The middle East is one of the three regions that will shape global politics in coming years. The other two to Europe with the problems of the European Union and East Asia, a region where the Chinese are gaining strength ambitions — have a secondary and more lasting impact on international relations, while the middle East has been the scene of fierce fighting and sophisticated diplomacy.
No matter how careful and cautious nor acted there regional players and world powers, unforeseen events may at any time completely change the strategic picture. A huge value at the moment have relations between Russia and Saudi Arabia are creating extremely important dynamics. In the last three to five years accumulating a potential full-scale confrontation between the two countries, and this opposition can have a significant impact on several areas of international relations.
The current tension between Moscow and Riyadh are the two dimensions. First, the positions of Russia and Saudi Arabia disagree on fundamental aspects of the global energy relations, and secondly, on the issues of combating terrorism. In both measurements there are factors which complicate the understanding of these differences.
In the discussions on global energy, OPEC has become a distraction. The vast majority of analysts indicates that the clearest manifestation of today’s differences between Russia and Saudi Arabia in the issue of governance of the global oil markets was the failure of the April negotiations in Doha. According to their argument, Russia seeks to coordinate the process of freezing of oil production with OPEC, but Saudi Arabia is not interested in. But OPEC could not act because of the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran. In fact, the difference in the approaches of Moscow and Riyadh to the global oil market is much deeper than paralysis on the OPEC talks.
A thorough analysis of Russian energy policy, particularly of Moscow’s positions in matters of global energy security, draws a very clear picture. Indeed, like Russia, to global energy markets, including oil, worked smoothly and quietly, and to protect the security of both demand and supply. In official documents one can find elaborated the concept of global energy security, which confirms Russia’s interest in the stable mechanism of international energy relations. This concept does not preclude unilateral action to the detriment of other participants in the global energy market. The reason is simple: Russia does not preach universal friendship and humane coexistence and rational underlines the fact that producers and consumers in this market need to develop mutual cooperation, as the aggressive actions without considering the interests of others is tantamount to throwing stones in a glass house the world’s energy system.
At the same time, Saudi Arabia today apparently more interested in improving positions on the market with the simultaneous implementation of the program of the Saudi Vision 2030, aimed at eliminating the country’s dependence on oil.
In this respect, half-dead OPEC is the platform on which takes place the clash of concepts of Russia and Saudi Arabia. In the national policy of energy security of Russia the mixed components of the energy security of both consumers and producers, and there is considerable additional potential for energy transit. Moscow depends on world energy markets that affect its economic development, and the last ten years, insists on the dialogue between energy producers and consumers, and between manufacturers. The purpose of this dialogue, it sees the building features the world’s energy markets. In this decade, mostly at the initiative of Russia was established the Forum of gas exporting countries, which has become a successful example of international energy organizations, is fundamentally different from OPEC. OPEC was created as a cartel, which defends the interests of exporters, opposing them to the interests of importers, while the GECF is an industry organization, whose purpose is improving the efficiency of world gas production through dialogue between specialists. It is very difficult to argue that such efficiency is contrary to the interests of consumers.
Riyadh prefers a different path. OPEC, for decades which is essentially an Annex to the Saudi oil industry, was made a scapegoat and left to their fate, and Saudi Arabia continues to pump oil with the intention to crush all of his competitors. Speaking of Deputy crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman (Mohammed bin Salman), who is the son and confidant of the king, and the Creator of the current policy, the magazine Bloomberg Businessweek notes: “the Possible future king of Saudi Arabia says he doesn’t care, will it rise or fall of oil prices. If they grow, will have more money for investment in other sectors other than oil. If they fall, Saudi Arabia, being the low-cost oil-producing country, can realize the expansion in the fast growing Asian market. Deputy crown Prince in fact renounces years of Saudi doctrine, which Riyadh acts as the leader of OPEC.”
