1.07.2005
Gulf regional security is embryonic, but growing
By Christian Koch
Compiled by «Daily Star» staff
Friday, January 07, 2005
On several fronts, the debate over a new approach to security arrangements in the Gulf received impetus within a two-week span between the end of November and the beginning of December 2004. Fortunately, a majority of those initiatives came from the Gulf states, underscoring a realization that the arrangements currently in place are insufficient for long-term peace and stability. This represented an important step in the right direction and should be capitalized upon. Unfortunately, none of the proposals were presented or officially supported by the United States, the preeminent power in the region and thus the key to any future Gulf security system. As a result, the outcome of the present discussions and future strategic direction of the Gulf remains uncertain.
From Nov. 23 to 25, the Dubai-based Gulf Research Center, in cooperation with the German Bertelsmann Foundation, brought together 30 specialists and policy practitioners to discuss a future European role in Gulf security arrangements. The workshop concluded with the recommendation that while the European Union's experience was useful in laying out a framework for cooperative security in the region, the Gulf states themselves had to first show their commitment to taking a different approach to regional relations.
The Dubai meeting was followed by a roundtable sponsored by the Netherlands Helsinki Committee on Nov. 29 in The Hague, which looked at how elements of the Helsinki Process - the process largely credited with introducing a political and human rights dialogue into East-West relations during the Cold War and ultimately overcoming the divide in Europe - can serve as inspiration for the Gulf. Again, there was broad agreement among the participants that the timing was right for a new methodology for security in the region, but also that such an approach should not include the imposition from outside of certain processes or models. The initiative rested with the Gulf states, albeit with a strong supporting role by external actors.
While focusing on the Gulf per se, these two meetings should also be seen in the framework of a high-level United Nations panel report on threats and challenges to the current international security environment released on Dec. 2. According to the panel chairman, former Thai Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun, the report entitled "A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility" essentially "puts forward a new vision of collective security" and stresses the need for nations to work together to protect their security. It mentions that "every state requires the cooperation of other states to make itself secure. It is in every state's interest, accordingly, to cooperate with other states to address the most pressing threats, because doing so will maximize the chances of reciprocal cooperation to address its own threat priorities."
In light of the continued volatile security situation in the Gulf, which is further threatened currently by events in Iraq and the Iranian nuclear debate, the notion of collective security subsequently entered into official pronouncements. The inaugural Gulf Security Conference organized by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) and hosted by the Kingdom of Bahrain brought together a number of key officials from all of the Gulf states to discuss the prospects of future security frameworks. On the opening day, Bahraini Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Muhammad bin Mubarak Al-Khalifa said there was a need for "new institutions and treaties" as a means to secure peace in the Middle East. This was followed by a call from Omani Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Yusif bin Alawi for the establishment of a regional body that would bring together the six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states plus Iran, Iraq, Yemen and Pakistan to enhance economic cooperation and thus bring about stability and development. Both speakers acknowledged the fact that current arrangements, like the Arab League, were insufficient for dealing with pressing regional challenges. The IISS meeting concluded with proposals by both Saudi Arabia and Iran for new regional security initiatives. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal characterized the need for collective security as an "urgent need," stating that "a unified GCC, a prosperous Yemen, a stable Iraq, and a friendly Iran would go a long way toward achieving the desired regional pillars of Gulf security." Even his Iranian counterpart, Kamal Kharrazi, who represents a country often identified as a key obstacle to better regional relations, suggested a new "collective security project" based on "independence and self-dependence." In the current environment, the fact that regional power brokers are beginning to speak in a similar language - even if the content of their proposals remains far from clear or identical - is a significant development. A first step has thus been taken. The question to be confronted now is how to proceed and turn the still vague and undefined notion of collective security into clearer and more applicable policy prescriptions. Three things stand out in this regard. First, promoting collective security is a long-term process that will not produce immediate results. Thus, expectations should be limited and the focus must remain on the process itself, in other words providing avenues through which concerns and points of view can be voiced in an informal manner and initially without binding commitments. As the Helsinki process made clear, the initiation of a structured dialogue can have far-reaching positive consequences once the impediments to agreement are overcome. Second, if the situation in Iraq continues to deteriorate and the confrontation over Iran's nuclear program escalates, it will not be possible to focus on a long-term strategy for the region. Therefore, besides broad pronouncements on the need for new approaches to regional security, there is a more immediate need to put forward efforts to resolve these critical current issues. The alternative is a continuation of the insecurity cycles of the past.
Third, security arrangements in the Gulf will, at least in the short-term, be determined by Washington's actions. While for the moment American security guarantees to the GCC states remain an integral part of the regional security equation, the current policy is also complicating the search for new approaches. Why? Because of the situation in Iraq, but also because of the lack of any dialogue with Iran, which has induced the latter to promote bilateral efforts with GCC states, at the expense of multilateral ones. As a result, something should be done to get the U.S. on board while the train is in the station. If it refuses, it could find itself increasingly on the sidelines as the momentum for regional arrangements takes on a life of its own.
As the UN report makes clear: "To be credible and sustainable a collective security system must be effective, efficient and equitable." Such a system can only be brought about if the Gulf countries begin a comprehensive dialogue among each other about the challenges they confront and the threats they perceive. Without being naively enthusiastic, such an exchange appears to have now taken on a more tangible shape.
