Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited
by Kamran Gasanov
[Regnum] Parliamentary elections in Israel, although without a clear winner, are over, and midterm elections for the US Congress are just around the corner.
In anticipation of a new military campaign against Iran, hinted at by the constant arrival of US supplies to the Jewish state and Donald Trump's threats, the leaders of the "European Four" and the Middle Eastern powers are trying to prevent a ruinous escalation.
Europe and the "Middle Eastern Titans"
The first large-scale attempt at diplomatic preparations was the talks held in Istanbul on October 23, with the participation of Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia.
| But not Israel, one notes. Exactly this is why Israel is necessary. |
A couple of days later, intelligence representatives from the last three countries listed arrived in Tehran. The United States is not participating in these initiatives, which European Council on Foreign Relations expert Elli Geranmayeh, in an article on the topic, described as a sign of weakening American influence in the region.
| That’s certainly one perspective. But one can see why she might feel the need to say so. |
The main risks for Europe now are related to new strikes on Iran and attacks by the Houthis, as well as the restriction or complete closure of the Straits of Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb. This scenario is 50% likely to have already been realized.
| There is always the risk that Iran will shoot missiles at Europe, but one doesn’t mention such things in polite company. |
Hormuz is barely functioning, and the Houthis are attacking Saudi oil refineries and airports, teetering on the brink of blockading the vital strait in the Red Sea. But that's not the end of it.
| *Blink* “Barely functioning”? Okayyyy… |
Geranmaye also points out the potential consequences of large-scale attacks on Iran, in the form of mass migration and humanitarian catastrophe. The European Union has had more than one such experience in the 21st century. So what should the Old World do?
A European think tank proposes joining forces with Turkey, the Saudis, and the Pakistanis to jointly prevent an American attack,
involve China in pressuring Iran, and link the easing of EU sanctions against Tehran to access to its nuclear facilities for IAEA experts.
| The lady was very keen on sustaining President Obama’s nuclear deal… |
At the same time, the "European Four" should facilitate the strengthening of the Lebanese government at the expense of Hezbollah, thereby eliminating the reasons for Israeli interventions. As a reminder, peace in Lebanon remains one of Iran's conditions for a peace agreement with the United States.
| Iran’s surrender remains one of America’s. The IDF is ensuring peace in Lebanon. |
In the long term, Geranmaye believes, the chosen format could develop into a new regional security architecture, which could one day include both Iran and Israel.
Even if these efforts fail and the US attacks Iran, it has already been demonstrated that the Middle East is beginning to build stability on its own and is looking for partners outside Washington.
PROSPECTS TO STOP THE US AND ISRAEL
Unlike Geranmaye, many journalists and experts focus on the escalating conflict between the United States and Israel,
| …two strong-willed men, personal friends for many decades before they met formally as respective heads of their states, who are plotting together the next round of the war against the Mad Mullahs and their satraps, have more important things to work on than junior high, mean girls nonsense... |
as well as on the mood in the Islamic Republic. But deterrent mechanisms remain in the background. There's a reason for this: peacekeepers are extremely weak. Therefore, assessments of the prospects of the "Europe-Middle East" format seem more like wishes.
Firstly, there are serious doubts that Turkey and Saudi Arabia, hand in hand with the “European Four”, are really capable of stopping Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu if they really decide to attack Iran again.
Before and during the spring campaign, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Emmanuel Macron, and Pakistani Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif tried hard to prevent chaos, but their efforts only yielded results when Trump realized it was time to stop, even though Netanyahu was prepared to fight on. At that point, the US president lavished praise on the mediators, also thanking Russia and China.
| He is always willing to lavish praise. It costs nothing and inclines the recipient in his direction. That’s basic transaction stuff. |
Secondly, how can we be sure that the format will be independent and sustainable? There are simply too many confounding variables. Chief among them is the United States itself, which has closer relations with each of the potential alliance members than they have with each other.
Saudi Arabia will not break with the United States for the sake of an incomprehensible and ineffective friendship with France and Germany, which are louder than others, but are incapable of unblocking Hormuz, or ensuring safe passage for Saudi tankers, or the safety of oil refineries.
And what price are the participants in the format willing to pay to ensure a new security architecture in the region? They won't go to war with Iran, and Germany and Italy certainly won't dare impose serious sanctions against Israel, not counting settlers in the West Bank. Getting involved in a conflict with the United States is even more dangerous. They could swallow Greenland and threaten the security of the EU itself.
If we're talking about Washington under the current president, it doesn't even need ostentatious sanctions. Simply verbal criticism of American attacks is enough, and that's it, relations are ruined. Are the leaders of France, Germany, and Italy, where thousands of schoolchildren and students are taking to the streets and where leaders' approval ratings are hitting historic lows, ready for such an escalation? Moreover, elections are scheduled in Italy and France in 2027.
| Sense erupts. Let us pause to appreciate its appearance. |
WHO WILL JOIN AND WHO WILL BE AFRAID?
So far, it's clear that the format will definitely remain, but divided by region. That is, the Europeans will be on their own, as will the countries in the region.
Despite the importance of Middle Eastern oil, Europe is more focused on ensuring its own security. For France and Germany, the Ukrainian conflict, escalating hysteria over a clash with Russia, and preventing the collapse of the European Union are far more important than the outcome of the US-Iranian conflict. Britain also has its own problems, from social issues to defense.
Middle Eastern states will likely engage with Europe, but not overly so. They are currently focused on the "Mecca Alliance" and are trying to lure Egypt into it. But even this more monolithic bloc still raises many questions. For example, defending Saudi Arabia from Houthi attacks has so far proven unsuccessful.
In the Middle East, strength is respected. As long as Europe has virtually no leverage over the situation in Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb, the Middle East could very quickly lose interest in a joint format due to the lack of practical benefits.
At the same time, Erdogan may try to maintain the institution of meetings in Istanbul, because the very fact of holding them enhances the image of his country and party, which is very necessary during the electoral period and at a time of economic difficulties.
| Also, his ego needs regular polishing. His own hands can’t do all the work. |
A number of countries could theoretically join the format: the UAE and Qatar, whose energy facilities are also under attack; China, Japan, and South Korea, dependent on oil supplies from the Persian Gulf; and Russia, which does not want another act of aggression against Iran.
However, geopolitical disagreements between Russia and Europe, Japan and South Korea and China, and the UAE and Saudi Arabia will become insurmountable barriers to the creation of an effective international mechanism for resolving the Iranian problem.
Ultimately, despite all the risks and concerns, it's hard to believe the Iranian conflict will prove systemic and long-term. And Trump, finally disillusioned with the militaristic approach, may rely on the "Abrahamic process" of reconciling Israel with the Arab world and, possibly, Turkey.
| Maybe Turkey post-Erdogan. The current iteration of the thing is fixated on somehow establishing his beloved neo-Ottoman sultanate. |
It turns out that in both wartime and peacetime, the initiative will rest with the United States. And Europe will once again have no place in this scenario.
| That’s an awfully long way round to that single sentence conclusion. |
|