Mid-East remains a seeming Gordian Knot

The ongoing recriminations between Israel and its foes in the Middle-East are proof that the Middle East problem, as it has come to be known, is the seeming Gordian Knot of global politics. We say ‘seeming’ because this is an issue over which much progress could have been achieved, in terms of conflict-resolution, over the years, provided the more predominant powers of the world worked doggedly and unitedly towards resolving the issue, instead of reducing it to a pawn in domestic as well as inter-state politics.

The Middle East and the Gulf were two regions which were coveted most by particularly the West over the decades. ‘Dividing and Ruling’ the Middle East was the game plan of the West from the time of, perhaps, the British-engineered Balfour Declaration at the turn of the last century. To be sure, some moral concerns weighed very heavily with sections of the West, in relation to the Jewish diaspora, but the seeming lack of focus and purpose on the West’s part in the Middle East has played a considerable role in delaying a fair solution to the problem.

If a firm resolve manifested itself among particularly the major Western powers in bringing a fair solution to the conflict, the issue could have been contained long ago and this is why one could say that the Middle East is a ‘seeming’ Gordian Knot.

Conflict resolution process

If the objective observer is to be guided by the criterion of equity, it could be ascertained that the two-state solution is the answer to the Middle East imbroglio. There are two nations that have been dispossessed in the region, the Palestinians and the Israelis, and it is the creation of two independent states, which would coexist peacefully, which would help defuse the problem. Instead of using the nations concerned to secure some narrow ends, the West should have got about the task of helping in advancing the two-state formula from the early decades of the 20th century, for the purpose of stabilizing the Middle East. This, of course, did not happen and as a result the problem has continued to bedevil world politics.

The US has attempted to play honest broker in the conflict over the years but it is plain to see that it is not performing a substantive role in getting the two sides to appreciate each others viewpoints. For instance, Israel cannot continue with its efforts at expanding its settlements in the contested territories if the cause of conflict-resolution is to be served, but the US has not been proving very effective in containing the Jewish practice of enlarging its settlements in the regions in question.

To be sure, these and many more are complex issues which cannot be resolved in a hurry but some progress should have been registered in the so far fitful conflict resolution process, if hope is to be entertained over Middle East peace.

International efforts

Western policy in the Cold War years was to curtail perceived Soviet influence-building in the Middle East and the Gulf. For instance, British concern was high during the Suez Canal crisis of the mid-fifties that Western business interests would lose their controlling interests in the Canal which proved pivotal in the West receiving its oil imports unhindered.

This accounted for Western military action in the Canal at the height of the crisis. Egyptian President Gamal Nazar’s nationalist credentials would, no doubt, have aggravated Western fears at the time and it could have been observed that from the time of the Suez crisis, a focus of Western policy in the Middle East was to have a West-friendly political leadership in Egypt. Western dreams in this regard came true with the coming to power in Egypt of Presidents Anwar Sadat and Husni Mabarak.

It is the continuing concern in the West for the safe passage to its shores of strategic resources, such as oil, which is partly accounting for the West’s continuing support of Israel, at even considerable costs to regional peace, but unless and until the West impresses on Israel the need to concertedly work towards a just peace in the Middle East, this problem would continue to be a source of conflict in the region.

Chronic political instability in Libya, Egypt and now Syria, is a major concern for the West and it is yet to be seen whether the West could have its way entirely in the states concerned because Russia too is anxious over the way developments are evolving in this region which was hotly contested by the superpowers. Russian President Vladimir Putin is on record as saying that ‘outside powers’ should not have a say in the affairs of the region. Thus, the stage is set for Cold War type tensions in the Middle East which do not augur well for collective international efforts to bring stability to the region swiftly.