The prospects for establishing a regional security organization in the Middle East
The situation in Iraq and the rapid escalation of “conflict potential” in regions around the Middle East considerably complicate the search for a “historical compromise” between Israel and the Arab states. (By Andrei Baklanov, Head of the International Affairs Department of the Federation Council of the Russian Federal Assembly)
By Andrei Baklanov,
Head of the International Affairs Department of the Federation Council of the Russian Federal Assembly
The Arab-Israeli conflict is considered the key “fault line” in the Middle East. Nevertheless, today the situation in Iraq and the rapid escalation of “conflict potential” in regions around the Middle East such as the Horn of Africa (Somalia, the Ethiopian-Eritrean conflict) considerably complicate the search for a “historical compromise” between Israel and the Arab states. For all of these reasons, it seems necessary to form a new, broader agenda, compile a new list of potential participants in future talks, and, eventually, establish a new security system.
Governments must also now deal with the leadership of radical groups, the role and influence of which have grown in recent years as a consequence of diplomatic failures and the inability to find peaceful resolutions for many of the conflicts in the Middle East. Moreover, a number of such groups, most notably Hamas, have attained significant political influence and a high degree of legitimacy as the result of elections.
It is clear that Israel will never officially negotiate with Hamas and other such radical groups. But at the same time all those involved in the conflict, including the Israelis, constantly make specific demands to Hamas, Hezbollah and other groups, thus recognizing the significant de facto role these groups play in current events.
In this context, the question arises as to what could help attract such organizations to reach a compromise.
In our view, granting radical military and political organizations the same status in future negotiations as the region’s governments is unrealistic. Therefore, the negotiations could be held in a “two-tier” format.
Full-fledged participants – governments and international (regional) organizations – should be able to negotiate by means of conventional mechanisms such as plenary sessions, working groups, etc. Non-governmental organizations and associations, including military and political alliances, could work within socio-political “caucuses,” which would be a kind of lower negotiating tier where approaches to the issues under discussion could be developed.
Another option is applying the so-called Rhodes Formula of negotiations to representatives of radical groups that are ready to participate in the peace process. This would allow real-time knowledge of the reactions of extremely influential participants in the conflict to the proposals under discussion.
It has to be said that as of yet there has been no practical progress on the main “substantive” endeavor; several years have passed since the Road Map was made public, and the timelines outlined by this document have lost their relevancy. A new document should be developed to replace the Road Map. It could be called “The Main Principles of Middle Eastern Settlement.”
It is unlikely that the Big Four international mediators (France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the U.S.) would be able to accomplish this on their own. Regional powers should support their efforts. These could be Egypt (largest Arab country in the world and a “pioneer” in peace negotiations with Israel), Saudi Arabia (author of the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002 and a potential leading contributor to regional peacekeeping operations) and Jordan (a country with long-term and generally successful relations with the Israelis).
It would be important to make another attempt to revive the multilateral process by establishing a minimum of four working groups – an arms-control and regional security group, a water resources group, a refugee group and an economic group.
Thereafter, it would be possible to implement a program based on the following five elements or steps.
The first step should involve experts developing a framework for Middle Eastern security that would require mutual accountability and mutual coordination of the interests and concerns of all the main states in the region.
The second step should be an international social and political forum to consider the aforementioned proposals, providing these proposals are supported by the political establishment and public opinion in the countries of the region.
The third step should be a series of bilateral and multilateral “official diplomatic” meetings to draft a series of proposals outlining a regional security system.
The fourth step should be a representative, international conference to come up with an overall settlement in the Middle East.
The conference would involve specific working groups that would address the following key aspects of a possible regional security system:
- the development of a region-wide agreement (a charter for regional security) that would regulate relations between countries in the region;
- the formation of regional peacekeeping and security bodies (a Regional Security Council that included all countries in the region, as well as the most important sponsors of the peace process from outside the region);
- the establishment of a common economic space and development of region-wide projects (in energy, water supply, etc.)
The fifth step should be a series of bilateral and multilateral consultations to negotiate a final version of the proposed documents.
And, finally, the sixth step should be a concluding international conference on regional security where the resulting agreements would be ratified. These agreements would include a Regional Security Charter, which would act as a code of conduct for countries in the region and stipulate measures such as establishing a peacekeeping center, forming peacekeeping brigades (it is interesting that African countries are already working on implementing such a program on a practical level), etc. It would also be advisable to establish a center to monitor the execution of joint security agreements and contracts.
Follow Valdai Discussion Club on Twitter