Primakov readings: the Middle East in the modern world

03 July 2020


The 6th online session of the international forum Primakov readings was held. It was dedicated to the theme "the Middle East in the modern world: time in captivity". This was the final panel discussion, and foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will be a guest at the forum on July 10.


The speakers were Vitaliy Naumkin, Scientific Director of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the RAS, academician of RAS; Alexander Aksenenok, Senior Researcher at the Centre for Arab and Islamic studies, Institute of Oriental studies of RAS, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary; Irina Zvyagelskaya, head of the Center for Middle Eastern studies, IMEMO named after Yevgeny Primakov of Russian Academy of Sciences. The host was Mikhail Shvydkoi, Special Representative of the President of the Russian Federation for International Cultural Cooperation.


Opening the session, IMEMO President, Academician Alexander Dynkin noted that the Middle East was a long-suffering region, still far from stability. Back in 2001, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice put forward the concept of a "Greater Middle East". Its meaning is to transform these countries into market-based democracies on the model of the Central and Eastern Europe countries of the 90s, but with a much larger power component. The practice began in 2003 with the war in Iraq, Libya, and Syria. "This strategy, in my opinion, ended in a resounding failure,"  Dynkin said. - It has shown that it is easy to eliminate a leader and disrupt elite and inter - confessional balances. It is difficult to build a new state. It is easy to bring in troops - it is difficult to withdraw them. The name of the panel "The Middle East in captivity" is about this."

 


The President of IMEMO repeated the idea expressed at the Indian panel that the collapse of empires leaved a trail of severe conflicts for descendants. In this case, the consequences of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire have been felt by the world for more than a hundred years. The Sykes-Picot border of 1916, named after the Foreign Ministers of Britain and France, was drawn hastily, along a line, without regard to identity, ethnic or religious lines of separation.

 


He noted that this was a favorite region of Yevgeny Maksimovich Primakov, and all the leaders in the region appreciated the opportunity to communicate with him. "The best Russian specialists in the region are developing the Primakov school with dignity. Russian Oriental studies is absolutely world class, " the academician summed up.

 


The host Mikhail Shvydkoi noted that this region had always been politically relevant, because it had always played a major role in world history.

 

The "axe of obscurity" hovered over the region"

 


Academician Naumkin suggested that the region under discussion was experiencing two crises: system and subjectivity. In this regard, we cannot speak of the region as a "single subject of world politics". But still, he noted, there were some common elements in the life of the region. In particular, one of the results of the coronavirus epic was "the hanging of the unknown axe over it". He explained this by saying that "no one knows what will happen next, and, accordingly, there was fear." "Fear has always played a big role in history, and today its role is even greater than the fear of the consequences of the economic crisis. Moreover, it is felt even in the security sphere." They are considering, in particular, whether to rely on the US now as the main provider, but at the same time they take into account the uncertainties in the US itself. They are also thinking about the role of Russia in the region and how the sharp rivalry between the US and China will affect it.


As for the issue of China, as the academician explained, it had huge resources necessary for the region. So some in the region "are trying to put China in front of a choice: are you with us or with them?" While the US, Naumkin continued, set the task of "ousting China from the region and preventing the growth of its influence, China is stepping up its activities there." Recently, for example, it offered $ 12.5 billion in economic assistance to Lebanon.


The pandemic also contributed to the expansion of the unknown. People are increasingly asking the question: what should we expect now? The new epidemic like "swine flu" or a livestock crisis, or maybe a collapse of fishing, because fish contain more and more microparticles of plastic and will become unfit for food.

 

In addition to these facts, the Scientific Director of the Institute of Oriental Studies drew attention to the processes "taking place in the leadership system in the region." He believes that there is now an "evolution of leadership". Serious leaders are emerging who are able to identify their role at the regional and global levels and compete for regional leadership. These are, first of all, Erdogan, the President of Turkey, and Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel. "They haven't said their last word yet," the academician believes, " but their stability is surprising."


