“ … the US was certainly caught off guard by the success of the talks. I am sure that US officials knew about the meetings because such things are very hard to keep secret, and the Saudis would have let US officials know broadly about the talks. But knowing about them is not the same as expecting them to be successful,” said Kurk Dorsey, a professor of history at the University of New Hampshire in an exclusive interview with the IRNA.
Dorsey said that the decision by Iran and Saudi Arabia to return to diplomatic relations was a wise step by both sides, adding that the move will facilitate discussions on other regional issues, including the wart in Yemen.
Following is the full text of Dorsey’s interview with IRNA’s correspondent in New York in which the academic figure has spoken about major regional and international issues:
An important diplomatic development in the region is the agreement between Iran and Saudi Arabia. What factors do you think led to the conclusion of this agreement?
It is important to remember why relations between the two nations had been severed in the first place in 2016, an attack on the Saudi embassy in Tehran. A return to diplomatic relations was a wise step by both sides, because it will facilitate discussions on issues such as Yemen. The two nations do not want to stumble into war, but states with diplomatic relations are not automatically friendly. We do not yet know enough to know what each side gave to the other to complete the deal, but it is telling that the embassies do not yet appear to have reopened.
What are the reasons that Saudi Arabia re-established diplomatic relations with Iran and other countries in the region, such as Syria, after many years of cold relations?
I am not an expert on Saudi foreign policy, but at least with regard to Syria it makes sense to resume relations now that some semblance of stability has returned to that country. Saudi Arabia closed its embassy out of concern for safety during the civil war, but of course that was also a political statement. Taking steps toward resuming normal relations is just a realistic policy right now. It would also make sense if the Saudis want to reduce tension with neighboring states so it could spend more on domestic reforms and reduce spending on foreign policy.
Why has China played a mediating role in reaching an agreement between Iran and Saudi Arabia and is seeking a similar role on other issues? What do you think are China's goals?
China has a simple goal, which is to remake the global order from one set up by the United States after World War II. It has pursued the Belt and Road Initiative for many years to bring a range of countries into its orbit. As it has gained economic and military power, it has also pursued diplomatic power. Playing a significant role in West Asia for the first time is a mark of success. I also suspect that the trade deal that China signed with Iran two years ago gives China significant leverage over Iran, so I believe that we will learn at some point in the future that China is guaranteeing Iran's compliance in any progress with Saudi Arabia.
The agreement between Iran and Saudi Arabia in China and other developments such as the abolition of the dollar as the main currency in transactions of some countries and the efforts in this field have caused concern in the West as they are seen as another sign of change in the world order. Given the regional and international developments, will the world soon witness changes towards a new order?
I doubt it. We have been talking about the decline of US leadership since the 1970s, yet as soon as Joe Biden was elected president, most nations in the world welcomed the US back to the role it had before Trump was elected. If Trump wins the election in 2024, then the US will voluntarily step back from leadership, in which case there will be a void. It may surprise Iranians, but most people who work with the Chinese government around the world do not enjoy the experience. US power will wane at some point, if for no other reason than our unsustainable national debt. But I doubt that many countries will acquiesce to a world led by China.
How do you see the impact of the great rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia on other issues in the Middle East, from the crisis in Yemen to Syria, the United Arab Emirates, Lebanon, Bahrain, Egypt and other countries?
Calling it a “great rapprochement” is a serious overstatement. The two states have agreed to resume diplomatic relations; they have not announced any substantive deals, particularly on Yemen. The leadership groups in each country still dislike and distrust each other. So let's give it a few years to see if they actually cooperate on anything, starting with Yemen and Lebanon. If they can find a way to back off their proxy wars, then maybe there will be room for cooperation on broader issues in the region.
Despite US officials' claims that they knew about the negotiations between Iran and Saudi Arabia, they seem surprised and shocked by the China-brokered deal as well as other developments, including the normalization of Syria's relations with Arab countries, which has prompted U.S. officials to travel to various countries in the region.
In particular, William Burns, the head of CIA, traveled to Saudi Arabia and expressed his concern and dissatisfaction with Saudi Arabia's policies in establishing relations with Iran and Syria. What is your assessment in this regard?
Well, the US was certainly caught off guard by the success of the talks. I am sure that US officials knew about the meetings because such things are very hard to keep secret, and the Saudis would have let US officials know broadly about the talks. But knowing about them is not the same as expecting them to be successful. Right now, the highest US priority is helping Ukraine defend itself, so that distracts the US from other issues but also means that seeing an ally, Saudi Arabia, make progress in negotiations with three of Russia's biggest backers, is a major disappointment.
Do not this agreement and other regional developments point to the decline of American influence in the region and in the world? Is not it time for the American government to reconsider its policy, which is mainly based on pressure, coercion and war?
US policy uses a wide range of persuasive techniques, but to say that it is mainly based on pressure, coercion, and war overlooks the enormous amount of cooperation and common interests in US relations with much of the world. There is a reason that so many countries follow the US lead on a range of issues, especially Ukraine—they see the alternatives. Ask the people of Vietnam, the Philippines, or Singapore, for instance, how they see Chinese influence. So yes, the US has used force and coercion, and it is seeing a lessening of influence vis-a-vis China, but it is not a crisis. Having said that, a smart administration always needs to reconsider its policy as conditions change.
How do you assess the impact of the important agreement between Iran and Saudi Arabia mediated by China on the negotiations to return to the JCPOA? Given Washington's fear of China's mediation role, what are the “real reasons” for the Biden administration's delay in returning to the JCPOA, and will it return to the agreement before the 2024 presidential election?
JCPOA is probably dead by now. The Biden Administration, I believe, calculated that the Iranian government wanted to resume JCPOA more than the US did, so it would allow the Iranians to come to the US. Neither side made any substantial concessions, then the Ukraine war broke out, and cutting a deal with Iran went lower on the US priority list. The JCPOA is not especially well understood or popular in the US, so resuming it before the election would not help Biden. The Trump Administration made a bad decision to withdraw from the deal, and that made Biden's path back to it difficult as well. The Chinese brokering of the path back to normalcy did not cause fear in Washington, and it probably did not significantly hamper efforts to bring back JCPOA.
The Israeli regime is also upset and concerned about the agreement between Saudi Arabia and Iran. How does this agreement affect the regime and US efforts to normalize Tel Aviv's relations with regional Arab countries?
The Israeli government certainly hoped to establish normal relations with Saudi Arabia, so the Saudi-Iranian move to normalization has to be a disappointment for Israel (which claims [occupied] Jerusalem as its capital of course). I do not foresee any more steps to normalize relations between Israel and Arab states any time soon, but it had made surprising strides under Trump.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's cabinet has been in serious crisis since he took office, and demonstrators have been taking to the streets in Tel Aviv for weeks. Biden has also sent a message to Netanyahu in this regard. How do you assess this crisis in light of the important regional developments?
Israel's domestic crisis does not seem connected to its foreign policy at all. Instead, it is an interesting example of how a democratically elected, but flawed, government can overreach in a domestic policy proposal. The government tried to ignore the protests but finally had to admit that its legitimacy as a government was being lost. So far, the Netanyahu administration seems to have decided that it cannot pull off the changes to the courts that it wanted. It is refreshing to see a government in West Asia that backs down in the face of domestic protest rather than go to war against its own people.
**4261
Your Comment