A NATO-Styled Arab Alliance is Timely

NATO was established in 1949, in the aftermath of WWII and has regrouped the post-war exhausted Western nations of Europe with the mighty U.S. The prospects of further communist expansion on the continent prompted these nations to form the alliance. Despite the ‘obsolescence’ jibe of Pres. Trump, NATO has played a pivotal role in deterring further Russian expansion, comforting allies, and strengthening ties between European nations who were previously at war (UK-France-Germany).

Fast forward to 2017, and a nuclear-armed Iran poses the largest threat ever encountered by the Arab world, including the Arabs’ arch-nemesis Israel. Iran is a regional superpower that has engaged in a protracted conventional war against an Arab nation to wit, Iraq (1980 to 1988), exported its guerilla warfare via proxy militias to Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Lebanon; and threatens to destabilize the Arab established order (code: for Sunni nations). To thwart Iran’s relentless attempts at expanding its regional hegemony, some Arab nations ought to seriously consider forming a NATO-styled alliance. The Peninsula Shield Force, the military arm of the GCC, is effectively –for a lack of a better word- obsolete.

Forming a regional NATO-styled alliance is not a novel idea, but a timely one. Why not novel? Because, sixty years ago, in 1957, the so-called Eisenhower Doctrine for the Middle East was a first attempt by a bold US administration to contain an assertive brand of Arab nationalism led by Nasser of Egypt. Nasser’s belligerent policies were directed at the former colonial powers (Britain & France) and their so-called 'implant' in the region (Israel), as well as, towards the moderate Arabs (Saudi). Arab nationalism had reached a new fervor after the 1957 tripartite attack by France, Britain and Israel on the Suez Canal. Nasser’s propaganda machine against Israel resembled to a large extent the vitriolic recitals of Iran’s theocratic leaders targeting the US and Israel, and more recently, Saudi. In 1957, there emerged a ‘royal axis’ regrouping the kingdoms of Saudi, Jordan, and Baghdad, with the Eisenhower Doctrine attracting  additional Arab and non-Arab nations. The non-Arab countries included such heavyweights as Pakistan, Iran and Turkey. All found in the new world order led by the US a better orientation for their foreign relations, rather than the bombastic politics of Nasser and his chauvinist, zealot followers.

This idea of military alliance is worth reviving, with few exceptions and some noteworthy replacements. Iran being the target of this containment policy could not be part, this time around, of such alliance. Maybe this possibility could be revived after the Iranian youths topple the corrupt and out-of-touch regime. This revived alliance, if it sees the day, will find a strong backing by the US, Britain and France, and would have to include at inception Saudi, the UAE, Bahrain, Jordan Egypt, and Morocco. Saudi and the UAE would bring advanced weapons’ systems, modern infrastructure (ports & airports), and funds. As a cherry on top, Bahrain being host to the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet would add depth to maritime warfare capabilities. Egypt, Jordan and Morocco would bring demographics and hardened fighting experiences both in conventional and unconventional warfare.

Who else could join this posse? Qatar would be a ‘natural’ partner in such alliance, if and only if, the current dispute with its neighbors is quickly and efficiently resolved. Such addition could bring the host nation of a most advanced US Airbase. Few exceptions would have to be allowed. Kuwait and Oman would initially steer away from such alliance for separate reasons. Kuwait is still living the ‘national trauma’ of the first Gulf war and is struggling to free itself from the ghosts of another invasion by Iraq, Iran or whomever. Whilst more likely to contribute funds to such alliance, one should view present-day Kuwait more of a 'political' Switzerland of the Middle East than anyt...

NATO was established in 1949, in the aftermath of WWII and has regrouped the post-war exhausted Western nations of Europe with the mighty U.S. The prospects of further communist expansion on the continent prompted these nations to form the alliance. Despite the ‘obsolescence’ jibe of Pres. Trump, NATO has played a pivotal role in deterring further Russian expansion, comforting allies, and strengthening ties between European nations who were previously at war (UK-France-Germany).

Fast forward to 2017, and a nuclear-armed Iran poses the largest threat ever encountered by the Arab world, including the Arabs’ arch-nemesis Israel. Iran is a regional superpower that has engaged in a protracted conventional war against an Arab nation to wit, Iraq (1980 to 1988), exported its guerilla warfare via proxy militias to Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Lebanon; and threatens to destabilize the Arab established order (code: for Sunni nations). To thwart Iran’s relentless attempts at expanding its regional hegemony, some Arab nations ought to seriously consider forming a NATO-styled alliance. The Peninsula Shield Force, the military arm of the GCC, is effectively –for a lack of a better word- obsolete.

