- Joined
- Oct 17, 2007
- Messages
- 11,862
- Reaction score
- 10,300
- Location
- New York
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
As long as the Syrian-Iranian axis is in place Lebanon will largely be denied to Saudi influence. However, Iraq is a different story. The Kurds and Sunnis are of sufficient influence and power to make Iraq a more even struggle. It is likely there will be more geopolitical wrangling over Iraq than Lebanon, in my opinion.
My how times change. When I was a kid, people didn't even have these kids of discussions. Beirut was still called the Paris of the Middle East, and Lebanon was still understood to be the Christian country in the region.
Yes it has changed but not as you are implying.
In those days, sphere of influence was a matter of discussion between major Western Powers.
Worldwide access to diverse information and opinions has changed our parochial outlook.
Yes it has changed but not as you are implying.
In those days, sphere of influence was a matter of discussion between major Western Powers.
Worldwide access to diverse information and opinions has changed our parochial outlook.
I generally agree. In addition, the demographic changes underway in Lebanon run counter to Saudi Arabia's long-term influence. Lebanon's Shia population is growing faster than any other demographic groups. Time is against Saudi Arabia's influence there and Iran/Syria/Hezbollah have the luxury of being patient there.
Considering that Saudi Arabia shares a border with Iraq, the stakes are even higher there from the Saudi perspective. Hence, Saudi Arabia might well be willing to offer much greater accommodation toward Iran's interests in Lebanon in exchange for a deal on Iraq that is more favorable for its interests.
For now, such an arrangement might well suit Iran's purposes. But as Iran evolves into a great regional power, Iraq could become a renewed focus of Iranian-Saudi rivalry, should Iran become interested in altering the region's status quo. Therefore, even in Iraq, Saudi Arabia will likely have to yield some ground if Saudi Arabia hopes to achieve a deal that has some degree of permanence.
What is interesting right now is that quietly, through its policy making, it appears that Saudi Arabia has placed a bet on the future. That bet implies Iran's becoming a great regional power, possibly a nuclear-armed one. Even if that future does not come to pass, Saudi Arabia may have reduced its own risk exposure.
There is growing evidence that the most recent economic sanctions imposed on Iran are beginning to hurt.
The Islamic republic is having difficulties finding international banks to handle the revenue from its oil sales — and those sales appear to be shrinking. Meanwhile, a recent dramatic drop in the value of Iran's currency has left many people shaken.
At the same time, the government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is removing subsidies that could lead to price increases on everything from bread to gasoline.
A question that comes out of this is world energy policy. That is, when Iran has consolidated power in the region they will be able to use oil as a weapon. That perhaps more than any military might they may obtain will be their most potent threat to those who are their opponents.
With the current state of the world economy, not sure what would happen for example if we had another oil embargo.
Iran's possible ability to choke off shipments of oil from the Persian Gulf region would most definitely pose a threat to the world's sluggishly growing economies, which remain fragile, as well as broader U.S. vital interests. With resource nationalism likely to grow more prominent in the years ahead, the risk of such a scenario should be among those considered by policy makers. Hence, at least in my view, even if the Israel-Iran issue was non-existent or completely irrelevant, Iran's growing power would be a major international concern.
Compounding the possible evolution in the region's balance of power is growing U.S. vulnerability to just such a cut-off in access to Persian Gulf oil supplies. The lack of an aggressive effort by the U.S., not to mention other major oil consumers, to diversify their energy supply makes them increasingly vulnerable to oil supply disruptions/resulting price shocks, as the Persian Gulf will likely account for a growing share of the world's oil production down the road. IMO, this lack of effort highlights anew a tragic and persistent failure to learn from past crises that were not of a prolonged duration (1973 Arab oil embargo, 1979 Iranian oil embargo, 2008 oil price spike). Political rhetoric swearing commitment to energy supply diversification rings hollow when measured by policy actions. Unfortunately, credibility of political rhetoric is much less important than the very real increase in vulnerability to the kind of risk you describe.
Finally, often lost in the discussion of Iran's growing military power, is Iran's aggressive efforts to court ties with potential strategic partners. Iran continues to strengthen energy export links with China where demand for oil is increasing robustly. Given China's need for oil and strong economic growth to maintain social stability, that deepening bilateral relationship helps provide Iran with diplomatic insulation from truly severe sanctions that would target its energy sector. Iran also continues to intensify its already strong relationship with Venezuela. Were Iran to try to target the U.S. with an oil embargo, it is not implausible that Venezuela (a major U.S. supplier) might well cooperate.
Spheres of influence--a reality in the past, the present, and almost certainly the future (even if some idealists argue that they have become obsolete)--may shift with demographics. Demographic change can create opportunities for outsiders who previously enjoyed less leverage to increase their influence. At the same time, it can erode the leverage of others.