There is a second group of leaders. Naumkin included young and super-energetic leaders, such as Mohammed bin Salman al-Saud in Saudi Arabia and Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nahyan in the United Emirates. In addition to new leaders in the region, there are new groups that have their own various military-political and strategic interests. As an example, the academic cited the rivalry between Qatar and Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates. Plus Egypt. And all of them, with the addition of France and Italy, are vying for infrastructure in the Mediterranean. At the same time, it should be added, he said, that it was the Syrian people who suffer from the sanctions, and not those against whom they wanted to direct them. And it is unclear, he concluded, how all this would develop?

 

The pandemic has not stopped activity


Irina Zvyagelskaya dedicated her speech to the question of how the pandemic affected events in the Middle East.


Although the pandemic, she said, has hit Middle Eastern States hard, it has not stopped their activity.


Iran is active in Syria, Turkey is active in Syria and Libya, and Iran even goes beyond the region to supply fuel to Venezuela. We can talk about the undiminished activity of other players. This is a very important conclusion, because it also confirms the factor of unpredictability of the region's development.


All players today have the opportunity to build their strategy, but how they will do it, she believes, is still unknown. Moreover, there is a clear reformatting of inter-regional relations. Although it is too early to talk about alliances, we can still see the processes of normalization of relations between Israel and the Arab monarchies of the Gulf, primarily Saudi Arabia. Moreover, these processes of normalization are going on, despite the unresolved Palestinian problem. Of course, if Israel does decide on annexation, which has now been postponed, it will certainly slow down the existing normalization processes. But, nevertheless, there is a community of interests. On the one hand, these are negative interests based on an anti-Iranian position. On the other hand, these are technological interests, business interests, etc.


She drew attention to some very symbolic facts, such as the participation of Israeli teams in the Arab games, and the visit of Netanyahu to the Halij, and the first time an Emirates Airlines plane landed at Ben Gurion airport with humanitarian aid for Palestinians. "This is a very important symbolism, especially for this region."


In addition, the associates of Marshal Haftar began to ask for help from Israel, which was also difficult to imagine a few years ago. Nevertheless, she believes that all these processes "are quite fragile, and to some extent they will, of course, be tied to how the Palestinian problem will be resolved. And even the fact that Israel temporarily postpones the annexation of land does not mean that Netanyahu will not return to this idea at some point."

 

There are more tempters


Ambassador Alexander Aksenenok drew attention to the fact that the Middle East had always been one of the most unstable regions in the world. But what, he asks, has happened in this unstable region since 2011, what has changed? (This is the year of the so-called "Arab spring", when a wave of protests and uprisings took place in the Arab world – IF). What happened, he said, was that "there are more tempters." What changed after the old foundations of the state, society, ideology, and traditions collapsed? We can say that the crisis has become permanent, including as a crisis of subjectivity.

 

But in this crisis of subjectivity, there are still strong elements of authority. Both the crisis of power and the system-forming crisis in general, and the conflict environment, thus, persists almost everywhere, in its various manifestations. The coronavirus gives conflicts in the Middle East a new negative reality, the consequences of which are difficult to predict. The pandemic interrupted the second wave of protest activity in Algeria, Lebanon, and Iraq, which was carried out under the slogan "all means all". This means that they demanded the change of all the ruling elites. The second wave has been interrupted, but many Western and Arab experts believe it will return, as the root problems that caused the unrest in 2011 remain unresolved. And even in Syria, street protests are beginning again, some of them of an anti-regime nature.


What are the features of new conflicts? First, in their duration. They last even longer than the First and Second world wars. Further, they take place against the background of sharp differences between Russia and the West. So this conflict already has a global dimension. Therefore, the efforts of the UN and international organizations are less effective, that is, the political capital of international cooperation is devalued. Therefore, the efforts of the UN, the Secretary-General and the Security Council are ineffective.


Third – there is a clash of interests not only between Russia and the West, but also between the United States and the Europeans, between the European States themselves, and between regional players. For example, between Saudi Arabia and Iran, between Saudi Arabia and the Emirates in Yemen, and between Turkey and Qatar in Libya. All this happens in conditions of hybridity, which makes them longer and more difficult to solve. These principles of private public partnership are transferred to foreign policy, which expands the capabilities of players and dramatically increases political, but most importantly, military risks. Therefore, diplomacy often loses its traditional function. It is known and noticeable that the role of foreign policy agencies in decision-making is decreasing almost everywhere. This is particularly evident in the United States. In the European policy on Syria, in particular, he notes, military diplomacy was in the foreground until 2015.


