Big Game In Mesopotamia
– Igor Muradyan
Saturday, 10 November 2012, 16:34
Since its origin Armenia had been closely related with the country of
Mesopotamia, and recent movement in the development of relations between
Iraq and Armenia will be an important aspect of our foreign policy. Iraq is
trying to return to some sovereign countries and play a more important role
in the Near East like in the previous decades.
The Arab world had four leaders for a long time: Egypt, Syria, Iraq and
Saudi Arabia. Currently deadly threat is posed to the existence of the
first three as sovereign states, to say nothing about the role of leaders
with claims to the role of regional great powers.
>From the point of view of geopolitics and more or less influential great
powers, the Arab world is not organized and needs a revision of internal
and foreign relations. The Arab politicians and experts have understood
this. For the first time in modern history they are trying to overcome
local ambitions and work out agreed solutions being posed to such serious
threat.
The war with Israel, the civil war in Lebanon, the war between Iran and
Iraq, Iraq’s aggression against Kuwait do not compare to the threat of
`revolutionary’ events in Arab states. In this situation everyone came
to
understand and feel that this drastic weakening of the Arab world began
with the liquidation of Iraq as a sovereign state and Arabs cannot regain
their former strength (though it was nothing special) without regaining
Iraq’s sovereignty.
Due to some historical, social and political reasons the Iraqi elite was
ambitious, and together with Cairo Baghdad was viewed as the political
center of the Arab world. No doubt after the end of the first stage of war
in Iraq the American experts did not have a clear understanding of the
future of this country and most importantly whether they would be able to
restore its territorial integrity. In 2005-2008 the Americans stated
bluntly that Iraq may save its integrity with assistance from outside but
one could feel lack of confidence and weak arguments.
It is clear that the United States is reluctant to demonstrate to the Arabs
that their intervention led to split of this country. After 2008 scenarios
of future Iraq were worked out in detail, considering a decentralized
federation or establishment of three states joined in a union or certain
obligations. At the same time, Barack Obama’s policy of shift of
responsibility on partners and rivals primarily in the near East envisaged
less interference in the Iraqi situation and all the three leading
communities of the country set to consider the political perspective of
separation.
At the same time, while the Kurdish state has basically separated from the
country, the Shiite and Sunnite communities have suddenly expressed
interest in political coexistence. Such factors as continuous existence in
one and centralized state, economic factors and issues of national and
community security may have played a role.
One can assume that the Arab experts (including those based in Europe and
the United States) that the leading Sunnite Arab states have swayed the
Sunnite leaders of Iraq to overcome the split. Besides, the present Iraqi
government with a Shiite majority have demonstrated their ability of
successful development of relations with Arab states, the West, Iran and
Russia.
At the same time, Iraq is exposed to new threats coming from the Kurdish
`belt’, as well as Turkish expansion. Iraq is Turkey’s main geoeconomic and
geopolitical goal primarily due to the huge economic potential, as well as
the necessity of presence in this country to prevent further strengthening
of the Kurdish state and the influence of Iran.
Turkey and Iraqi Kurdistan are demonstrating rapprochement and mutual
understanding angering Baghdad which has felt the danger of Turkish
regional expansion after a lasting period of illusions relating partnership
with Turkey.
The United States and its partners France and the United Kingdom support
Iraq’s opposition to Turkish expansion and create a source of oil in the
north of the country of global character, independent from Baghdad, the
Shiite community, and from the Arab politics, at the same time. The
independence of this source of oil is related with the bypassing Turkish
oil pipes in the Strait of Hormuz and the Suez Canal with an outlet of
energy infrastructures to the Syrian-Lebanese coast of the Mediterranean
Sea.
Iran does not hide its intentions to support Shiites in opposing the
influence of the United States and the West, Arab states, as well as
Turkey. Hence, a long-term game is played, planned for decades which is the
period when Northern Iraq will run out of its oil resource.
In this situation Baghdad needs to enlarge its international relations
including the countries of the second circle located farther from Iraq but
within the boundaries of the Greater Near East. In this regard Armenia is
viewed by Iraq as a country on good terms with Russia and the United
States, Iraq’s western neighbors Syria and Lebanon, strategic relations
with Shiite Iraq, as well as Kurds.
For Armenia Iraq is a country with a major economic potential whose oil
resources have offset the importance of Caspian oil having mutual claims
with Turkey and strategic relations with Iran. Iraq is located 10-12 hours
of ride from Armenia, two hours of flight, and Iran will always promote
transportation between Iraq and Armenia. The mutual interest between these
states may grow due to the development of the `Kurdish project’ and
emergence of a new format of the Kurdish state. One way or another, Iraqi
Kurdistan is located in the political, legal and economic field of Iraq and
relations with Northern Iraq depend on the relations with Baghdad. Iraqi
Kurdistan still feels a threat from Turkey and besides the United States,
Iraq remains the real defender and provider of security of Iraq.