Middle-East on the brink of international realignment?

[Tahuti]

First, lets assume Assad loses in Syria. The Alawites have lost power and Syria becomes a Sunni Arab dominated nation again, pretty much in sync with population of Syria. What happens is that Iran loses its only Shi'a Arab ally in the region. Considering the Iranian general population hasn't strong antipathy towards Israel or the West in general and the fact Iran can no longer maintain politically expedient alliances with Arab Countries - except perhaps for Iraq - Iran and Israel decide to do the impossible and go for reapproachment. This way, both nations can focus their efforts against their common Sunni Arab enemies.

Israel (alongside the oil-lobby) then persuades the US government to restore ties with Iran as well.

So what would happen next? The US runs into trouble with Saudi-Arabia? Israeli-Iranian reapproachment sets the stage for solving Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Or is this entirely unlikely?

 

[Save_Ferris]

Iran and Israel uniting sounds like a cheesy movie plot. That stuff doesn't happen IRL.

 

[Verarde]

I highly doubt that will happen.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I highly doubt that Israel and Iran will suddenly get along if Syria falls to the rebels and goes democratic.

What is far more likely, IMO is that Israel will get fed up with sanctions not stopping Iran enriching Uranium and will attack. But that will probably spiral into a nasty war. Israel doesn't really have a lot of options.

I do think that the Arab spring is going to force Israel to deal with the Palestinian statehood question however. The thing about the dictatorships that are falling is that they prevented the populace from making policies to antagonize Israel over the issue. Egypt is a good example of this.

With the dictators out of the way and policy in the hands of democratically elected governments, I expect a massive diplomatic push from the Arab world to get Israel to recognize a Palestinian state.

 

[Virote_Considon]

If Iran finds itself isolated, it'd step up its anti-Israel rhetoric even more. It's anti-Israel rhetoric exists for the most part to help them gain a better standing and more support in the Muslim world.

 

[del62]

The only real way for a better relationship between Iran and Israel (and the west for that matter) is the crumbling of the power of the Mullahs within Iran, something like an Arab revolt, this was tried and suppressed not long ago, but who know's the fall of Syria might renew the impetus for this.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The only real way for a better relationship between Iran and Israel (and the west for that matter) is the crumbling of the power of the Mullahs within Iran, something like an Arab revolt, this was tried and suppressed not long ago, but who know's the fall of Syria might renew the impetus for this.

I don't think even the fall of the regime will help Iran/Israel relations. See my above post

 

[Joecoolyo]

I don't think even the fall of the regime will help Iran/Israel relations. See my above post

It might. A lot of the anti-Israel sentiment expressed by the Iranian government is political-power-play and stuff like that. Get them out of power and reconciliation is possible if both sides really push for it.

And I highly doubt Israel is going to attack Iran anytime soon. As with Iran, a lot of the sabre-rattling is just political power-play in Israel.

 

[Ajidica]

While an Iranian-Israeli rapproachment is unlikely to happen so long as the current parties remain in power, it isn't beyond the realm of possibility. Israel and Iran had a rather strong relation under the Shah and had some rather interesting relations with Revolutionary Iran (such as serving as the middlemen for funneling arms to Iran during Iran-Contra).

 

[hobbsyoyo]

It might. A lot of the anti-Israel sentiment expressed by the Iranian government is political-power-play and stuff like that. Get them out of power and reconciliation is possible if both sides really push for it.

And I highly doubt Israel is going to attack Iran anytime soon. As with Iran, a lot of the sabre-rattling is just political power-play in Israel.

It's possible that the anti-Israel sentiment is only propoganda - but I still think that average Iranians side with the Palestinians and would act jointly with the newly-democractic Arab countries to pressure Israel.

I hope Israel doesn't attack Iran ever. It's not like the Iraqi and Syrian reactors they hit at all. There would be a major war IMHO if they attacked. I just don't see a lot of options for them. When a country talks about wiping another one off the map and is also pursuing technology that can lead to nuclear weapons in spite of crippling sanctions...I just don't know. As others pointed out, it's unlikely the Iranians would attack first against a nuclear armed opponent with nuclear armed allies.

But for they Israelis, all they need to do is think an attack is coming to decide to act first.

 

[amadeus]

Iran and Israel uniting sounds like a cheesy movie plot. That stuff doesn't happen IRL.

Except for when Israel supported Iran in the Iran-Iraq war and sold it hundreds of millions of dollars in weapons in exchange for Iranian oil.

()

 

[ParkCungHee]

he fact Iran can no longer maintain politically expedient alliances with Arab Countries - except perhaps for Iraq -

You say that like Iraq is a bad ally to have.

 

[Virote_Considon]

To put the argument that Iran and Israel aren't gonna buddy up, I'll put accross this point:

Iran-Israel relations will only improve when Saudi-Israel relations take a significant turn for the worse. Iran's foreign policy is essentially all about counter-balancing the Saudis, and vice-verse; ideologically, they each see themselves as the head of the Islamic world, and for as long as a) this remains the case, and b) Saudi Arabia still holds the Hejaz, they'll still see counter-balancing each other as the biggest foreign policy objective.

After all, why did the Saudis and other Gulf states finance Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war? As the US-led invasion of '91 shows, it wasn't out of any real concern for Iraq itself, but instead to contain the ideological flow of the Iranians from its inevitable gravitation towards the Muslim Holy Lands.

 

[Tahuti]

You say that like Iraq is a bad ally to have.

No, it isn't. But unlike Syria, it does not have a direct reason to hold a grudge against Israel. Officially it still is Anti-Israel, but if they have enough interests to openly contend its Sunni Arab neighbours, they might at the very least adopt a policy of indifference, akin to what Saudi-Arabia now has because of its ties to the USA.

