I have recently read many articles and analyses dealing with the issue of arranging priorities in the Middle East in relation to international powers, specifically the United States of America. Many observers criticize the great American interest in tackling the Iranian nuclear crisis at the expense of other regional issues they see as more important and urgent, foremost of which is the issue of the Palestinian–Israeli conflict, which represents the cornerstone of chaos and instability in the region. The truth is that the agenda of the priorities of any major power stems from its strategic interests in the first place, and this is an axiom that does not bear any discussion.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
Therefore, if we want to understand the American strategic perspective on the Middle East, we must proceed from this angle, through which we can understand the significance of the interest in the crisis of the Iranian nuclear agreement. What is certain is that the matter is not related to Iran, despite its regional status, but it is mainly related to two important factors, the first of which is the sensitivity of decision-makers in Israel and the United States to the ayatollahs' unconventional armament capabilities that could threaten Israel's military superiority, or build a deterrent force that limits the margin of Israeli tactical maneuver in confronting any threat to its national security.
The second factor is the time factor, which plays a very dangerous role in the crisis of the Iranian nuclear agreement. All the intelligence reports, even the reports of the International Atomic Energy Agency, indicate that the ayatollahs' regime is close to possessing the capabilities necessary to manufacture a nuclear bomb, especially with uranium enrichment rates exceeding more than 60% recently, and we should not ignore here the statements of IAEA chief Rafael Grossi, in which he described the Iranian nuclear program as "extremely worrying," noting that the ayatollahs' regime is enriching uranium to degrees of purity that only the countries that manufacture bombs can reach.
He literally said, "Enrichment of Uranium by a country to a purity of 60 percent is very dangerous... Only countries that produce bombs reach this level." He added that the purity level is "almost 60%, the level of weapon production. Commercial enrichment is from two to three (percent)," and these statements lend great credibility to Western intelligence estimates that talk about "a few months" separating the ayatollahs from producing a nuclear weapon.
This gives this issue a very urgent aspect among the priorities of the White House, as it is the main guarantor and ally of Israel, not to mention that the United States, by virtue of being the first superpower in the world, has a great interest in preventing Iran from acquiring military nuclear capabilities, both by virtue of the alliances of this regime and its anti-American orientations or by virtue of the danger of nuclear power in the Arab Gulf region, which enjoys exceptional strategic importance within the calculations of hegemony, influence and conflicts of major international powers.
This abstract analytical vision does not, of course, reflect a subjective opinion of the realism of the regression in the importance of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict within the calculations of strategic priorities in the Middle East, but it is nothing but a refutation of American policies and positions.
The centrality of the Palestinian issue to Arab countries and peoples does not necessarily mean that it is a central issue for decision-makers in major capitals, especially in light of the complexity of this issue. Everyone knows the huge amount of United Nations resolutions and efforts and negotiating rounds the issue went through without witnessing a real qualitative breakthrough on the ground.
Abstract calculations that monitor these priorities do not mean that they are rigid templates, but rather they may witness changes, even temporary, due to the change of data and the circumstances, and everyone followed how the American focus suddenly turned during the past weeks to search for exits and solutions to end the military escalation between Israel and the Palestinian organizations in Gaza, and how President Biden intervened several times by making phone calls with leaders and heads of several regional countries to search for calm and ceasefire.
My conviction is that it is not a matter of priorities as much as it is related to trying to control the most volatile situations and seeking to close the most pressing issues that affect the interests of the United States and the Israeli ally in particular. We must not forget that one of the most important motives for the Biden administration to push for a settlement to the Iranian nuclear crisis is to avoid Israel's involvement in a preemptive war aimed at pre-empting the Iranian nuclear project, with the implied possibilities of this scenario regarding the involvement of the United States in any possible confrontation between Iran and Israel.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
However, the seriousness of the tension between the Palestinians and Israel when it jumped to the top of the priorities list did not affect the status of the Iranian nuclear program, which some Arab observers and analysts see as not a threat at all. This is a view that stems from narrow country interests that are not based on convincing strategic calculations. The Iranian nuclear "genie" – as the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency called it – if it emerges from its "bottle" on the other side of the Arabian Gulf, will turn all strategic data upside down, and those with this vision should think a little about the behavior of the ayatollahs' regime that runs wild in our Arab countries and boasts about occupying four of its capitals before it had a nuclear bomb, and where these behaviors can go in light of the presence of a "nuclear button" in Teheran's hands.
Salem al–Ketbi is an Emirati political analyst and a former candidate to the UAE's Federal National Council.
