DUBAI AND ISTANBUL Exhausted from conflict and eager for
growth, Middle Eastern rivals try talking
I t was a surprising choice for a summer
holiday. On August 18th Tahnoon bin Zayed, the nationalsecurity adviser of the
United Arab Emirates (uae), turned up in
Ankara to meet Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the
president of Turkey. The countries have been at odds for years over Mr Erdogan’s
support for Islamist groups around the Middle East. Turkish officials accused the uae
of abetting a failed coup in 2016. But
none of that was mentioned in the official statement after their meeting, which
talked instead of economic cooperation.
A week later Sheikh Tahnoon met the
emir of Qatar, becoming the most senior
Emirati official to visit Qatar since the uae
and three other Arab states imposed an
embargo on it in 2017. Again, there was
cheery language about cooperation. The
sheikh is one of the uae’s most influential figures, a brother of Muhammad bin
Zayed, the de facto ruler. His visits were a
sign of a shift in Emirati foreign policy. It is
not the only country changing course.
There are two main faultlines in today’s
Middle East. One pits the Gulf states and Israel against Iran and its allies. The other
runs between countries such as Turkey
and Qatar, which are sympathetic to Islamists, and Egypt and the uae, which are not.
These schisms have fuelled conflict in the
Levant, Libya and Yemen, and less bloody
disputes elsewhere. Over the past five months, though,
longstanding foes have embarked on a
rush of diplomacy. Saudi Arabia and Iran
started a dialogue in April. Turkey has
sought to repair ties with Egypt, which
soured after the Egyptian army overthrew
an Islamistled government in 2013 (Mr Erdogan was a vocal critic of the coup). Qatar
and Egypt, which fell out for the same reason, are back on speaking terms. Egypt
even allowed Al Jazeera, a Qatari satellite
television network with an often proBrotherhood stance, to reopen its Cairo bureau, which was closed after the coup.
The capstone was a summit in Baghdad
on August 28th that brought together offi
cials from Egypt, Iran, Qatar, Saudi Arabia,
Turkey and elsewhere. Though it ended
with no concrete agreements, the act of
talking was a breakthrough in itself: many
participants would have been loth to attend such a gathering not long ago. Optimists hope these meetings may signal a
thaw and a possible end to the region’s ruinous disputes. The Middle East is a cruel
place for optimists—but in this case, their
hopes may not be entirely misplaced. The SaudiIranian feud, which reshaped the region after 1979, has settled into a frozen conflict over the past four years.
In part that is because of Iran’s success, and
Saudi Arabia’s failure, at exerting influence
abroad. The Saudi crown prince, Muhammad bin Salman, made a series of foreignpolicy blunders during his early days in
power and has since shifted focus to transforming the oilbound economy.
After pursuing its own aggressive foreign policy, the uae
has also begun to seek detente. Officials in Abu Dhabi, the capital, say this was a sideeffect of covid19. “It
made us understand… that we had to turn
back home and let go of certain kinds of en
gagements in the broader Middle East,” says an Emirati diplomat.
Introspective as it may sound, that is an ex
post facto justification: the uae began
withdrawing troops from Yemen in 2019,
months before the pandemic. The war had
become a quagmire, while Emirati support
for an antiIslamist warlord in Libya ended
in defeat (largely thanks to Turkish intervention). An activist foreign policy yielded
few gains; better to focus on an economy which, although more diversified than
those of its neighbours, is still unprepared
for a looming energy transition away from
oil. Ahead of the country’s 50th anniversary in December, officials are busy announcing a raft of economic initiatives.
Turkey has reached similar conclusions. Its economy has been hamstrung by
19% inflation, weak foreign investment
and a long currency crisis. Regional feuds,
not to mention disputes with America, the eu
and Greece, are not helping. “The economy needs deescalation,” says Galip Dalay
of Chatham House, a thinktank in London. It also needs cash. Emirati investors
might provide some. The lira’s devaluation
means foreigners can snatch up Turkish
assets at bargain prices.
Turkey also hopes to cash in on normalisation with Egypt. Despite their estrangement, trade between the countries reached
nearly $5bn last year. Turkish officials say
the potential is much higher. But mending
fences with Egypt would also pay political
dividends. Egypt, together with the eu,
America and Israel, has sided with Greece
and Cyprus in a dispute with Turkey over
drilling rights in the eastern Mediterranean. Mr Erdogan’s government thinks a
deal with Egypt can help it break out of its
isolation, so it is trying to negotiate one.
All of this would be quite a uturn. Yet
by now there are hardly any Islamists left
to support. AbdelFattah alSisi, Egypt’s
dictator, has ruthlessly dismantled the
Brotherhood. Even in countries where Islamists are free to compete in politics,
their popularity is waning (see article on
next page). For Turkey and Qatar, the costs
of continued confrontation with Egypt and the uae
are great, the benefits slim.
Disputes with Iran are harder to solve.
The regime in Tehran will not negotiate
away its hardwon influence in the Arab
world. Instead the Gulf states may seek only to secure their own backyard. They became keenly aware of their vulnerability
after Donald Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign led Iran to sabotage oil
tankers in the Persian Gulf and supply
drones and missiles for a surprise strike on
Saudi oil facilities in 2019. A wider conflict would be ruinous. Officials fret, for example, that a wellplaced salvo of missiles
aimed at desalination plants could render
the Gulf unliveable within days.
In their own ways, then, everyone enters these
talks from a position of some weakness. The Gulf states are wealthy but brittle,
whereas Iran and Turkey are muscular but broke. The Baghdad summit ended with a
joint statement pledging “noninterference in the internal affairs of countries”—ironic,
since the participants are notorious for interfering. They are unlikely to
stop. Regional diplomacy is thus little comfort for citizens of places like
Lebanon and Iraq, which barely exist as sovereign states. These are talks
between autocrats keen to protect their own grip on power and boost their
economies: not peace in ourtime, only within our borders.