Dr. Jon Alterman
SUSRIS Exclusive Interview
Regional Challenges for U.S. and Saudi Policymakers
Editor’s Note:
The vote-rigging charges that followed the June 2009 Iranian presidential election spawned violent clashes and a government crackdown. It came at a time when Tehran’s neighbors and the West were facing security challenges from Iran, especially their nuclear program developments. To help understand the implications of political strife in Iran for the United States and Saudi Arabia we turned to Dr. Jon Alterman, Director of the Middle East Program at the Center for International Studies in Washington, for his perspective in an exclusive SUSRIS interview. His insights then remain an important context for understanding current developments:
“There’s an underlying difference in how Iran is perceived by Saudis and Americans. The Saudis, and many of their Arab allies in the Gulf, see Iran as a long-term threat, regardless of who’s in power in Tehran. This isn’t about the Islamic Republic. It’s about traditional Persian ambitions, as they see it, on the southern shores of the Gulf. By contrast the United States continues to try to fix its relationship with Iran. The Americans have the sense that this is a solvable problem if the United States and its allies are only able to do the right thing. But many of Iran’s neighbors don’t see this as solvable — it’s a problem that needs to be managed. So between the Gulf Arab desire to manage the problem and the American impatience to solve it, there are sometimes tensions between the two sides.”
The rhetoric and posturing over the Iranian nuclear program is heating up on both sides of the issue and the United States is shifting its policy to a “pressure phase” so we again asked Dr. Alterman for his perspective on this important challenge in the Gulf. We also wanted to know what he thought about the fallout from the U.S.-Israeli discord on the question of settlements in the occupied territories and American credibility in the region.
We talked with Dr. Alterman by phone from Amman, one stop on his journey to the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Jordan to learn more about the national security challenges posed by water shortages in the Middle East. We look forward to the results of this research but today, we are pleased to share his perspective on U.S.-Saudi challenges in the Gulf in this exclusive interview. We also suggest you read yesterday’s SUSRIS exclusive interview with Ambassador Chas Freeman. ["The United States, Saudi Arabia, China, Iran and Israel - "An Interesting Moment" - A Conversation with Ambassador Chas Freeman"]
Regional Challenges for U.S. and Saudi Policymakers
A Conversation with Dr. Jon Alterman
SUSRIS: The signals from Riyadh, those in the public domain, are confusing about what Saudi Arabia believes should be done to staunch the Iranian nuclear challenge – no military action, sanctions are too long term, immediate action is needed. What would Saudi Arabia have the United States do about Iran?
Dr. Jon Alterman: First, there’s not a single Saudi view; there’s a range of Saudi views. There’s much more of a consensus on what the outcome should be than how to get it, and that’s not true only of the Saudis.
In conversations I’ve had with members of the Majlis Ash Shoura, the Saudi Consultative Council, about Iran they’ve backed away from saying anything specific. They say this is up to the government. There is not a broad, informed public debate in the Kingdom about the government’s position.
The most important consideration for Riyadh is that while there are short-term issues, Iran is not a short-term problem for Saudi Arabia. A major Saudi concern is that the United States might act in a short-term way and leave Saudi Arabia to deal with the long-term consequences.
It’s easy to imagine any number of things that would make the situation markedly worse. It’s hard to imagine anything that’s guaranteed to make the situation markedly better. The desire among Saudis would be for the United States not to do anything that will make the situation worse and hope that the United States can do some things that would make it better.
There is no unified Saudi view as to whether an Israeli strike would be a good thing or a bad thing. On the U.S. side, though, my discussions with both Israeli and American officials suggest that the scope and timing of any potential Israeli strike is something very much beyond the control of the U.S. government.
SUSRIS: Last week U.S. Defense Secretary Gates was in Saudi Arabia for consultations, characterized in a Pentagon press report as seeking help, ostensibly help to gain Chinese support for tougher sanctions on Iran. Talk about the nature of the US-Saudi relationship that has the Defense Secretary seeking help and specifically the involvement of Riyadh in gaining Chinese support vis-a-vis Iran.
Alterman: The United States shares a broad number of interests with Saudi Arabia. One of many is Gulf security, and Saudi Arabia plays a leadership role in the GCC.