The Saudis are taking a bold bet, but it is important to remember that the issue of such a policy is still not solved. King Salman and Deputy crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman can take all sorts of decisions, but there is the impression that some fundamental provisions of the Saudi Vision 2030 is very risky. There’s a lot of questions. Will the Kingdom of money (even after the partial privatization of Aramco) in order to pay all your bills — after all, it dramatically increases the costs of transition? Will he have enough of those 14 years that remain until 2030 to prepare the workforce for the new economy, which is expected to be free from petroleum dependence? Will he manage to change the mindset of the Saudi population, including many members of the Royal family? Is it possible to will such reforms in the context of those social, cultural and religious frameworks that exist in Saudi Arabia? Deputy crown Prince Muhammad likes to compare herself with Steve jobs, mark Zuckerberg and bill gates. But all of these people succeeded, not in Saudi Arabia, where women are still not allowed to drive, and where there are other much more complex problems.
For understanding the second dimension of differences between Russia and Saudi Arabia are also important role of Islam in this country. If problems OPEC overshadow the substantial differences between the energy policies of the Russian and the Saudis, the Syrian crisis is the same distraction when analysing discrepancies Moscow and Riyadh in combating terrorism. To say that Russia is protecting “their man in Syria” Bashar al-Assad, while Saudi Arabia supports the struggle of the opposition for freedom would be misleading simplification.
Let’s start with the obvious. It must be emphasized that among the many factions fighting against the Assad regime, the Islamist are the strongest, and the “Islamic state” has an extremely bad reputation. But although ISIS because of its global pretensions and deadly actions on a global scale has become the enemy of the entire planet after initial victories in Iraq and Syria, and other Islamist parties could compete with the “Islamic state” in religious zeal and cruelty. The question arises: will stop if these groups to fight, if they win in Syria? Or is it just the rivalry terrorists — ISIS today is the most formidable, and his competitors aspire to “surpass” this organization in Syria and other places?
Further, the analysis of different approaches to counter-terrorism between Moscow and Riyadh should pay attention to the fact that Saudi support for jihadist groups in Syria is no longer a secret. Even today it appears that Saudi Arabia and Turkey, according to some estimates, trying to unite jihadi formation in Syria under a single command and under the name “Jaish al-Fatah” (conquest). By the way, the leader of “al Qaeda” Ayman al-Zawahiri also calls for such a Union.
And finally — turns, but not least. In the analysis of the difference in the approaches of Moscow and Riyadh to fight against terrorist groups should be taken into account the fact that in Saudi Arabia dominated by the Wahhabi branch of Islam, and that Wahhabi preachers cooperate with Russian terrorist groups in the North Caucasus and especially in Dagestan. It helps to understand why Moscow is so concerned about what is happening in Syria, and why she’s concerned about the support that the Saudis have a different radical groups.
In addition to solving global energy problems of Russia proposes to establish broad international cooperation in the fight against jihadists in Syria and other countries. For example, she urged the United States to start joint strikes on Jabhat al-Nusra” in Syria. While Washington refuses from such cooperation despite the fact that America in 2012 ranked as “Dzhebhat an-Nusra” terrorist organizations, and the American troops inflict on her own beats. Saudi Arabia, allegedly a partner and ally of America, in 2014, also brought “Dzhebhat an-Nusra” in the list of terrorist groups, however, that front, which is often called “al-Qaeda in Syria” is part of the coalition Jaish al-Fatah”. The relationship of the Saudis with the forces of the jihadists cause alarm among many foreign observers and reinforce suspicions of Russia against Saudi policies. It is clear that between two countries there are differences in views about what is radical and dangerous Islam.
In conditions when the world is increasingly concerned about global energy security and radical Islam, the difference in the approaches of Russia and Saudi Arabia to these problems is to create a resonance that goes beyond bilateral relations. Although they carefully avoid open confrontation and hostile rhetoric, the incompatibility of their goals in energy markets and middle East politics are already evident. The future will show how this rivalry will affect international relations.
