July, 2022.

 

References:

^[1]China vs. United States | Cold War | Nuclear Threat | Investigative Journalism (youtube.com) , accessed on 18 May 2024

^[2]Niall Ferguson, Kissinger and the True Meaning of Détente: Reinventing a Cold War Strategy for the Contest With China (foreignaffairs.com), accessed on 30 May 2024

^[3] David K. Sanger, New Cold Wars, Crown Publishing Group, 2024, page 446.

^[4]David E Sanger, New Cold Wars, Crown Publishing Group, 2024, Inner Flap

^[5]Antonio Guterres, UN Chief: We Must Avoid US/China Cold War, Associated Press, 25 Sep 2021, www.youtube.com

^[6]Niall Ferguson in conversation with Urs Gehriger, The New Cold War, Die Weltwoche (Swiss weekly magazine based in Zurich), 03 May 2024

^[7]Putin meets Xi Jinping in Beijing | Carl Zha Reacts (youtube.com) accessed on 17 May 2024

^[8]China vs. United States | Cold War | Nuclear Threat | Investigative Journalism (youtube.com) , accessed on 18 May 2024

^[9]David E Sanger, New Cold Wars, Crown Publishing Group, 2024, p 9

^[10] Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Richard Fontaine, The Axis of Upheaval, Foreign Affairs, May/June 2024

^[11]Frank Hofmann, How China indirectly supports Russia’s war in Ukraine – DW – 05/16/2024, accessed on 01 June 2024

^[12] Song Jung-a in Seoul, Kana Inagaki in Tokyo and Joseph Leahy in Beijing, Japan and South Korea sound alarm over Putin-Kim pact, Financial Times, 20 June 2024

^[13] South Korea considers sending weapons to Ukraine in response to Russia-North Korea deal | DW News (youtube.com), accessed on 21 June 2024

^[14]Robert M. Gates, The United States now confronts graver threats, The Dysfunctional Superpower, Foreign Affairs, 29 Sep 2023

^[15]Joe Leahey, Kai Waluszewski & Max Seddon, China-Russia: an economic ‘friendship’ that could rattle the world, Financial Times– The Big Read, 15 May 2024

^[16]Jennifer Sor,Russia’s economy is so driven by the war in Ukraine that it cannot afford to either win or lose, economist says (msn.com), accessed on 01 June 2024

^[17]Zelensky Says China Is Helping Russia Undermine a Peace Summit on Ukraine (msn.com), accessed on 02 June2024

^[18]Elbridge Colby, Why Should We Care About America’s Defense Priorities? (youtube.com) accessed on 02 June 2024

^[19]Nicholas Burns, US Ambassador to China,us china rivalry taiwan and hongkong 60 minutes – Search Videos (bing.com). accessed on 02 June 2024

^[20] Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Richard Fontaine, The Axis of Upheaval, Foreign Affairs, May/June 2024

^[21] محاضرة رفيعة المستوى | اتجاهات العلاقات الأمريكية – الصينية بعد الانتخابات الأمريكية 2024 (youtube.com), Kishore Mahbubani on Prospects for US-China Relations, High Level Lecture at the Emirates Centre for Strategic Studies & Research, ECSSR, accessed on 22 June 2024

^[22] Why Turkey Joins BRICS and How This Will Impact the World – YouTube, accessed on 20 June 2024

^[23] Western Empire Facing Same Collapse as Rome in its Final Days: Martin Armstrong – YouTube, accessed on 21 June 2024

^[24] London Conference 2024: Dr Fareed Zakaria and Bronwen Maddox (youtube.com), accessed on 22 June 2024

^[25] Song Jung-a in Seoul, Kana Inagaki in Tokyo and Joseph Leahy in Beijing, Japan and South Korea sound alarm over Putin-Kim pact, Financial Times, 20 June 2024

^[26] Naill Ferguson, Kissinger and the True Meaning of Détente – Reinventing a Cold War Strategy for the Contest With China, Foreign Affairs, March/April 2024

Since independence, India’s foreign policy has been remarkably consistent, resting on the twin pillars of economic prosperity (Samriddhi) and national security (Suraksha). A noticeable shift in foreign policy formulation took place after Prime Minister Narendra Modi assumed office in 2014, which saw three additional pillars being added to the existing two: ‘Samman’ (emphasising India’s dignity and honour), ‘Samvad’ (increased engagement with the global community), and ‘Sansriti’ (leveraging India’s cultural and civilisational heritage as a foreign policy tool). The new approach is grounded in pragmatism, being more assertive, bold, and proactive.^[1] This has resulted in a dramatic turnaround in India’s relations with the global community, particularly with the West Asian countries.

Speaking at the Raisina Dialogue in 2016, India’s then External Affairs Minister, Ms. Sushma Swaraj, spoke of “bringing a new sense of purpose to our foreign policy.” She said, “India can and should raise its international profile” and “leverage our diplomatic influence to accelerate development at home… and send the message that India’s growth can be the world’s opportunity.” She also spoke of policy choices to drive change and emphasised the role of net security providers in maintaining global order.^[2] In his keynote address at the same conference, the then foreign secretary (now India’s foreign minister), Shri S. Jaishankar, mentioned this change in India’s engagement with the Gulf countries. He said that despite a strong historical connection to West Asia, India’s links to the Gulf countries had come to be defined mainly by energy imports and labour exports. Stressing the need to build a more robust relationship, he said, “We are no longer content to be passive recipients of outcomes. India’s landmark ‘Act East’ policy would be matched with ‘Think West’.”^[3] This was the first time the phrase ‘Think West’ was used, signalling that a shift in policy was underway.

