News & Comment

Saudi Arabia’s Quest for Nuclear Bomb Strengthens Western Hegemony

News:

Last week, Crown Prince Muhammed bin Salman (MBS) went on record to state that Saudi Arabia would obtain a nuclear bomb if Iran acquired one. MBS’s statement does not only have huge implications for the longevity of Iranian nuclear deal agreed in 2015 [cbsnews], but it also weakens the efforts of the Islamic world to end Western dominance.

Comment:

The timing of Crown Prince Muhammed bin Salman’s comments coincide with the dismissal of US Secretary State Tillerson—who opposed revisions to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPA) [state.gov]— and amidst signals from the White House that US President Trump seeks alterations to the agreement. If Trump and his acolytes really want peace in the Middle East, perhaps they should pay close attention to the words of Kenneth Waltz.

    One of the first American scholars to break ranks with mainstream opinion and advocate nuclear weapons for the Middle East was the father of neo-realism Kenneth Waltz [Foreign Affairs, 91(4), pp.2-5.]. Waltz argued that the Jewish entity’s nuclear primacy provided it with open license to conduct conventional wars with its neighbors and spread instability throughout the Middle East. Waltz believed that a nuclear-armed Iran would deter the Jewish entity from conducting conventional warfare, especially in countries where Iran had a major stake such as Lebanon and Syria.

    In essence, Waltz’s argument was predicated on selective proliferation of nuclear weapons to produce some semblance of nuclear parity that deters adversarial states from intensifying conventional warfare and avoiding nuclear war. By doing so, peace is more likely to prevail instead of hegemony and instability.

   Implicit in Waltz’s assessment is that the spread of nuclear weapons synthesizes stability in regions that have states, which possess ideological differences. Waltz viewed the stability of the bipolar order of the Cold War through this prism, and foresaw a miniature bipolar order in the Middle East existing between Iran and the Jewish entity.

    MBS’s quest for a nuclear bomb opposes Waltz’s thesis and is driven by the desire to overcome Iran’s conventional superiority of ground forces. The recent request by Saudi Arabia for Pakistani troops to aid the war effort in Yemen as well as to buttress internal security of the kingdom exemplifies this [khaleejtimes].

    Iran and Saudi Arabia certainly have differences but they are not rooted in ideology. Wahhabism and Shiaism are two strands of Islamic jurisprudence. Moreover, both Iran and Saudi Arabia have more than ideological differences with the Jewish state. The people of both countries regard the Jewish state an alien entity that is a continuation of the crusader project stemming from the 12th century.

   It would have been far better for MBS to frame the desire for nuclear weapons in countering the nuclear superiority of the Jewish state. This rationale would have resonated extremely well with all the populations of the Middle East and even stymied objections from Iran. Another advantage of this argument is that it taps into the groundswell of popular support, which can be easily exploited to rouse the Muslim world to end the crusader project.

    MBS’s focus on framing the nuclear bomb in response to Iranian nuclear ambitions legitimizes the occupation of the Jewish state over Palestine, conveys the impression that Saudi Arabia has teamed up with the Jewish state to counter Iran, and weakens the unity of the Islamic world.

    It is evident that neither Saudi Arabia nor Iran can provide suitable leadership over nuclear warheads and the more pressing issue of West’s support for the Jewish state. Only the Caliphate can successfully achieve nuclear parity with the West, and end western hegemony not just in Middle East but also across the entire Islamic world.

Written for the Central Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir by

Abdul Majeed Bhatti