Biden’s Twin Pillars Strategy for the Middle East
Likely to be central tool of the United States in dealing with post-JCPOA Iran
Image1 Credit: Saudi Press Agency
PRESIDENT Joe Biden’s four-day Middle East trip, which concluded last week with his visits to Israel and Saudi Arabia, had a clear message for Iran – while the US is serious about resurrecting the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), it is also ready with a policy to deal with the post-JCPOA Iran, in case there was no deal between Iran and the USA. The new US Middle East policy, that emerged through this visit, is the one that is devised with an eye on the challenges the US is facing from two of its greatest adversaries, Russia, and China, especially in the Middle East.
Biden’s visit to Saudi Arabia was also significant under the backdrop of the Russia-Ukraine war, which has put pressure on oil supplies. This is a domain in which Saudi Arabia could be much helpful to the US’ efforts in alienating Russia. The necessity of Saudi Arabia being on board with the US in this realm was amply clear through the justification that President Biden gave through his Washington Post Op-ed days before departing for the Middle East.
Israel and Saudi Arabia are the two staunchest opponents of JCPOA, their rationale being that a thaw between the US and Iran, especially through the JCPOA, would strengthen Iran while at the same time pose serious security threats to them. Thus, Biden made considerable efforts to assuage them while seeking their supports towards his goal of reaching the nuclear deal. He assured them that the US would never allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons, and it will also counter Iranian proxies, the two most important types of security challenges emanating from Iran and cause of concerns for Israel and Saudi Arabia.
During Biden’s visit to Israel, the two countries signed the Jerusalem Declaration which explicitly mentioned the US’ pledge that it was committed “never to allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon, and that it is prepared to use all elements of its national power to ensure that outcome.” The US also affirmed its “commitment to work together with other partners to confront Iran’s aggression and destabilizing activities, whether advanced directly or through proxies and terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.”
In terms of the Iranian threat, Biden’s assurance to Saudi Arabia was same as that given to Israel. Thus, the Jeddah Communique stated that the US and Saudi Arabia “underscored the need to further deter Iran’s interference in the internal affairs of other countries, its support for terrorism through its armed proxies, and its efforts to destabilize the security and stability of the region.” It was also added that “Saudi Arabia and the United States stressed the importance of preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.”
The Jeddah Communique also began by mentioning the historical context of US-Saudi Strategic Partnership dating back to “nearly eight decades ago with the meeting between King Abdulaziz Al-Saud and President Franklin D. Roosevelt on board the USS Quincy.” Indeed, the number of countries and related issues that were mentioned under their regional cooperation, gave the impression that the US had now decided to considerably outsource its Middle East commitments to Saudi Arabia. These included regional issues surrounding Yemen, Iraq, Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Ukraine, Sudan, Libya, and Afghanistan.
The way President Biden flew directly from Israel to Saudi Arabia had much symbolism of US’ efforts to extend the Abraham Accords to Saudi Arabia. Undoubtedly, his Middle East visit brought Israel and Saudi Arabia much closer, particularly due to the coinciding of this visit with the Saudi decision to open its airspace to civilian aircraft flying to and from Israel.
Notwithstanding the rhetoric from the Iranian side, especially the reaction of one of its official to Biden’s mention of use of force against Iran as a matter of last resort, Iranian leaders seem to be aware of the central purpose of President Biden’s visit to the Middle East. Evidently, Biden’s visit to the Middle East has happened soon after the proximate talks between the US and Iran in Doha, and the two sides have amply articulated that there is a draft on the table, on which the other side needs to take the political decision. If it is the US which needs to take that political decision, President Biden’s visit to Israel and Saudi Arabia could pave the way for such a decision.
President Biden’s articulation of the use of force against Iran, during his interview to the Israeli media, although meant to allay fears of Israel and Saudi Arabia against Iranian threats, was not in line with what was reflected throughout in the three written communications, respectively on the occasions of US-Israel Summit, US-Saudi Summit and US-GCC+3 Summit. For instance, the Jerusalem Declaration mentioned that the US was committed “to preserve and strengthen Israel’s capability to deter its enemies and to defend itself by itself against any threat or combination of threats.” Similarly, the Jeddah Communique mentioned that the US was committed “to supporting Saudi Arabia’s security and territorial defense, and facilitating the Kingdom’s ability to obtain necessary capabilities to defend its people and territory against external threats.”
