Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Washington watches as Beijing bargains
China announced last Friday it had brokered a deal to restore diplomatic relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia for the first time in seven years. Beijing will also reportedly host a summit later this year, bringing together representatives from Iran and the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council. Like all early stage diplomatic breakthroughs, this one remains fragile. It will take at least two months to hammer out details, and Iranians and Saudis aren’t about to become fast friends. But President Xi Jinping wouldn’t trumpet this news unless he believed all relevant parties were sincerely interested in an agreement of substance.
This is something Joe Biden might call a “big F deal.”
First, any handshake that puts a floor under relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia, the two most important rivals in a critically important region, matters for stability.
Second, China is swimming into uncharted waters here. In the past, Beijing confined its leadership in diplomatic interventions to Asia, avoiding direct involvement in anything not directly relevant to China’s national security. And now we see China brokering a Middle East deal that Americans and Europeans could not have made.
It’s also a big deal because China might successfully hold Iran to its promises to not build a nuclear weapon, a point toward which Iran appears to have edged ever closer in recent weeks. That would be good for the region, for the world, and for US and Israeli national security.
It’s also impossible to end the horrible war in Yemen, and the humanitarian catastrophes it has triggered, without bringing Iranians and Saudis to the table. The agreement China announced is only a first step, but the newly pragmatic relations could bring the Yemen conflict – in which Tehran supports the Houthi rebels and Riyadh supports the Yemeni government – to a halt much sooner.
In fact, China’s Middle East plan underscores the limited value of a Biden administration foreign policy the US president continues to insist is built on support for democracy through containment of autocracy.
There won’t be any freely or fairly elected officials at Beijing’s Middle East summit. Outside Israel, there aren’t many Middle Eastern democracies to defend (and even Israel’s on dicier ground these days …). Also, you can’t broker a deal unless you’re talking to both sides … and unless both sides see you as an honest broker. It’s been a while since the US and Saudi governments have seen eye-to-eye on the issues of the day, while US and Iranian officials (very) rarely appear publicly in the same room together.
Nor is the US a predictable partner in the Middle East these days. The Saudis don’t want to see Iran develop a nuclear weapon, and Iranians want to know what they’ll get by cutting a deal to trade that opportunity away. Barack Obama made a deal. Donald Trump withdrew from the deal. Joe Biden wants back in the deal. Maybe. Why should anyone in the Middle East believe Washington can steer a straight course?
Saudis and Emiratis can also see the US hasn’t done much to stop Iranian drone strikes on their territory and infrastructure. If China can bring leaders together to put an end to those attacks, why should they say no?
But China’s new diplomatic ambitions aren’t limited to the Middle East.
After unveiling a detailed framework to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine, Xi is now prepping for a phone call with Volodymyr Zelensky and a visit to Moscow to see his friend Vladimir Putin.
In this case, we should be more skeptical of China’s value. Here, the honest broker principle works against Beijing. China’s Ukraine plan is entirely unacceptable for Kyiv, mainly because it doesn’t call on Russian invaders to leave Ukraine, and Zelensky still insists Ukraine’s army can push them out. Zelensky knows there’s a big difference between China's strategic partnership with Russia and its nominal recognition of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity. The Chinese aren’t going to condemn Russia’s illegal invasion, illegal annexations, or war crimes.
But even here, China may eventually offer something the US can’t. Unless one side wins a highly unlikely complete victory, the war in Ukraine must eventually end with some kind of sustainable deal between Moscow and Kyiv. China is potentially in a better position to broker that agreement than the Americans and Europeans, whom many outsiders feel are pushing for escalation and enabling more bloodshed by providing military support for Ukraine and slapping sanctions on Russia.
Let me be clear: I personally support Western backing for Ukraine against naked Russian aggression. But most of the developing world, an audience China would like to engage, is less interested in justice for Ukraine than an end to a war that’s inflicting real damage on the global economy and distracting world leaders from addressing problems they care far more about … like economic recovery from the pandemic’s damage to the global economy and a plan to manage their growing debt in a reasonable way.
More broadly, Washington should see both risks and opportunities in China’s more ambitious global diplomatic role.
It’s not like China is about to replace the United States in the Middle East. Given the hardware the US already has patrolling the skies and waters of the region, Beijing would have to spend billions upon billions over many years to supplant that influence.