Speaking about the Syrian conflict, the Ambassador believes that regardless of how it is resolved, "it can unleash other conflicts, but it can, under certain conditions, contribute to the normalization of relations between Russia and the United States."


"Russia, he notes, is directly involved militarily in Syria. For Russia, the policy of full and unconditional support for the Assad regime threatens great complications. Of course, Russia will do everything to help Syria to the best of its ability, to help it survive in the humanitarian field, but the Syrians demand much more in the financial field. Whether Russia is capable of this is a big question. But if Russia fully associates itself with all the mistakes of the regime, there is a danger that it will become a hostage to the exorbitant ambitions of Damascus, its old rhetoric."


What's the problem? The Syrian leadership believes that Russia needs Syria more than Russia needs Syria. "The Syrian leadership would like to present relations as "complete and harmonious unity", which in principle does not happen even between allies. For example, there are certain differences between the United States and Turkey, and between the United States and Saudi Arabia, but they are resolved in a more open manner."

 

He recalled Primakov's conversation with Milosevic, which had taken place before the bombing. "You," Primakov said at the time, " are late with your initiatives, and even if you come forward with them, it is too late and too insufficient. You must really assess the situation and anticipate events in a timely manner, because your initiatives look like they were made under pressure all the time." The Ambassador believes that this phrase is now applicable to Russia's relations with its allies, including with Damascus. He is convinced that "it is necessary to help Syria, but to the extent possible, precisely to the extent possible," he stressed, and Russia's capabilities are now declining due to the crisis. Plus-to seek consensus from all influential Syrian forces."


Shvydkoi recalled the words of the President Putin about the need to intensify the inter-Syrian dialogue in Geneva.

 

Religion makes conflicts uncompromising


The moderator noted that in addition to economic, socio-political, religious and ethnic conflicts, there have always been problems related to the interfaith situation.


According to the academician Naumkin, religion plays an increasing role in the world today, but religion in the region "plays an important role in supporting identification, and perhaps even in rejecting some concepts imposed on the region, and its role will continue". He does not see the possibility that "some extremist movements that are just engaged in manipulating religion" will disappear. In his opinion, "unexpected turns can be expected here, including the fragmentation of various Muslim movements."


Irina Zvyagelskaya drew attention to the fact that "conflicts in the Middle East are increasingly colored in confessional or religious tones." This allows, she said, some journalists to talk about the new Middle Ages and that we are returning to religious wars. Outwardly, it may indeed look like this, but only outwardly. Identity awareness occurs in the postmodern era, and it plays a largely instrumental role.


"Confessional and religious issues play a big role, and in some cases even help conflicts by legitimizing certain actions and giving them an uncompromising character. Because it is one thing to give life for sacred values, and another-for the acquisition of territories, for the possibility of deploying troops or for gaining access to markets." She believes that the religious factor is now involved in a broader sense. As an example, Zvyagelskaya cited Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's address to US evangelicals. Trying to win them over, she said, he emphasized that the settlements that Israel was going to annex in the Jordan valley had a sacred meaning for Christians. He reminds evangelists that these territories are mentioned even in the Bible and therefore convinces them that it is best to preserve these territories under Israeli sovereignty.


Zvyagelskaya and Shvydkoi believe that in order to better understand the roots of conflicts and to understand how they can be regulated, it is necessary, as noted by Yevgeny Primakov, to pay special attention to the history and culture of this region. Shvydkoi further noted that issues of religious identity played an increasing role, but politics interfered with this, and interfered in different ways. He cited the attitude towards the destruction or restoration of cultural monuments as an example. "There is a process going on in Iraq," he recalls, "and there is quite a strong influence of Americans and Europeans. In Syria, despite the fact that this is a problem of global heritage, other processes are taking place, because the West believes that this is a zone of Russian influence. Unfortunately, today the culture is more politicized than we would like."