It also became apparent that the US’ commitment to help Israel and Saudi Arabia to help themselves was real. This was amply illustrated during Biden’s respective visits to Jerusalem and Jeddah. Thus the Jerusalem Declaration included the US commitments to Israel in the form of “implementing the terms of the current historic $38 billion Memorandum of Understanding in full” and “providing an additional $1 billion over MOU levels in supplemental missile defense funding following the 2021 conflict”.
Similarly, the Fact Sheet that was released by the White House as a supplement to the Jeddah Communique, mentioned in detail the planned US-Saudi cooperation in various fields including an “Enhanced Maritime Security Cooperation” and “Integrated Air Defense Cooperation”, the latter of which included their cooperation in the field of “missiles, drones, and UAVs” as well as the “U.S. military support and far-reaching foreign military sales” including “defensive systems and advanced technology.”
President Biden was most elaborate on his new US Middle East strategy during his speech that was delivered at the GCC+3 Summit. When he said, “We will not walk away and leave a vacuum to be filled by China, Russia, or Iran” and added that “we’ll seek to build on this moment with active, principled American leadership,” he also clarified what he meant by the term “American leadership.” Calling it the US’ “new framework for the Middle East” he elaborated that this leadership was based on “five key principles.” Importantly, none of these principles gave any indication that the US was interested in any way to get into direct intervention in the Middle East conflicts. In fact, the first key principle stated that the US will make sure that its friendly Middle Eastern “countries can defend themselves against foreign threats.”
Regardless of Biden’s efforts, due to the type of antagonistic relationship that Iran and the US currently share, it would remain impossible for Iran to receive the economic benefits even after the resurrection of the JCPOA. Iran couldn’t get such benefits during the best of times of JCPOA’s implementation! So, the result of Biden’s new Middle East strategy appears to be throwing the status quo and if a scenario eventually appears in which Israel and Saudi Arabia get embroiled into violent conflicts with Iran, the US may only give peripheral support to its Middle East partners rather than directly intervening in such bilateral or multilateral conflicts.
Conceptually, this scenario is closer to Nixon’s Twin Pillars strategy that was in place in the form of the US’ Middle East strategy before Iran’s Islamic Revolution of 1979. This strategy entailed that Saudi Arabia and Iran served as the two key pillars of the US in ensuring its interests in the Middle East. In the reincarnated form of this Twin Pillars strategy, Iran has now been replaced by Israel. For sure, we are again out of the phase mirroring the Carter Doctrine, which entailed direct intervention of the US to secure its interests in the Middle East.
Interestingly, in 1970s, the pressure of Vietnam war on the US had culminated into Nixon Doctrine and the Twin Pillars strategy. Currently, the pressure of Afghanistan and Iraq wars on the US seem to have brought it back to the same juncture – a return to its Twin Pillars strategy, albeit with the replacement of Iran by Israel. From now on, Israel and Saudi Arabia are likely to facilitate the US in attaining its core interests in the Middle East. In return, the US would support them through monetary and materiel means, but not by committing its own soldiers!
On the other hand, the Carter Doctrine, which paved the way for the US to directly intervene in the Middle East, was in reaction to the challenge emanating from a singular Soviet Union. In the current scenario, the US is facing the double challenges jointly emanating from Russia and China, its two greatest global adversaries. This compound pressure seems to have caused the US to back down a little, even if temporarily. Although not directed exclusively against Iran, President Biden’s Twin Pillars strategy for the Middle East is likely to be the central tool of the United States in dealing with the post-JCPOA Iran.
* Dr. Asif Shuja is a Senior Research Fellow at the Middle East Institute, National University of Singapore, who specialises in Iranian affairs. Views expressed here are personal.
Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman receiving the US President Joe Biden in Jeddah on July 15, 2022.