Escalating Tensions Between Saudi Arabia and Iran

When Saudi Arabia executed an influential Shia cleric Nimr al-Nimr protests errupted through out the region. Forty-six others were also executed by the Kingdom changed with involvement in terrorism. It is not entirely clear that Nimr al-Nimr was involved with ISIS or any other radical political Islamist organization. This was clearly a political motivation, due to the fact he was one of the leading figures in the 2011 protests in Eastern province. These protests were conducted by the Shia Muslim population, who have been marginalized in Saudi Arabia. Shia Muslims took notice of the high profile execution and protested in Iran, Syria, Iraq, and even in non-Arab countries like the UK. When the Saudi Embassy was attacked by protesters, Saudi Arabia began breaking diplomatic relations with Iran. A precarious situation is emerging which could escalate to full scale war. This also demonstrates that the House of Saud has growing internal political opposition. There is a growing sectarianism that is taking dramatic ethnic and religious overtones. Persian and Arab ethnic hatreds could be an influence in current behaviors of both nations. This will derail attempts at resolving the Syrian Civil War. This only strengthens Israel's plans to either undermine or attack Iran. Saudi Arabia and Iran are two major powers in the Middle East competing for control. This tension at some point will reach a climax and the effects could be devastating.
      The Saudi monarchy was thought to be stalwart. Since its founding, the House of Saud has maintained a tight grip on power. Internal opposition did not seem like an immediate concern. There have been cases of terror attacks. The Kobar attacks and the Riyadh Compound bombings were major incidents, but never had the chance of destabilizing the government. The worst fear of the monarchy is their overthrow. King Salman has inherited the issues of the former King. A growing extremist movement, a society that wants liberalization of the political system, and a region growing more sectarian.The Arab Spring brought about many regime changes and it was clear that the Gulf monarchies were not immune. Eastern province was protesting the grievances that the Shia Muslim minority faced in the Kingdom. Nimr al-Nimr before he became known by his execution was a leading figure. The Shia Muslim cleric became the voice of frustrated youth and a disgruntled public . He had been charged by the government for incendiary speech and allegedly having connections to terrorism. These charges have not been verified;it is obvious what the motive was. King Salman and the ruling family are attempting to eliminate potential emerging political or religious opposition. The reason the Shia Muslims are targeted is because they could get external assistance from other Shia states. Iran and Syria could use this opportunity to destabilize the Kingdom internally. What could be a general movement for rights for the Shia minority could transform into a movement to depose the monarchy.

What has occurred is   Namr al-Namr  has been transformed into a heroic dissident figure. This image is not an entirely accurate picture. While he was imprisoned for criticizing the monarchy, it is difficult to verify if he wanted full scale removal of it. His execution was a mistake and resulted in the region forming rival alliance systems. The discrimination of the Shia Muslims does extend outside Saudi Arabia's borders. Bahrain which has a majority Shia Muslim population, which causes solicitous emotions in the Saudi leadership. The Sunni Muslim minority that rules the country was in a state of crisis when protests reached the state. Saudi Arabia sent troops to Bahrain to crush the protests and buttress the Al-Khalifa family. Under King Abdullah   al-Saud  the Kingdom was becoming more willing to use military force. King Salman has extended this policy to a far greater extent. Interventions that have occurred in Yemen and Syria serve to expand Saudi Arabia's power. These external ventures have caused minimal damage to Saudi Arabia. However, the execution of Namr al-Namr has jeopardized their regional power aspirations. Saudi Arabia can no longer do what it wants to its Shia population without backlash from other states.  

      Iranian and Saudi Arabian tensions are projecting more ethnic and religious overtones. The Persian and Arab ethnic hatred has been present for centuries. When ethnic nationalism became of political importance, these hatreds escalated. Iraq and Iran before the Iran-Iraq War were already having border disputes. To complicate matters further Iran was arming Kurdish rebel groups in Iraq. The Algiers Agreement prevented war between the two countries at least temporarily. Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi met with Vice President Saddam Hussein of Iraq in 1975 to reach a consensus on borders and the issue of Kurdish independence movements. Houri Boumediene President of Algeria wanted to prevent a mass regional war in the Middle East. President Boumediene did not want to have Algeria take a side if such a war to erupt. This agreement was fragile and the subsequent events that followed lead to war. The Shah was deposed by the Iranian Revolution. The Islamic Republic was established under Shia Muslim rule. Saddam Hussein purged the Baath Party and formally became President of Iraq. His regime was Sunni Muslim minority ruled and the new Islamic Republic he felt posed a threat. Iraq then launched an invasion in 1980 with the support of the Gulf monarchies and the West. 

A combination of ethnic hatred and religious intolerance was present in the Iran and Iraq War. Saudi Arabia supported Saddam as an enforcer against the Islamic Republic of Iran. Kuwait was also hoping for an Iraqi victory. This would be more preferable than a powerful Persian state.These foreign policy moves further alienated Shia Muslims living in majority Sunni Muslim states. Saddam Hussein would later fall out of favor with the invasion of Kuwait in 1990. When the US invaded Iraq the Shiite population was able to make the state majority rule. This time, Saudi Arabia did not have another state to act as a buffer zone against a Shia Muslim state. Iran's power was growing without Iraq to balance it. What also caught Saudi Arabia attention was the development of a potential Shia land bridge connecting Syria, Iraq, and Iran. Agreements made in regards to oil and gas could cause economic challenges for Saudi Arabia. What has happened now is a potential for ethnic and religious wars that were fomented by failed foreign policies. Regime change, war, and imperialism have unleashed old hatreds in a new and dangerous form. Saudi Arabia and Iran represent the Arab and Persian rivalry combined with the sectarianism between sects of Islam. These regional ethnic and religious hatreds have caused both Iran and Saudi Arabia to arm various groups across the Middle East. Saudi Arabia has armed elements of ISIS and Iran supports the Houthi rebels. These actions would be considered wars of proxy, but could become direct conflict. 