Regarding China and UN sanctions on Iran, consider that Saudi Arabia is the number one oil exporter to China, sending about 40% more oil to China than Iran does. While there is a concern that it will be hard to get Chinese acquiescence to Security Council sanctions against Iran for its proliferation activities, consider that the Saudi-Chinese trade relationship is important to China, just as the U.S.-Chinese trade relationship is important. That may help the Chinese put its Iranian relationship in context.
For all of the talk of Sino-Iranian ties, it is important to remember this context. China is Iran’s largest trading partner, but Iran is not China’s largest trading partner. In fact, despite all the oil Iran sends to China, China has ten times more trade with the U.S., more trade with Saudi Arabia, more trade with Europe. And for most of the international community, Iranian actions are not only irresponsible, they are deeply threatening.
In this case, I believe the U.S. approach is not to tell the Saudis to squeeze the Chinese. Rather the U.S. desire is to coordinate broadly on common interests, one of which is to move forward on international action to change Iranian behavior.
SUSRIS: When Secretary Gates talked about China having been discussed with the Saudis, Riyadh quickly denied it was on the agenda. Is there some sensitivity among the Saudis about their relationship to China, a subject you explored in your book “The Vital Triangle,” in regard to security issues?
Alterman: The Saudis are mindful that that there will be a long term Saudi-Chinese trade relationship. China is one of the few growing, large oil markets in the world. The United States demand is flat. Europe is declining. When Saudi Arabia looks toward expanding markets, China is the most significant expanding oil market in the world. So that relationship has been growing and will continue to grow.
The Saudis are not about to order the Chinese around about how they should behave. However, the Saudis can and will underline a shared interest in Gulf security, the shared interest in non proliferation, the shared interest in the security of supply, which requires different behavior from Tehran than we have seen for the last several years.
SUSRIS: What’s your general assessment of the Iranian nuclear challenge for the United States and Saudi Arabia?
Alterman: When I speak to the leadership in the Gulf, there is a broader sense that their concerns with Iran are not short-term. They did not begin and will not end with the nuclear program. The challenges will have to be managed far into the future – a concern about the longer-term Iranian role in regional security. With respect to the nuclear issue, I am convinced that if America’s Gulf allies were presented with the choice between a nuclear Iran with the U.S. playing a deterrent role in the Gulf, or a non-nuclear Iran where the US pulls out of the Gulf, they would prefer the former. The Gulf states are not only trying to shape what the Iranians do in the long term, they are also trying to shape what the United States will do in the long term.
The cold hard reality is that no country or combination of countries can guarantee the security of the Gulf in the way the United States has done and will continue to do.
SUSRIS: The U.S.-Israeli relationship has colored America’s standing in the Arab and Muslim world but now there’s a report, by Mark Perry of Foreign Policy, that U.S. military leaders like General Petraeus of CENTCOM are surfacing concerns that “Israeli intransigence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was jeopardizing U.S. standing in the region .. and could cost American lives.” That question and the dispute between Washington and Tel Aviv over settlements suggest the game is changing. Is it and how does that play among America’s Arab allies, especially Saudi Arabia?
Alterman: There’s no question that the Arab-Israeli conflict is not only an irritant in the region, but an irritant in the U.S. relationships with governments and people throughout the Middle East.
That’s not new. What is new is what I sense to be an emerging divergence of strategy among some Americans and Israelis. There are Israelis who say military operations like the ones against South Lebanon in 2006 and Gaza in 2008 and 2009 are necessary military engagements that need to be carried out to deter and defeat hostile forces among its neighbors in perpetuity.
Some Israelis refer to it as “mowing the grass.” It is not something one likes to do but it is something that has to be done every few years. I don’t sense this is acceptable to many Americans. If there is an Israeli strategy of carrying out limited military operations every few years, resulting in the deaths of thousands – rather than an embrace of an ongoing diplomatic process the United States has been pressing for years to resolve the conflict – it will have a profound effect on the U.S.-Israeli strategic relationship.
It hasn’t happened yet, but I think what we have been seeing is more than a mere personality clash. We are starting to see a divergence in strategy about how Israel should respond to its neighbors.
