Imagine two regions. Between them they have given rise to some of the world’s greatest civilisations and all of the world’s major religions. Both experienced colonial domination over the last half millennia. Yet in recent decades while Asia has seen unprecedented growth underpinned by strong states, parts of the Middle East have been mired in political turmoil and violence. While some states have seen economic growth, overall the region is hamstrung by instability.
During the Cold War, Middle Eastern states, by will or necessity, looked to the West and to Eastern Bloc countries for military and diplomatic support, as well as aid and governance advice. Post-Cold War, this narrowed to most states relying on the West, with a couple seeking support from a reassertive Russia.
However, recent geopolitical developments such as increased global multipolarity, as well as America’s growing energy self-sufficiency and declining public appetite for involvement in the Middle East, over the long-term, have begun to change this. Gulf states, for instance, are seeking alternative sources to underwrite their security following Iran’s economic unshackling with the nuclear deal.
In addition to seeking to form a regional security dialogue, Middle Eastern countries could look towards Asian powers. China, India, Japan and South Korea all have strategic interests in the region as a key energy source. Energy imports have a significant impact on the strategic capabilities of these powers. A chronically unstable region leaves Asian states’ energy security vulnerable to the actions of other global powers who exert influence in the Middle East. The rise of non-state groups in the region also increases threats faced by countries like India, China and Indonesia from domestic extremists.
Right now, Asia’s involvement in the Middle East has the early makings of a standard competition for resources, as seen many times throughout world history. China’s strategic forays, including its involvement in the Iran deal, growing defence ties with several states and its “One Belt, One Road” initiative, have caught the attention of policymakers in Delhi and Tokyo. A competitive, reactive approach by Asian countries will drain their own resources and increase the Middle East’s instability.
A more cooperative future could be underpinned by establishing an Asia-Middle East summit. This architecture could include major energy consumers and labour providers. Rather than being restricted to commercial transactions, the summit would give all sides an opportunity to hammer out common positions and agreements on complex security and economic issues. Lessons in do’s and don’ts could be learned from the East Asia Summit – another multiregional grouping.
Beyond this, such a forum would enable Middle Eastern states to tap into Asian countries’ experience in strengthening state stability, institutions and identities. Large states such as India and China had to contend with subnational identities post-independence and post-revolution respectively. But both, with differing combinations of tools, including inclusive-ideology, economic inclusion and coercive force, were able to supplant these with national identities to the point where anti-state forces now face an almost impossible task. The same goes for smaller states such as Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Myanmar.
Currently, in a strategic sense, there is very little likelihood of any Asian state being split, or its government being violently overthrown. Even the outlying case of East Timor, whose birth was preceded by bloodshed, now has amicable relations with Indonesia.
Wealthy countries from both regions could work together to support development in poorer countries. Middle Eastern states could also model their evolution from commodity exporters to service economies after countries such as India and Singapore. Asian states in turn could sharpen their public and cultural diplomacy tools.
An Asia-Middle East summit would complement the current mechanisms for engagement between the United States and Europe, and Middle Eastern countries.
Furthermore, a heavy Asian presence may add a different ingredient to interactions between the countries of this region. It would probably provide a less charged atmosphere than western-dominated forums.
Kadira Pethiyagoda is a visiting fellow in Asia-Middle East relations at Brookings Doha