Iran's possible ability to choke off shipments of oil from the Persian Gulf region would most definitely pose a threat to the world's sluggishly growing economies, which remain fragile, as well as broader U.S. vital interests. With resource nationalism likely to grow more prominent in the years ahead, the risk of such a scenario should be among those considered by policy makers. Hence, at least in my view, even if the Israel-Iran issue was non-existent or completely irrelevant, Iran's growing power would be a major international concern.
Unfortunately, all that worldwide access to diverse information has not resulted in knowledge of history, but simply the acceptance of an alternate one.
The FACT remains that Lebanon had a Christian majority upon its inception and that it was just not assumed to be yet another Islamic state by those bandying about notions as to which country had the most influence in its internal politics. That you do not know this, and have so rejected western culture that you have embraced the Arab street view of the world does not change this fact.
That's one half of the equation. The other half of the equation has to do with all that which ISN'T physical, but the stuff of ideology and influence played out in more subtle ways.
There is a reason almost all Europeans who have ever posted in these forums have extremely similar world views when it comes to the Middle east, and that is because of the way European media portrays world politics. That portrayal is heavily influenced by the need for oil, and is conducted in such a way as to cozy up ideologically to those who possess the stuff. Newspaper reporting siezes upon certain buzz words, frames issues according to certain sensitivities, and speaks in a language designed to avoid key areas of confrontation with those who sell them their oil. Accordingly, those who read these accounts are influenced in ways beyond their understanding, and repeat the same framing mechanisms as have been presented to them.
Oil is the hammer that drives the propaganda war, which has already succeeded in transforming public opinion in Europe. The very fact that we are discussing whether it is Saudi Arabia or Iran who is to control a once Christian country indicates we are losing it. In 40 or 50 years, will we be having similar discussions about other countries?
Despite continuous and inflammatory failed attempts by similarly minded members, in this forum and the Europe forum, to paint Europeans as a single entity with one brainwashed view of the World Politick you still persist with this. There is no doubt a sizeable proportion of Europeans who do not agree with your viewpoint in many different ways but I would ask you why Europeans do not have the right to pursue their Global Interests when you vehemently affirm the right for the US and Israel to pursue theirs in the Middle East?
I for one am reviled by the way we deal with Saudi Arabia but resources and control of them make very strange bedfellows, this is NOT unusual. Going back to Dons very good point, we have had plenty of time to ween ourselves off of Middle East oil but choose not to do so, so we have to live with that. It is also a fact of grown up life that power balances change and sometimes you have to choose the lesser evil. The alternative and rather 20th Century view is that we can shoot and kill our way through this and it seems de rigeur amongst many hawks on here that we need to go across and deal the filthy Muslims a good old fashioned beating. How has that been successful in the last two hundred years?
With rare exceptions, the Europeans who have posted here over the years have been so virulently anti-Israel, they differ little, if at all, from the prevailing attitudes found on the Arab street. If you actually wanted to prove my observations errant, instead of marching so completely in lockstep with this prevailing orthodoxy, you would be better served by a display of attitudes that were not so completely conformist.
Your every word proves my observations as spot on.
I do not think Europe's perspective on Israel can be explained by oil imports...
Spheres of influence--a reality in the past, the present, and almost certainly the future (even if some idealists argue that they have become obsolete)--may shift with demographics. Demographic change can create opportunities for outsiders who previously enjoyed less leverage to increase their influence. At the same time, it can erode the leverage of others.
A question that comes out of this is world energy policy. That is, when Iran has consolidated power in the region they will be able to use oil as a weapon. That perhaps more than any military might they may obtain will be their most potent threat to those who are their opponents.
With the current state of the world economy, not sure what would happen for example if we had another oil embargo.
Oil imports are just one of a number of factors that shape Europe's interests vis-a-vis the Middle East. Moreover, the intensity of interests varies from EU state to EU state. I used the oil imports situation to help illustrate one area in which the Mideast's oil producers have greater leverage. It is not an all-inclusive description. It does not preclude other dimensions that shape the relationship.
The problem is, I do not think it really is a factor. Aside from domestic European oil production there is Russia's oil exports with countries like Algeria and Libya being the biggest contributors to the major European powers. Honestly it seems those countries most dependent on Middle Eastern states for oil are also the most in line with American foreign policy concerning the Middle East.
I think when you get right down to it the European Union is just less inclined towards the kind of policies we are talking about. Honestly, most member states of the EU are majority atheist or agnostic and so any notion that they would even care about Lebanon as a formerly majority Christian country is kind of silly.
...so any notion that they would even care about Lebanon as a formerly majority Christian country is kind of silly.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?