SUSRIS: How do you think America’s Arab allies, like Saudi Arabia, view the current tension between the Obama Administration and the Israeli government?
Alterman: On this trip in the Middle East I have yet to hear anyone claiming any satisfaction about what is happening between the leaderships. There’s a lot of disappointment in what people see as the unfulfilled promises of the Cairo speech. There’s a lot of alarm in what people see as the policies of the Netanyahu government.
I don’t see an appreciation for the Obama Administration’s efforts, but I do sense that the mood for change – that accompanied Obama’s election – still lingers. While the euphoria of the Cairo speech has started to dwindle, we are still at a very different point than we were in 2008 when there was active hostility to what people saw as American heavy-handedness in the region.
SUSRIS: Can you talk about your current visit to the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Jordan for research on the connection between security and water scarcity?
Alterman: Over the next twenty years, the most likely source of political and social instability in the Middle East will not come from armies crossing borders or revolutionary plots, but will from populations in countries that have simply run out of water. The governments will not be able to provide for their agriculture and their populations. That’s a profound change in the way people see national security in the Middle East, and a marked shift from policies developed in the 1970s to provide food security. In many ways, efforts to develop security have laid the seeds of insecurity. A lot of it has to do with the use of water for agriculture. It is simply unsustainable in many places.
SUSRIS: You’re exploring the potential for conflict?
Alterman: Yes. What I’m looking at isn’t the possibility of interstate conflict so much as intrastate conflict—the possibility of depopulating capital cities, massive refugee flows, and epidemic diseases. It’s not a case of fighting over the water, it’s a case of simply running out. It has profound prospects for dislocations to happen and change the landscape of the region.
SUSRIS: Thank you for sharing your perspectives on these issues with us today and we look forward to learning more about your new research work.
About Jon B. Alterman
Jon Alterman is director and senior fellow of the CSIS Middle East Program. Prior to joining CSIS, he served as a member of the Policy Planning Staff at the U.S. Department of State and as a special assistant to the assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs. He served as an expert adviser to the Iraq Study Group (also known as the Baker-Hamilton Commission) and is a professorial lecturer at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.
Before entering government, he was a scholar at the U.S. Institute of Peace and at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. From 1993 to 1997, Alterman was an award-winning teacher at Harvard University, where he received his Ph.D. in history. He also worked as a legislative aide to Senator Daniel P. Moynihan (D-NY), responsible for foreign policy and defense. Alterman has lectured in more than 20 countries on subjects related to the Middle East and U.S. policy toward the region.
He is the author or coauthor of three books on the Middle East and the editor of a fourth. In addition to his academic work, he is a frequent commentator in print, on radio, and on television. His opinion pieces have appeared in the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, Asharq al-Awsat, and other major publications. He is a member of the editorial boards of the Middle East Journal and Transnational Broadcasting Studies and is a former International Affairs Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
CSIS Profile – Jon B. Alterman
About CSIS
CSIS provides strategic insights and policy solutions to decision makers in government, international institutions, the private sector, and civil society.
At a time of new global opportunities and challenges, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) provides strategic insights and policy solutions to decisionmakers in government, international institutions, the private sector, and civil society. A bipartisan, nonprofit organization headquartered in Washington, DC, CSIS conducts research and analysis and develops policy initiatives that look into the future and anticipate change.
Related Material:
- The United States, Saudi Arabia, China, Iran and Israel – “An Interesting Moment” – A Conversation with Ambassador Chas Freeman – SUSRIS Exclusive Interview – Mar 22, 2010
- Middle East Notes and Comment: Dangerous Brinkmanship – Jon B. Alterman – CSIS – Mar 16, 2010
- Connecting Mideast Peace Dots to America’s Regional Standing – SUSRISBlog – Mar 16, 2010
- U.S. Seeks Saudi Help for U.N. Iran Sanctions – SUSRIS IOI – Mar 13, 2010
- Defense Secretary Gates in Riyadh – SUSRIS Blog – Mar 10, 2010
- Why Saudi Arabia Does Not Support Iran Strike – Seznec – SUSRIS IOI – Mar 11, 2010
{ 4 trackbacks }
{ 0 comments… add one now }