India’s earlier reticent approach towards West Asia was rooted in two main factors. First, it stemmed from solidarity with the newly independent Gulf nations, owing to a shared history of colonial rule. Second, due to its non-aligned stance during the Cold War, India viewed socialist and secular states more favourably than regional monarchies. A shift occurred during the 1973 oil crisis, prompting India to prioritise engagement with oil-producing nations. However, this engagement was primarily economic, characterised by a transactional buyer-seller relationship. Additionally, the significant Indian diaspora in West Asia, a region dominated by Islam, necessitated a more nuanced approach. India’s foreign policy increasingly took religious considerations into account, influencing both domestic and international affairs.

When the BJP-led NDA government came to power in 2014, it shed the hesitations of earlier years, adopting a more robust approach to West Asia that aligned with India’s evolving worldview. While New Delhi remained sensitive to the potential impact of domestic issues on its relations with predominantly Islamic WANA countries, religion ceased to be an overriding concern. The focus shifted to forging strategic partnerships through political, economic, and security initiatives aimed at strengthening mutual interests. There was also a growing confidence and sense of purpose in engaging with Gulf countries, despite their mutual antagonisms. India successfully cultivated vibrant relations with Saudi Arabia and Iran, navigating their historical animosities. Similarly, India developed strong ties with Israel and Palestine, despite their longstanding conflict. This de-hyphenation of relations allowed New Delhi to build each relationship based on its own merits and for mutual benefit, reflecting India’s enhanced global stature.

In India’s neighbourhood, these relationships are part of India’s broader outreach in the Indian Ocean under the SAGAR initiative. SAGAR, an acronym for Security and Growth for All in the Region, was introduced by Prime Minister Modi in 2015. Through SAGAR, India aims to ensure a safe, secure, and stable Indian Ocean Region (IOR) by fostering economic and security cooperation with its maritime neighbours and enhancing their maritime security capabilities. Cooperation with Gulf countries is integral to the SAGAR initiative, aimed at maintaining free, open, and secure sea lanes of communication for international shipping, including humanitarian aid and disaster relief (HADR) missions.

The vision of SAGAR is inclusive, emphasising politico-economic-security cooperation and adherence to international maritime laws.^[4] India’s engagement with West Asia now extends beyond energy, trade, and people-to-people contacts. While India remains dependent on the Gulf for its energy needs, the relationship has diversified into new areas. Gulf nations increasingly view India as a safe investment destination and a reliable security partner. This shift marks a departure from India’s earlier piecemeal transactional approach to a more holistic and strategic intent.

On the security front, the Indian Navy plays a crucial role in ensuring open sea lanes and mitigating piracy threats in the Western Indian Ocean. Currently, the Indian Navy has deployed a dozen warships in the Western Arabian Sea, along with two warships in the Gulf of Aden. This deployment addresses the challenges posed by Somali piracy in the Gulf of Aden and potential attacks by Houthi rebels in the Red Sea.^[5] This represents a significant departure from previous deployments in terms of both strength and operational scope, contributing to maintaining calm and incident-free conditions in this part of the Indian Ocean.

The last decade has witnessed the Indian military conducting joint air, naval, and army exercises with the Emirates and Oman, as well as multilateral exercises involving Qatar, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia. These exercises not only enhance interoperability with regional counterparts but also signal India’s capability as a net security provider in the region. India has also joined the 43-nation Combined Maritime Forces naval partnership based in Bahrain, facilitating multilateral security operations in the Gulf.^[6]

However, West Asia and North Africa (WANA) face immense challenges. Ongoing conflicts in Syria and Yemen, strained relations between Israel and Iran, as well as Israel and Hamas, and the sectarian divide between Saudi Arabia and Iran pose significant hurdles to achieving peace and stability. These challenges are further complicated by conflicting interests among major regional powers. While events in West Asia may not directly impact India, disruptions in energy supplies could have unsettling effects on both India’s and the world’s economies. West Asia remains a high-stakes arena, where India, with its goodwill across the region, can potentially play a peacemaking role.

 

Author Bio: Maj. Gen. Dhruv C. Katoch is Editor, India Foundation Journal and Director, India Foundation

 

References:

^[1] Ram Madhav, Panchamrit: The Five Pillars of Indian Foreign Policy in India’s Foreign Policy: Towards Resurgence, Dhruv C Katoch (Ed), New Delhi, Pentagon, 2016, pp. 20-24.

^[2] https://www.mea.gov.in/Speeches-Statements.htm?dtl/26432/Speech_by_External_Affairs_Minister_at_the_inauguration_of_Raisina_Dialogue_in_New_Delhi_March_01_2016

^[3] Conference Report, Raisina Dialogue March1-3, 2016, pp 61-63, available at https://www.orfonline.org/forums/raisina-dialogue-2016

^[4] https://maritimeindia.org/revisiting-sagar-indias-template-for-cooperation-in-the-indian-ocean-region/

^[5] https://www.orfonline.org/research/dynamic-shift-indian-navy-in-the-red-sea

^[6] https://warontherocks.com/2024/05/indias-engagement-with-the-middle-east-reflects-new-delhis-changing-worldview/