        Iran and Saudi Arabia's diplomatic and political conflict will only extend the Syrian Civil War. Saudi Arabia wants President Assad to be removed. Iran sees in President Assad as an asset. Their relationship goes back to the Islamic Republic's founding. Syria was one of the few Arab states to have positive relations with a Persian state. Western interference has further complicated a fragile peace process. The US, UK, and France do not want peace. Long term bombing they claim is directed at ISIS, but the real target is the Baathist government. This triggered a response from Russia, which is now engaged in bombing of both ISIS and armed opposition groups.There were meetings in Vienna to establish a frame work for peace. The UN has even endorsed a peace plan, but this means nothing as long as the main objective is to overthrow the legitimate government. Saudi Arabia has more of an interest in having the war continue. It allows them to keep armed Sunni groups active regionally, while expanding influence. ISIS cannot be defeated if Iran does not participate to the fullest degree.ISIS is highly active in areas on the Shia land bridge, which is why Iran's support for President Assad will grow stronger. 

At one point it seemed as if  ISIS was going to take Baghdad, but have since been pushed back to Northern Iraq and Syria. Syria and Iraq are battle grounds for regional powers. The less powerful states will begin to align themselves based on political and cultural ideologies. Kuwait, Bahrain, the UAE, and now Qatar are forming a military alliance with Saudi Arabia. Oman has been unique in its path in regards to the Iran and Saudi Arabia crisis. While it did condemn the attacks on the Saudi Embassy, it refuses to sever diplomatic relations with Iran. It appears to be either going for a stance of neutrality or a mediator between two warring parties.Oman has taken the position of negotiated settlements before, being instrumental in the Iran nuclear deal and still willing to recognize the Baathist government in Syria. Iran has Syria in its alliance  and Iraq which is mostly Shia Muslim would follow. The Syrian Civil War may go beyond a war of proxy into a mass regional war. The alliances have already been set by the most powerful states.  

      Another factor  present in the Saudi Arabian and Iranian tension is Israel's reaction. Israel's reaction to the Iran nuclear deal reveals that the country wants an existential threat. This diverts attention from serious domestic issues such as limited affordable housing and water resources. The country also wants to be the most powerful in the region. At one point it was, but since the 2006 Lebanon War and the Iraq War their power is in decline. Iran and Saudi Arabia could have the potential to be a military challenge to Israel. Prime Minister Netanyahu's government wants war. Not only that, but expansion of territory as settlers continue to enter the West Bank. The rhetoric that Prime Minister Netanyahu promoted was presenting Iran as a global menace and a danger to international security.Israel is not confident enough to attack Iran without US support. The possibility of defeat is too high to risk. There is no guarantee that other states would not react. Saudi Arabia does not like Israel and was especially furious with the attacks on Gaza.Saudi Arabia has a new found confidence in its military power that it has not seen since the Gulf War. If  Israel were to attack Iran, Saudi Arabia would respond with force. Israeli expansionism has always been condemned in the Arab world. Seeing as these are likely scenarios, Israel may begin to side with Saudi Arabia to advance their goals. Israel and Saudi Arabia are both actively fueling the rebellion in Syria, so this does not seem impossible.The United States claims it favors neither side in the Iran and Saudi Arabia dispute, but the facts tell another story. US silence after the execution of Nimr al- Nimr demonstrate a general lack of concern about Saudi Arabia' s human rights abuses. The US is quick to criticize Iran's political system, yet never challenges Israel's continuing persecution of the Palestinian people. What ever happens it seems Israel will benefit from conflict. This does not only have repercussions in the Middle East, but globally.  

    Regional instability will attract world powers. Their interventions are not to promote peace, but to advance a geopolitical design for particular nations. The United Nations has assisted in this causing more chaos across the world. The United States and Russia are theoretically in a proxy war in Syria arming different sides of the conflict.This only further exacerbates tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia seeing as they have diplomatic relations with the two opposing states. The reduction of the price of oil only adds to the intricacies causing economic problems in both Saudi Arabia and Iran.Oil can be useful  in regards to economic health only when the price of it is high. When some sanctions on Iranian oil were lifted, this caused extra oil to be available in the global market. As a result, the price per barrel become cheaper. The solution would be to have oil exporting nations to cut production. Saudi Arabia and Iran would have to agree to scale back oil production. At this stage it would not be possible, because the two nations are in a state of conflict. Getting involved in war would be the only solution to their oil problem. The Western nations allied with Saudi Arabia would most likely boycott and stop the import of Iranian oil. This could have more destabilizing effects on international markets. Economic warfare will become another element of national warfare. The main objective is to prevent expansion of the Iran and Saudi Arabia rivalry.Government officials did not attack the Saudi Embassy, it was protesters. The failure of the police to restrain and control the situation should not be taken as a declaration of war. Saudi Arabia made an error in the execution of Nimr al-Nimr. It ignited a new wave a sectarianism from which there is no return.