[Christian Koch is program director for GCC-EU relations at the Gulf Research Center in the U.A.E. This commentary first appeared in the center's Araa magazine and is published by permission]
Compiled by «Daily Star» staff
Friday, January 07, 2005
On several fronts, the debate over a new approach to security arrangements in the Gulf received impetus within a two-week span between the end of November and the beginning of December 2004. Fortunately, a majority of those initiatives came from the Gulf states, underscoring a realization that the arrangements currently in place are insufficient for long-term peace and stability. This represented an important step in the right direction and should be capitalized upon. Unfortunately, none of the proposals were presented or officially supported by the United States, the preeminent power in the region and thus the key to any future Gulf security system. As a result, the outcome of the present discussions and future strategic direction of the Gulf remains uncertain.
From Nov. 23 to 25, the Dubai-based Gulf Research Center, in cooperation with the German Bertelsmann Foundation, brought together 30 specialists and policy practitioners to discuss a future European role in Gulf security arrangements. The workshop concluded with the recommendation that while the European Union's experience was useful in laying out a framework for cooperative security in the region, the Gulf states themselves had to first show their commitment to taking a different approach to regional relations.
The Dubai meeting was followed by a roundtable sponsored by the Netherlands Helsinki Committee on Nov. 29 in The Hague, which looked at how elements of the Helsinki Process - the process largely credited with introducing a political and human rights dialogue into East-West relations during the Cold War and ultimately overcoming the divide in Europe - can serve as inspiration for the Gulf. Again, there was broad agreement among the participants that the timing was right for a new methodology for security in the region, but also that such an approach should not include the imposition from outside of certain processes or models. The initiative rested with the Gulf states, albeit with a strong supporting role by external actors.
While focusing on the Gulf per se, these two meetings should also be seen in the framework of a high-level United Nations panel report on threats and challenges to the current international security environment released on Dec. 2. According to the panel chairman, former Thai Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun, the report entitled "A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility" essentially "puts forward a new vision of collective security" and stresses the need for nations to work together to protect their security. It mentions that "every state requires the cooperation of other states to make itself secure. It is in every state's interest, accordingly, to cooperate with other states to address the most pressing threats, because doing so will maximize the chances of reciprocal cooperation to address its own threat priorities."
In light of the continued volatile security situation in the Gulf, which is further threatened currently by events in Iraq and the Iranian nuclear debate, the notion of collective security subsequently entered into official pronouncements. The inaugural Gulf Security Conference organized by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) and hosted by the Kingdom of Bahrain brought together a number of key officials from all of the Gulf states to discuss the prospects of future security frameworks. On the opening day, Bahraini Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Muhammad bin Mubarak Al-Khalifa said there was a need for "new institutions and treaties" as a means to secure peace in the Middle East. This was followed by a call from Omani Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Yusif bin Alawi for the establishment of a regional body that would bring together the six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states plus Iran, Iraq, Yemen and Pakistan to enhance economic cooperation and thus bring about stability and development. Both speakers acknowledged the fact that current arrangements, like the Arab League, were insufficient for dealing with pressing regional challenges. The IISS meeting concluded with proposals by both Saudi Arabia and Iran for new regional security initiatives. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal characterized the need for collective security as an "urgent need," stating that "a unified GCC, a prosperous Yemen, a stable Iraq, and a friendly Iran would go a long way toward achieving the desired regional pillars of Gulf security." Even his Iranian counterpart, Kamal Kharrazi, who represents a country often identified as a key obstacle to better regional relations, suggested a new "collective security project" based on "independence and self-dependence." In the current environment, the fact that regional power brokers are beginning to speak in a similar language - even if the content of their proposals remains far from clear or identical - is a significant development. A first step has thus been taken. The question to be confronted now is how to proceed and turn the still vague and undefined notion of collective security into clearer and more applicable policy prescriptions. Three things stand out in this regard. First, promoting collective security is a long-term process that will not produce immediate results. Thus, expectations should be limited and the focus must remain on the process itself, in other words providing avenues through which concerns and points of view can be voiced in an informal manner and initially without binding commitments. As the Helsinki process made clear, the initiation of a structured dialogue can have far-reaching positive consequences once the impediments to agreement are overcome. Second, if the situation in Iraq continues to deteriorate and the confrontation over Iran's nuclear program escalates, it will not be possible to focus on a long-term strategy for the region. Therefore, besides broad pronouncements on the need for new approaches to regional security, there is a more immediate need to put forward efforts to resolve these critical current issues. The alternative is a continuation of the insecurity cycles of the past.
Third, security arrangements in the Gulf will, at least in the short-term, be determined by Washington's actions. While for the moment American security guarantees to the GCC states remain an integral part of the regional security equation, the current policy is also complicating the search for new approaches. Why? Because of the situation in Iraq, but also because of the lack of any dialogue with Iran, which has induced the latter to promote bilateral efforts with GCC states, at the expense of multilateral ones. As a result, something should be done to get the U.S. on board while the train is in the station. If it refuses, it could find itself increasingly on the sidelines as the momentum for regional arrangements takes on a life of its own.
As the UN report makes clear: "To be credible and sustainable a collective security system must be effective, efficient and equitable." Such a system can only be brought about if the Gulf countries begin a comprehensive dialogue among each other about the challenges they confront and the threats they perceive. Without being naively enthusiastic, such an exchange appears to have now taken on a more tangible shape.
[Christian Koch is program director for GCC-EU relations at the Gulf Research Center in the U.A.E. This commentary first appeared in the center's Araa magazine and is published by permission]