Forming a regional NATO-styled alliance is not a novel idea, but a timely one. Why not novel? Because, sixty years ago, in 1957, the so-called Eisenhower Doctrine for the Middle East was a first attempt by a bold US administration to contain an assertive brand of Arab nationalism led by Nasser of Egypt. Nasser’s belligerent policies were directed at the former colonial powers (Britain & France) and their so-called ‘implant’ in the region (Israel), as well as, towards the moderate Arabs (Saudi). Arab nationalism had reached a new fervor after the 1957 tripartite attack by France, Britain and Israel on the Suez Canal. Nasser’s propaganda machine against Israel resembled to a large extent the vitriolic recitals of Iran’s theocratic leaders targeting the US and Israel, and more recently, Saudi. In 1957, there emerged a ‘royal axis’ regrouping the kingdoms of Saudi, Jordan, and Baghdad, with the Eisenhower Doctrine attracting  additional Arab and non-Arab nations. The non-Arab countries included such heavyweights as Pakistan, Iran and Turkey. All found in the new world order led by the US a better orientation for their foreign relations, rather than the bombastic politics of Nasser and his chauvinist, zealot followers.

This idea of military alliance is worth reviving, with few exceptions and some noteworthy replacements. Iran being the target of this containment policy could not be part, this time around, of such alliance. Maybe this possibility could be revived after the Iranian youths topple the corrupt and out-of-touch regime. This revived alliance, if it sees the day, will find a strong backing by the US, Britain and France, and would have to include at inception Saudi, the UAE, Bahrain, Jordan Egypt, and Morocco. Saudi and the UAE would bring advanced weapons’ systems, modern infrastructure (ports & airports), and funds. As a cherry on top, Bahrain being host to the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet would add depth to maritime warfare capabilities. Egypt, Jordan and Morocco would bring demographics and hardened fighting experiences both in conventional and unconventional warfare.

Who else could join this posse? Qatar would be a ‘natural’ partner in such alliance, if and only if, the current dispute with its neighbors is quickly and efficiently resolved. Such addition could bring the host nation of a most advanced US Airbase. Few exceptions would have to be allowed. Kuwait and Oman would initially steer away from such alliance for separate reasons. Kuwait is still living the ‘national trauma’ of the first Gulf war and is struggling to free itself from the ghosts of another invasion by Iraq, Iran or whomever. Whilst more likely to contribute funds to such alliance, one should view present-day Kuwait more of a ‘political’ Switzerland of the Middle East than anything else.   Oman does not see itself as a diehard GCC member. Its predominant religion (the Ibadhis), tradition, and history are markedly different from its neighbors. While its territory borders several Arab nations (Saudi, UAE, Yemen), its ties into the Indian sub-continent (India-Iran) are too strong to be ignored. One should accept that Oman, for the foreseeable future, will act as a non-aligned nation in the conflicts of the Middle East.

Depending on the level of success in containing Iranian’s expansionist policies and the use of its foreign militias in out-of-border warfare, one could aspire for Lebanon, Iraq and even Yemen to join such alliance at one point in time. Surely, an autonomous Kurdish region is a logical add-on. Finally, and until a drastic change occurs in Erdogan’s short-sighted, biased and fanatical obsession about the Muslim Brotherhood, Turkey should be counted out, and more probably should be viewed with great suspicion. Truth be told, if NATO 21st century’s failures are counted, Turkey would win the prize hands down.

All told, a NATO-styled alliance among Arab nations is not only timely, but rather a must to preserve order, stability and regional peace. Its goal would not be limited to containing Iran and combating ISIS, but to win over additional members so as to constitute the single largest club of regional nations with a vested interest in a lasting peace.

On that occasion, a quote from Helmut Von Moltke the Elder, German Field Marshal and chief of staff of the Prussian army for thirty years, resonates till today with an astounding lucidity: “In the last analysis, luck comes only to the well prepared”. Arab nations should not count themselves simply lucky because of the ‘re-pivot’ of the US administration in favor of their regional priorities, but rather be prepared for all dire eventualities, as they will inevitably come.