 

In this regard, Zvyagelskaya noted that not only in the Middle East, but also in the United States, there were also processes in relation to monuments. (For its part, it can be noted that the process of destruction of monuments did not pass in the XX century and Russia – IF).

 

And the Kurdish problem?


The host Shvydkoi asked all participants to focus on the problem of the Kurds.


Vitaly Naumkin: the Kurdish issue is one of the most serious problems for the region as a whole, but first of all for the countries where they live, and their trouble is that they are very divided. The Kurds are a mass of different movements, but there is one thing in common: this people is united by the desire to increase the level of recognition of their national identity. One way or another, the Kurdish problem will have to be solved. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that in each of the four countries where the Kurds live, everything is developing according to a common scenario: their authorities do not want to allow the Kurds to unite, to prevent an increase in the level of automatization. But, nevertheless, the trend is that the role of the Kurds will increase. Speaking about the unpredictability of the Kurdish problem, the academic cited the example of Syria, where there is a real deal between the Kurdish movements and the United States (including those that are considered terrorist in Turkey, a NATO country). And how everything will develop in the Trans-Euphrates region is still unclear.


Irina Zvyagelskaya: the Kurds are fragmented even within the states where they are located. But at the same time, she considers the autonomy of the Kurds in Iraq to be a fairly successful example. The success of the Kurdish autonomy inside Iraq, she said, is unquestionable. Even many Iraqi citizens are trying to find shelter in Iraqi Kurdistan.


Vitaly Naumkin, in turn, did not agree with the assessment of the situation of Kurds in Iraqi Kurdistan, considering that there is "a lot of tension".


Alexander Aksenenok: although the Kurds are all different, they are united by their opposition to their autonomy. But things are not going smoothly between the Kurds either. For example, he wonders whether they can so easily give up in Syria what they received as a result of the fight against ISIS (the organization is banned in the Russian Federation - IF). Especially since Damascus itself left the Northern territories, i.e. those that Turkey has now destroyed. But the Kurds in Syria no longer demand independence, they have lowered the bar for their ambitions. And it would be possible to play on this field more flexibly and diplomatically in the fight for them.

 

The Mediterranean and the Libyan conflict


The next question that Shvydkoi asked to pay attention to was about the attitude to the Libyan conflict.
Speakers noted that its importance was increasing.


Leading researcher of IMEMO RAS Vasily Kuznetsov, who took part in the discussion, believes that the Libyan conflict can be viewed through two regional prisms – through the Middle East prism and then we are talking about the events between Turkey and Qatar, on the one hand, and on the other - the Emirates and Egypt, and through the Mediterranean prism. The Mediterranean as a special region in world politics is now becoming more and more important. What's more, we are seeing the Mediterranean becoming more Middle Eastern – something that wasn't there before. And the whole of the Southern Europe is increasingly drawn into a certain logic of Middle Eastern politics, Middle Eastern reality. This is serious and it will continue. At the same time, the Libyan conflict differs sharply from the Syrian and Yemeni conflicts, and although its significance is increasing, it still remains more or less peripheral for all players, including regional ones.


The main difference between it and other conflicts is the problem of legitimacy. There are two legitimate authorities that are recognized by the international community. And now we see a desire to review their legitimacy, to review all the early agreements and their key role in the settlement process, and even to review the status of the executive authorities in Eastern Libya. This means that the legal problem will continue and increase. He is confident that attempts to resolve the conflict in Libya will be difficult in the future.

 

As for France and Italy, which are also involved in the Libyan conflict, in many problems in the Middle East, they should look at the electoral part of their Arab population, which will respond to any movement of their governments in the Middle East.

 

Balance of weak


Nikolay Surkov, a senior researcher at IMEMO RAS, dedicated his speech to the part of the Arab world called the Persian Gulf. He drew attention to a very interesting fact. There, " instead of a balance of power, there is a balance of the weak." What is the reason for this? Iran has suffered very much from the sanctions, but has adapted, and is beginning to achieve great success at very little expense. In parallel, the Arab monarchs are getting weaker, because they are losing the importance of suppliers of strategic raw materials, and they have fewer resources, even despite the "pillows" that they were able to make and accumulate. Therefore, now, he believes, there is a possibility that the Gulf monarchies will not be up to competition with Iran. Moreover, Iran is doing quite well. It has problems, but it is ready to continue fighting. The monarchies became not so much allies of the United States of America as competitors, especially in the oil market. For example, lowering prices is an attempt to destroy American oil producers.

