This past week Professor Webb brought to my attention a great article from online news website www.al-monitor.com about the GCC's inability to successfully play a role as a collective security institution.
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/security/01/03/gulf-union-is-the-solution.html
The article talks about a conference held in Bahrain this past March. For those of you who don't know, Bahrain has been dealing with severe protests during the Arab Spring. This conference was created to discuss security issues and how to deal with them in both Bahrain and in the GCC. The conference identified three things that governments in the GCC need to address: political reform, social justice, and establishing a Gulf Union.
The Arab Spring has sent a shock-wave of political activism throughout the Middle East but in the Gulf only Bahrain has seen severe threats to the current Monarchy. However in other GCC states smaller protests have occurred and governments anticipated the Arab Spring with political reformation measures. I would also have to argue that successful domestic control has kept a lid on any protests coming up elsewhere in the Gulf.
What really interests me in this article is the suggestion of creating a Gulf Union to better deal with the collective security of GCC states and to balance the power in Gulf. So far the GCC states have had a lack of coordination in creating collective security for its members. Iran and Iraq have traditionally been the two other powers in the Gulf while the GCC states have relied on the US to bolster its defenses and provide deterrence. Currently the only real international security force the GCC has is the Peninsula Shield Force which is less than 60,000 troops. This force played its first international role in Bahrain in 2011. As the article states, creating a new power bloc out of the GCC states would counter Iraq and Iran while getting rid of reliance on foreign powers. The only way to do this is to tie the GCC states closer together.
I've read other articles before about creating a political, economic, and social bloc from the GCC states like this article suggests and every time individual countries own interests are the downfall to the plan. The GCC states peg their currencies to the US dollar and I know Oman has scoffed at the idea of ever joining a regional currency. Also, political elitism among the ruling families of the states would need to be bridged to even get anywhere past the idea stage. I truly think this is one of the main problems the GCC faces because ever since the British withdrawal in the late 1960's fighting between rulers have halted political talks. However, identity may offer a way to overcome issues since the other powers in the Gulf are not necessarily Gulf Arab. Iran and Iraq have their own identities as well. The Arab Spring might be the needed message to the GCC governments that it is time to consider a Gulf Union.
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/security/01/03/gulf-union-is-the-solution.html
The article talks about a conference held in Bahrain this past March. For those of you who don't know, Bahrain has been dealing with severe protests during the Arab Spring. This conference was created to discuss security issues and how to deal with them in both Bahrain and in the GCC. The conference identified three things that governments in the GCC need to address: political reform, social justice, and establishing a Gulf Union.
The Arab Spring has sent a shock-wave of political activism throughout the Middle East but in the Gulf only Bahrain has seen severe threats to the current Monarchy. However in other GCC states smaller protests have occurred and governments anticipated the Arab Spring with political reformation measures. I would also have to argue that successful domestic control has kept a lid on any protests coming up elsewhere in the Gulf.
What really interests me in this article is the suggestion of creating a Gulf Union to better deal with the collective security of GCC states and to balance the power in Gulf. So far the GCC states have had a lack of coordination in creating collective security for its members. Iran and Iraq have traditionally been the two other powers in the Gulf while the GCC states have relied on the US to bolster its defenses and provide deterrence. Currently the only real international security force the GCC has is the Peninsula Shield Force which is less than 60,000 troops. This force played its first international role in Bahrain in 2011. As the article states, creating a new power bloc out of the GCC states would counter Iraq and Iran while getting rid of reliance on foreign powers. The only way to do this is to tie the GCC states closer together.
The Peninsula Shield Force on its way to Bahrain
I've read other articles before about creating a political, economic, and social bloc from the GCC states like this article suggests and every time individual countries own interests are the downfall to the plan. The GCC states peg their currencies to the US dollar and I know Oman has scoffed at the idea of ever joining a regional currency. Also, political elitism among the ruling families of the states would need to be bridged to even get anywhere past the idea stage. I truly think this is one of the main problems the GCC faces because ever since the British withdrawal in the late 1960's fighting between rulers have halted political talks. However, identity may offer a way to overcome issues since the other powers in the Gulf are not necessarily Gulf Arab. Iran and Iraq have their own identities as well. The Arab Spring might be the needed message to the GCC governments that it is time to consider a Gulf Union.
Ferris, it is hard to imagine a more opportune time for the GCC to create a functional Gulf Union, especially in the security realm. Iraq's military is years away from returning to its status as a regional threat and international sanctions along with focused attention on Iran make establishing Iranian dominance in the Gulf difficult. However, do you envision a security force which is completely independent of western (mainly US) support?
ReplyDeleteEconomically, I don't see what the Gulf has to gain from a unified currency. I imagine that any change in currency would require Gulf states to convert their piles of cash. Inevitably, this would lead to some losing a little while some gain. Your thoughts?
Politically, I think you are right on the money. A true Gulf Union would essentially require GCC rulers to submit to a higher regional power. That may be a tough pill to swallow. But, it did work in Europe. Maybe some type of rotating presidential office may make the political aspect of a union more bearable.
I don't ever see the Peninsula Defense Shield or any other GCC security force being independent of foreign support because the infrastructure and industry to develop and produce weapons doesn't exist in those states. However the near monopoly the US has on arms sales to the GCC states and its constant presence there could change if a new effective security force could be formed. The Peninsula Defense Shield and GCC state forces receive foreign training and have the potential for expansion if state governments are willing to go this far.
ReplyDeleteI think the independent security force has more of a chance succeeding than a unified currency. You are right about governments fearing the loss of their cash stockpiles. The article I read over the summer about Oman refusing the idea outright talked about the initial losses it would have to deal with. I think governments are trying to make every dollar count especially since oil is going to run out along with the rent gained from it.
As for the Gulf Union idea I think a rotating presidency would bring on a whole new set of issues. Longevity of dynastic power is a huge cornerstone of many monarchs legitimacy and I think any hint of submission to a regional authority would stir up challenges to the monarchies. Elitism is so apparent right now and I can't imagine how it would play out in a rotating presidency. Perhaps Wahhabi influence might spread more throughout the region?
Marine,
ReplyDeleteIsnt a united currency just one of the basic steps towards unity? First theres trade agreements (Nafta) then united currency and econoimc ties ( Euro) then finally full economic intergration (europe + 10 years).
Sure Military agreemnts seem to be of more use presently but if moving towards a closer GCC is the goal, economics is one of the big moves.
Ferris I would question is this really benefical? if a gcc security force cant be reached with out external assistance its not truly of the GCC and cant act soley on the gulfs behalf.