Three Scenarios for the Middle East in Post-Iran-USA War Era

Pakistan’s persistent efforts led to a peace deal between Iran and the USA. It is not only a triumph for Pakistan, but for the region and the world. It is a great relief for the people of the region and beyond, as many were suffering, both directly and indirectly. After the deal, there is also hope that peace will return to the region and it will be lasting this time. Thus, they are expecting that the peace deal will lead to development and prosperity. However, to realize the dream of development and prosperity, we have to wait for the implementation of the first phase of the deal and the result of the negotiations for the final deal in the coming months.  

Thus, it would be premature to predict the post-war era or to predict the structure of relationships, attitudes, and interactions among countries. Moreover, given the region’s history and the quest of regional countries to dominate it, we cannot predict precisely whether the peace deal will lead to sustainable peace and prosperity or vice versa.  

In this context, a mix of hope, optimism, caution, pessimism, and fear of the unknown best describes the present situation and near future. Based on the prevailing situation and the region’s history, we have developed three scenarios to predict the post-Iran-USA Middle East. 

First, a self-hostage scenario. In this scenario, the regional countries can adopt a “my interest first” or “my country first” mentality. Some countries can claim superiority over others on the basis of economy, wealth, and military power. There can also be a clash of civilizations and sub-civilizations, as the region is home to three prominent civilizations: Arab, Turkish, and Iranian. Historically, these civilizations have sought to dominate the region and cement their positions as regional leaders. In recent times, we have also seen that, within Arab civilization, new forces have emerged as contenders for a dominant role in the region. 

Simultaneously, the region is home to three major religious civilizations, i.e., Islamic, Jewish, and Christian. It is an open secret that Israel is seeking hegemony of Judaism at any cost and is a major source of conflicts in the region. Israel has destabilized the region and regional peace in pursuit of its agenda of Greater Israel; it considers the Jewish people as a superior race. Therefore, it undermines efforts to bring peace and development by instigating wars in the region. The recent war with Iran and attacks on Lebanon are parts of this policy. If Israel continues to do so, then it will be a real threat to the region. 

In the second scenario, the regional countries can decide to adopt a policy of peaceful coexistence. No interference in the internal affairs of others and concentrate on its own country and development. It would be a good policy and scenario, as it would eliminate or at least reduce the risk of violence. It will help to create an environment for development and prosperity. 

However, there is fear that it can lead to a silo mentality and countries can become aloof from each other. Countries can remain busy with their own development without paying attention to others’ problems. It will create islands of development and prosperity and leave others to suffer. Why? Because the region is highly diverse. Some countries, such as Gulf countries, are extremely rich, while others, such as Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon, are poor. The Gulf countries are blessed with huge natural resources, and some have developed into global hubs of financial institutions. The others lack resources to pursue economic development, and people struggle to make ends meet on a daily basis.  

Islands of prosperity are not an ideal outcome or situation. It usually creates grievances among the poor, and they want to do anything to get rich like their neighbors. This provides an ideal situation for extremist groups to cultivate their presence and influence. They use their influence to push people to resort to violence. To counter the situation, some countries start to create their proxies in other countries, which leads to terrorism and conflicts among countries. Thus, it is not a sustainable solution. In this context, there may be a need to move one step further, which would be the third scenario. 

The third scenario would be cooperative and peaceful coexistence. In this scenario, cooperation would be the key area along with peaceful coexistence. It will encourage everyone to cooperate and find mutually beneficial ways to work together. It will create opportunities for the poor countries and enable them to pursue their dream of development and prosperity. In this way, they will create a stake in each other and try to contribute positively. It will lead to the development of a society, rather than the creation of islands of development. Thus, efforts should be made to go for this scenario.     

However, there can be an outlier scenario. After the peace deal, Iran can portray itself as the strongest country in the region. Thus, Iran can insist on a more prominent role in regional affairs and try to impose its policies. Rather, the process has already started, as many pro-Iran social media influencers have started to claim that Iran is the dominant force of the region. They claim that if the regional countries want peace and need security, they need to cooperate with Iran. To strengthen their argument, they cite the example of Iranian attacks on regional countries and say that regional countries could not save themselves. Moreover, the USA was not able to protect. However, forget the fact that during the Iran-USA war, regional countries showed restraint in retaliating. They did not want to expand the war. However, in the new realities, they may retaliate; rather, they will definitely retaliate. 

On the other hand, Israel can also exploit the situation to sow the seeds of conflict in the region. Moreover, it would also be an ideal situation for Israel to trigger a Cold War among the regional countries. It would be disastrous for the region and can trigger major conflicts or wars. Therefore, Iran needs to be careful and should pursue no policy or agenda that can threaten the security of other regional countries or their interests. Moreover, Iran should also snub all social media influencers to refrain from cultivating such an image of Iran. 

Lastly, Israel can act as a spoiler. Unfortunately, it has already begun acting as a spoiler by attacking Lebanon. It is bombing civilians and compelling them to vacate their homes. Despite all the assurances, Israel is not honoring the peace deal at this point in time. 

Thus, the regional countries will have to be careful because Israel can apply other strategies to sabotage peace and pursue its agenda of Greater Israel. For example, it can try to instigate conflicts among regional countries under different names. For example, it can fan sectarian divides and use the Muslim against each other.  The USA and Western countries can also join hands to facilitate Israel. President Trump’s statement on the potential role of Syria in tackling the issue of Hezbollah is a strong indication of this strategy. He is urging Israel to stop attacking Lebanon and let the Syrian government fight Hezbollah. Lastly, Israel can also exploit the civilizational context and emotions of custodians of the Arab, Iranian, and Turkish civilizations. It can trigger emotions of self-greatness and urge each civilization to pursue past glory. It is also feared that Israel can create differences between Muslims and Christians, as Israel considers both its enemies. 

In conclusion, from the above discussion, we can draw four inferences. First, the peace and prosperity of the region depend on how regional countries respond to new realities. Second, regional civilizations (Arab, Iranian, Turkish) and sects of Islam need to work more closely and snub any efforts to create differences among them. It is direly needed; otherwise, Israel will be successful in dividing and ruling the regional countries. It will bring never-ending conflict, and the dream of peace and prosperity will remain a dream. Third, the best-case scenario would be cooperative, peaceful coexistence. Therefore, all countries should subscribe to this scenario. It will bring sustainable peace and prosperity for the region.  Third, the world needs to be cautious and closely watch the policies and actions of Israel. Especially, the Muslim countries need to be extra careful and devise mechanisms to snub any attempt at sectarian division.

Lastly, the best available option is the third scenario: cooperative and peaceful coexistence. It is a win-win proposition in which everyone will benefit.