Regardless of the course of the current Gulf crisis between the Iranian regime and the United States, the region is clearly at the door of a difficult period, whether an unwanted war breaks out, or the parties meet at the negotiating table again.
War may seem distant in terms of strategic planning. There are not enough U.S. military preparations for war. Also, Trump has a very open desire to avoid the war scenario, undercutting his talk of deterrence and intimidation of the Iranian regime.
The regime is fully aware that the White House does not want to go to sign the decision to go to war before the coming presidential election. But two key factors could spark war beyond President Trump’s will.
The first is the predominance of mutual misperception between the two sides. The Iranian regime’s propensity for reckless adventures could force the United States into war. Another drone downing might not provoke the same reaction by the US and in the event of casualties from U.S. soldiers as a result of any Iranian military action, the administration will be forced to issue combat orders.
The second factor is the mullahs’ insistence on ending the “economic war” before the U.S. presidential election, as it realizes that the prospect of President Trump being elected to a second term will put the Iranian regime in the hands of a post-election president that could go to war more easily.
For the mullahs, the current period is the most appropriate to exert maximum pressure on President Trump to lift sanctions on Iran and return to the nuclear deal or sit down to renegotiate.
In my opinion, President Trump has managed to soften the position of the mullahs’ regime. Negotiations were out of question for the regime, but now it is issuing clear signals it can sit down and talk if sanctions are lifted.
However, disagreement remains on two fundamental issues. The first is the U.S. sanctions, whether they should be frozen during the period of negotiations as some suggest in the EU, or lifted as demanded by the mullahs.
The second issue is Iran’s missile program. The mullahs stand pat on this point unlike other issues such as Iran’s regional expansionist project. So this only Iranian precondition could also be discussed if the mullahs perceived a serious White House intention to lift the sanctions.
Back to the crisis scenarios, war is a possibility, even as a result of unilateral or mutual misperception, or situations one party might put the other in.
The second scenario, the negotiating scenario, involves complex questions for the GCC states. The Gulf countries should not be kept away from any possible negotiations over any future time between the mullahs’ regime and the major powers that signed the P5+1 deal with Tehran. Isolating them from negotiations will keep real tensions on the ground, and will give the Iranian regime a green light to resume its expansionist project that is being countered by the Arab coalition in Yemen.
It is both logical and necessary that the GCC geostrategic bloc be a key party to any future negotiations with the mullahs’ regime. Excluding Gulf partners in any future negotiations would be like excluding the role of South Korea or China in U.S. talks with North Korea. Regional neighbors are an indispensable party to ensure that all causes of tension and disagreement are removed and that viable strategic understandings are built.
The obvious question is who is responsible for involving the council in any future dialogue with the mullahs’ regime? This would be the job of the major parties on the negotiating table. Whether these are the five international powers that signed the nuclear deal in 2015, or a new negotiating panel, any partner in any potential talks is responsible to ensure their success first, and to implement and sustain what is agreed upon second.
But that does not mean that the GCC countries should sit back and watch and wait an invitation to talks. They should take the initiative to raise this matter and seriously demand that they have an agreed representation in any future negotiations on the Iranian crisis.