 


But at the same time, Saudi Arabia cannot ensure its own security. They are in a position where neither the military nor the political umbrella of the United States saves them from threats. The standoff between Iran and Saudi Arabia may continue, but it will be very costly for both sides. Now there are conditions for dialogue, which is important, because Russia is one of the initiators of building a security architecture there. In fact, there is a talk about finding a new form of coexistence in the Gulf. They will have to find compromises, because the power that is needed to exist in this region is now not so much in military strength, but in the ability to find new allies and those who can both put pressure on their opponents and exert influence in certain countries of the region. Now there is an opportunity to try to negotiate with Iran, because the Saudis have weakened a little, their partners have also weakened, and the Americans are less interested in this region. Therefore, the Saudis need to find an opportunity to get out of the conflicts that have arisen with dignity, especially to leave Yemen. Against this background, they can soften their position, and the new security architecture will be very useful. In his opinion, the essence of the new architecture is that it is based on a dialogue mechanism. "There is a need to agree at the military level on preventing incidents, a need to ensure that tensions in Yemen, Iraq, and possibly Syria are reduced. In the context of the economic crisis, this is very important now."


Finally, Iran may not be so much a source of problems as a part of their solution. Iran openly states that if it receives guarantees, reduces sanctions pressure, and its legitimate interests are respected, it is ready to negotiate and interact.

 

Why does Turkey need the S-400?


It is impossible not to dwell on two interesting questions asked at the end of the session by journalists.


First , how will the US pressure on Turkey in relation to the Russian S-400 end? Will Turkey buy additional batches of air defense systems from Russia or not?


Irina Zvyagelskaya: for Turkey, the purchase itself is important not only from the point of view of security itself, but also politically. As a member of NATO, with a fairly strained relationship with the United States, Erdogan had to demonstrate that he could make far-reaching decisions. And this is despite the obligations associated with staying in NATO. But as for further purchases, it is not yet known whether he will continue them.


Vitaly Naumkin: there is new information that the Americans are offering to buy these S-400s from Turkey. This will be the second test of Turkey's decision-making independence.

 

An interesting version was expressed by Nikolai Surkov: Erdogan needed Russian systems to ensure control of the air space in Northern Syria. Then, if Turkish troops attack the Kurds there, the Americans will not be able to provide the Kurds with the necessary support.


And the second question is: what is Russia's motivation in Libya and why are we intervening in the Libyan situation? How dangerous is it that Marshal Haftar's forces, supported by Russian PMCs, are blocking oil fields in Libya?


Vasily Kuznetsov: We do not interfere in the situation in Libya. And endless speculation about PMCs does not stand up to criticism. Even if we assume that there are some Russian PMCs, we must understand that different countries are represented in Libya. But only one of them has a serious military contingent, and it is quite official, this is Turkey. This is a reality and the capabilities of PMCs and something similar are not comparable to the Turkish forces. And second, Russia maintains relations with various players. It runs a famous course on equal proximity and participates in various mediation initiatives.


As for blocking oil fields in the East of the country, Haftar has long extended control over these territories. Most likely, we can expect the creation of an alternative oil company. This will be opposed by a significant part of the international community. But if this happens to the oil market in Libya, it will eventually mean that another step has been taken on the way to dividing the state.

 

Epilogue


The discussion at the session turned out to be voluminous, because the topic of the situation in the Middle East and the reasons for many events taking place there is immense. Much has been said, but much remains for the next sessions. But I would like to finish with the words of academician Dynkin. The President of IMEMO RAS recalled that when the Ottoman Empire collapsed, "it was divided in 1916 by the Foreign Ministers of Great Britain and France in a hurry, and the borders were drawn according to a ruler." This is how the Sykes-Picot line came into being. This inattention to ethnic and religious boundaries of residence has largely determined the increased conflict in the region and interfaith problems in the future.

 

GSV "Russia - Islamic World"

Based on materials from RIA Novosti, Interfax