Nor is the US retreating from China’s backyard. The American withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership limited Washington’s economic influence in Asia, but the US remains critical for the security of its many Asian and Pacific allies. Washington is now extending that commitment with its Quadrilateral Security Dialogue with Japan, India, and Australia.
But a larger global leadership role for China will come at a cost for US influence.
In the Middle East, Washington has a big presence, but it doesn’t have a clear purpose. It’s on the wrong side of most Middle Eastern countries, in part because the Biden administration wants to transition away from fossil fuels, but offers little talk about the continuing importance of hydrocarbons for keeping that transition stable. In that sense, the Gulf oil producers don't share a core interest with the US. China, on the other hand, isn’t ambivalent about quenching its thirst for fossil fuel. Given that the Saudis and Iranians will have to compete with Russia to sell oil to China, new deals with Riyadh have extra value.
It’s in the US national interest to welcome others to broker peace where Americans can’t. But there will be areas where China’s diplomacy won’t make Washington happy. We’ll get a good look at that problem when Xi turns up in Moscow as an ostensible peacemaker, rather than as an enabler of the man who launched this war.
Given the Chinese president’s startlingly explicit recent criticism of the US and its role in the world, the most hawkish comments made by a Chinese leader about Washington in decades, it’s clear there will be plenty of instances where US and Chinese interests just don’t align.People hold Israeli flags during a demonstration in Tel Avis against PM Benjamin Netanyahu's plans for judicial overhaul.
What We're Watching: Israel's mega-protest, Iran-Saudi détente, BBC own goal
Israel on the brink
Half a million demonstrators took to the streets Saturday night in what was billed as the biggest protest in Israel’s history to blast PM Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu’s controversial plan to overhaul the judiciary, which many see as a threat to democracy. That was a huge turnout for the 9-million-strong country that has seen 10 weeks of protests, with dismay over the reforms cutting across large segments of Israeli society, from the tech sector to army reservists.
The situation is quickly spiraling for Bibi. The country faces a constitutional crisis if parts of the civil service and security forces refuse to obey government orders. (On Saturday, heads turned when Tel Aviv police chief Amichai Eshed joined the rally in uniform. He's been making waves since National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir fired him for not cracking down hard enough on the protesters, although his dismissal was later overruled by the attorney general.)
All of this is happening as Israel tries to get a handle on a recent spike in violence in the Palestinian territories. The PM’s far-right coalition, meanwhile, may not survive a backtrack on the reforms. Can Bibi hold on?
Bridging the Gulf?
Bitter rivals Saudi Arabia and Iran agreed to reestablish diplomatic ties on Friday following a breakthrough facilitated by Beijing, a rapprochement that could potentially realign politics in the Middle East.
To be sure, there’s still plenty the two countries disagree on, but they also have strong incentives to keep talking. Iran — with growing Chinese help — gets the prospect of some relief from its crippling economic isolation. Meanwhile, the Saudis hope to get concessions in areas of conflict throughout the region and signal to the West that the Kingdom is willing to move closer to China and away from Uncle Sam, its longtime ally. China, for its part, has emerged as the big winner by finally complementing its growing economic and military weight by flexing its diplomatic muscles.
A critical test of the agreement is whether it leads to de-escalation or an end to the civil war in Yemen, where the Iranians and Saudis back different sides amid a devastating humanitarian crisis.
BBC vs. Gary Lineker
The famously impartial BBC has scored an own goal by claiming political bias to justify muzzling one of its own: soccer commentator Gary Lineker.
The former England captain and longtime host of the popular program "Match Day" was abruptly taken off the air Saturday after tweeting that the Conservative government's new language on migrants smacked of 1930s Germany. But the decision soon backfired, with Lineker's co-hosts and possible replacements all boycotting the network. The BBC was ultimately forced to cancel all live soccer programming. Even PM Rishi Sunak — whose Home Secretary Suella Braverman had demanded Lineker be suspended — weighed in by asking both sides to patch things up.
Although the scandal was finally "resolved" early Monday, it feeds right into the Tory narrative that it's time to nix the license fee that all Brits pay to fund the BBC. After all, if enforcing impartiality makes you look biased, perhaps you're not really as impartial as you claim.