The resumption of relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran has been dubbed a "strategic shock" by many experts and specialists. The reactions from both the regional and international communities indicate the significance and implications of this agreement.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
Several regional players have welcomed the agreement with open arms, including Oman, whose Foreign Minister, Badr Al Busaidi, hailed it as a win-win situation that would bolster security both locally and globally. Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, also made two phone calls to his Saudi and Iranian counterparts to express his approval of the agreement.
The UAE's diplomatic advisor, Dr. Anwar Gargash, took to Twitter to express his support for the agreement, emphasizing the importance of positive communication and dialogue between neighboring countries to foster stability and ensure a brighter future for all.
On the flip side, Iraq lauded the agreement as a game-changer that will elevate cooperation among regional countries and usher in a new era. Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, Russia, Turkey, and various regional organizations also joined in welcoming the agreement.
The overarching theme among these positions was the importance of sovereignty, non-interference in the internal affairs of other nations, and maintaining regional security and stability.
These issues were the crux of the Arabs' dispute with Iran on a broader scale, as opposed to other major strategic matters at the bilateral level, such as Iran's seizure of the three UAE islands (Greater and Lesser Tunbs and Abu Musa). The UAE's diplomatic approach to this issue is rooted in rationality and sagacity, driven by a resolute determination to engage in dialogue and negotiations while carefully safeguarding the UAE's historical sovereignty over its islands.
What's even more intriguing is the reactions of some regional and international players, which have been nothing short of fascinating.
Mohammed Abdulsalam, the lead negotiator for the Iran-backed Houthi militia, expressed his belief that restoring the "natural relations" between regional countries is crucial for the Islamic nation to regain its security, which has been compromised by foreign interference.
In the same vein, Hassan Nasrallah, the Secretary-General of the Lebanese Hezbollah party, lauded the resumption of relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran as a positive development. These two positions may pave the way for an agreement on the outstanding issues in Yemen and Lebanon as a direct outcome of dialogue between Riyadh and Tehran.
It's apparent that the warm reception from Iran's agents in both countries towards the agreement implies their approval of any resolution reached concerning the unresolved issues in both files. Perhaps the most noteworthy international reaction to the agreement comes from the US, which welcomed the resumption of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
John Kirby, the spokesperson for the National Security Council at the White House, noted that it remains to be seen whether Iran will follow through on its obligations in this agreement.
He also dismissed the notion that China has filled the void left by the US in the Middle East by saying: "I would stridently push back on this idea that we're stepping back in the Middle East." Kirby further emphasized that "The Saudis did keep us informed about these talks that they were having, just as we keep them informed on our engagements, but we weren't directly involved."
Another official in the White House stated that the US has long been advocating for direct dialogue between the two parties and welcomes any efforts to end the Yemeni conflict and reduce tensions in the Middle East. President Joe Biden's policy as outlined during his visit to the region last year, he continued, is built upon de-escalation, diplomacy, and deterrence.
To be frank, the American position on this matter is a key element in grasping the significance of this strategic event. While their statements were factual, they overlooked a crucial and astonishing detail for the White House decision-makers: the Saudi-Iranian dialogue scenario deviated from America's expected course. Initially, the dialogue was mediated by Iraq and Oman, with American approval or support, and it seemed to be making slow progress without any imminent breakthroughs.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
However, the final scene took an unexpected turn in two ways. First, China played an active role in the scenario and was highlighted in the tripartite official statement, showcasing its growing international influence. Second, the timing of the final statement came after two significant events: Iran's involvement in the Ukrainian crisis by supplying Russia with drones, which angered Western powers, and the cessation of efforts to revive the Iranian nuclear agreement. The latter was supposed to run parallel with the Saudi-Iranian openness, ultimately easing tensions in the Middle East and the Arab Gulf region. Nonetheless, while one pillar of the agreement—efforts to revive the nuclear deal—came to a halt, efforts towards reconciliation between regional powers continued, thanks to successful Chinese mediation.
To put it in a nutshell, the American response to the Saudi-Iranian reconciliation seems valid at first glance, but the timing and the involvement of the Chinese mediator have made it questionable. John Kirby's statement holds some truth, but there are a few factors that have led to the final outcome being different from what the US had anticipated.