If Iran finds itself isolated, it'd step up its anti-Israel rhetoric even more. It's anti-Israel rhetoric exists for the most part to help them gain a better standing and more support in the Muslim world.

Problem is Iran already has deplorable relations with most Muslim countries because most Muslim countries are Sunni, while Iran is Shi'a. What you say is true though, but only as long (the Shi'ite) Assad stays in power in Syria. Once his régime crumbles, Iran can redirect it's Anti-Israel rethoric into Anti-Arab rethoric.

The only real way for a better relationship between Iran and Israel (and the west for that matter) is the crumbling of the power of the Mullahs within Iran, something like an Arab revolt, this was tried and suppressed not long ago, but who know's the fall of Syria might renew the impetus for this.

Actually, not even a fundamentalistically Islamic régime does by definition need to have trouble with Israel. Israel has trouble with Palestine. The Palestinians are A) Arab and B) mainly Sunni or Christian while Iran is A) Persian and B) Shi'a Islamic. Thus I don't see why Iran should feel an obligation to care about the Palestinians, provided they don't have allies that do have ties to Palestine, like Syria.

Except for when Israel supported Iran in the Iran-Iraq war and sold it hundreds of millions of dollars in weapons in exchange for Iranian oil.

While an Iranian-Israeli rapproachment is unlikely to happen so long as the current parties remain in power, it isn't beyond the realm of possibility. Israel and Iran had a rather strong relation under the Shah and had some rather interesting relations with Revolutionary Iran (such as serving as the middlemen for funneling arms to Iran during Iran-Contra).

Indeed, the precedents are there already. In fact, current hostilities between Israel and Iran are in a way, quite unnatural.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Problem is Iran already has deplorable relations with most Muslim countries because most Muslim countries are Sunni, while Iran is Shi'a. What you say is true though, but only as long (the Shi'ite) Assad stays in power in Syria. Once his régime crumbles, Iran can redirect it's Anti-Israel rethoric into Anti-Arab rethoric.

Assad is an Alawite, as are the ruling class of Syria and the army. The Alawites are another Muslim sect - one that most other sects viciously hate for their mysticism. The Alawites of Syria were favored during French rule and rose to power through the army and eventually a coup. The majority of the country is Sunni, however, and the situation could potentially devolve into sectarian violence if the reigns of the Alawite dominated government are thrown off.

Actually, not even a fundamentalistically Islamic régime does by definition need to have trouble with Israel. Israel has trouble with Palestine. The Palestinians are A) Arab and B) mainly Sunni or Christian while Iran is A) Persian and B) Shi'a Islamic. Thus I don't see why Iran should feel an obligation to care about the Palestinians, provided they don't have allies that do have ties to Palestine, like Syria.

The Iranians have made a point of supporting the Palestinians by supporting Hamas, a terrorist outfit that runs the Gaza Strip. Although at this point the Gazans themselves actually voted them into office - so I guess they have some tiny measure of legitimacy. They mostly do it to fight via proxy against Israel and for the prestige it garners in the rest of the Arab world.

 

[Gen.Mannerheim]

Problem is Iran already has deplorable relations with most Muslim countries because most Muslim countries are Sunni, while Iran is Shi'a. What you say is true though, but only as long (the Shi'ite) Assad stays in power in Syria. Once his régime crumbles, Iran can redirect it's Anti-Israel rethoric into Anti-Arab rethoric.

Iran would never do something so stupid as to go anti-Arab. They are already isolated in the arab world and losing their only remaning ally there. Two of the three biggest powers in the region, Saudi Arabia and Iraq, hate Iran as does NATO garrisoned Afghanistan (Though the Afghans are more focused on a possible war with Pakistan atm). I see Iran trying to reform its position and make new friends with democratic Egypt (the other Arab power) and Lybia. The hope for them would be that they could form an Iran-Egypt-Lybia anti-West bloc to counter the existing Saudi-Iraq-Turkey-Jordan pro-West bloc (this grouping doesn't exist on paper but through strong ties with U.S./U.K./ and NATO).

I don't think this will happen though. Iran will try but become even more isolated. Their only remaning option would be to try and get closer with Russia and China.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Their only remaning option would be to try and get closer with Russia and China.

The only way methinks they can get any closer is to station Russian or Chinese nuclear weapons on their soil.

 

[Gen.Mannerheim]

The only way methinks they can get any closer is to station Russian or Chinese nuclear weapons on their soil.

What better way to prevent Israel from attacking you. The U.S. would never let Jerusalem possibly hit Russian equipment and risk a new world war. I don't think China is really intrested in Iran, they have a running start on African oil and have to counter increasing U.S., Japanese, and Australian influence in Asia. The fact that communist Vietnam is friendlier with the U.S. than China is not lost on Beijing.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

What better way to prevent Israel from attacking you. The U.S. would never let Jerusalem possibly hit Russian equipment and risk a new world war. I don't think China is really intrested in Iran, they have a running start on African oil and have to counter increasing U.S., Japanese, and Australian influence in Asia. The fact that communist Vietnam is friendlier with the U.S. than China is not lost on Beijing.

I'll just point out that a lot of the reactor equipment that Israel possibly could/should/will hit is Russian made and/or Russian owned. Of course that didn't stop them from hitting the French made Osirak reactor. It's all so complicated for them - throwing Russian and Chinese nukes in would make the situation 1,000,000 times worse.

I agree with China being 'into' Africa more, but I don't kow that they aren't interested in Iran.

 

[Save_Ferris]

Except for when Israel supported Iran in the Iran-Iraq war and sold it hundreds of millions of dollars in weapons in exchange for Iranian oil.

()

I don't see that happening today.