Christopher Hoerstel, German journalist and political activist, tells the Tehran Times winners are all friends and partners, including Iraq and Oman, will be the winners of reconciliation between Iran and Saudi Arabia. 

“Winners are hundreds and millions of people” and “losers are a few,” he adds.

He calls Washington and Tel Aviv the opponents of the Tehran-Riyadh détente.

The freelance journalist who spent so many years in the Middle East and publisher of “NATO at a turning point“  highlights that for decades Iran has vowed, that all regional countries solve their problems among themselves.

Here is the full text of the interview:  

How do you evaluate China’s successful mediation between Iran and Saudi Arabia?

To correctly describe the importance of this sensational and outstanding mediation, a good look into history and surrounding political issues may be helpful. Because it took a huge effort to establish the political background in Saudi Arabia allowing for this bold Saudi step, which is clearly linked to personality and mindset of Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammad bin Salman, nicknamed MBS.

In the Yemen engagement of 2015 as well as the actions against ISIS, MBS, in his capacity as defense minister and minister of state showed both strong resolve and firm will to succeed quickly, and already in September that same year he strongly criticized US foreign policy openly, while accompanying his father, King Salman, in a US visit during the Obama presidency. But, alas, America didn’t listen. Mohammad bin Salman was made crown prince. Washington used its influence to arrange huge and unprecedented arms deals with Riyadh, which surpassed any other arms deals in human history- $110 billion in May 2017 and 350 billion for 10 years, thus positioning Saudi Arabia as leader of a Sunni Arab group of states opposed to Iran. This move served the interests and agenda of radically pro-Zionist US President Trump, who showed himself as a staunch MBS supporter and enemy of Iran.

Washington’s Deep State, fearing for its influence in Riyadh, arranged appointment of the known critic of King Salman and his son MBS, Jamal Abdul Khashoggi, wealthy media personality and consultant to deeply CIA-linked Prince Turki, as a columnist of the Washington Post. There, Khashoggi wrote a series of statements critical of the royal family and Saudi policies. 

In November 2017, MBS ordered arrest of 200 wealthy businessmen and princes, who were subsequently made to pay billions of dollars in corruption charges to help balance the Saudi state budget. Khashoggi was killed on October 2, 2018, and the CIA linked the murder to MBS. But Russian, Chinese and other global leaders refused to follow the ensuing Western MBS-bashing policies.

The Chinese diplomatic effort shows top qualities of setting patient stepstones. China’s mediation has come a very long way and shows the typical sturdiness and perseverance of China’s and of Iran’s diplomacy.

The killing of Iranian hero General Soleimani alongside his very close and longstanding friend, Abu Mahidi Al-Muhandis, leader of Iraq’s paramilitary units Popular Mobilisation Forces in January 2020, appears now as Washington’s last desperate effort to stop the Saudi-Iranian relations. In fact, it backfired against Washington’s decades-old and permanent divide and rule” tactics, pushing the main Islamic powers against each other. However, it helped sides with fresh energy to pursue the path of potential reconciliation.

China helped its friend, successful oil and gas provider Iran, that is under permanent criminal Washington-led sanctions pressure. It practically acted as friend and host, setting a historical landmark in world history. Watch out, this is China, the coming global leader. It started its role as a peace maker while is following up on its nefarious multiple third world war designs.

How can Tehran-Riyadh deal affect the state of security in the Middle East?

Washington has invested a huge part of its clout in the region, manpower, media power and secret service funding, trying to establish a US-managed permanent war threat in the region, with Saudi Arabia and Iran confronting each other. “The biggest secret hobby game of Washington is Muslims killing Muslims”. 

As two equal regional powers and one powerful global player with a future leadership are involved, stability can prevail. However, a deal doesn’t mean that powers outside the deal will abide by it, respect it, take its values and aspirations into consideration. Washington may reassess its human resources and try to reverse the tide. That is the only real threat to this bold and happy step into a peaceful and prosperous future.

The bilateral aspect opens up loads of opportunities in all fields of politics. In the regional network of cooperations, GCC, the whole Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon axis as well as hitherto difficult bilateral positions and partnerships, such as around Qatar, Oman and even Jordan may improve. The same holds for Bahrain and its brave people under longstanding oppression. Biggest hope is for progress in the terrible Yemen conflict, where closer relations between the two partners to the deal may finally offer solutions to the benefit of all people involved. Inside Iran, which is right now under high pressure from US secret operations, the interior situation may vastly improve.

The aspects of the JCPOA are being disregarded by Washington and its allies since its inauguration in 2015 under Obama. In the light of the new regional deal under Chinese patronage all parties should benefit and adjacent policies should not grossly contradict the spirit and intentions of previous agreements, but stabilize and enhance their value.

Israel was projected by Washington as to support and cooperate with Saudi Arabia in a potential war against Iran; this seems pretty much obsolete by now. The deal with certainly set new limits for Israel to destabilize the Muslim world and its neighbors – to various extents.
Many scholars, experts, military and media heads in the US, such as Fareed Zakaria, have frequently pointed out that the Shia-Muslim divide should no longer be backbone or main stepping-stone of the United States’ Middle East policies. 

Who are the winners and losers of this deal?

Accordingly, winners are all friends and partners of the involved parties to the Saudi-Iran agreement, including Iraq und Oman, who helped in the mediation. People suffering in the region are winners.

Losers are manifold, such as the winners – but bad designs and intentions, mainly developed in Washington and Israel, may be named here, alongside many inside and outside these two societies. I put Washington and Israel here, side by side.

The reason for my choice of wording is that most American citizens are not quite aware of what their ill-advised government is in fact doing and planning anywhere in the world – so they cannot be easily counted among the culprits. In Israel, however, the situation is different: People are quite well aware of what really happens. And this is why we have faced two nearly equally questionable governments in the past, after a lengthy infighting and four nearly useless elections. Israel’s woes are systemic – and their system is being challenged by Iran-Saudi détente.

Winners are hundreds and millions of people, losers are few. 

For decades Iran has vowed that all regional countries solve their problems among themselves – and, all of a sudden, Iran’s agreement with the Saudis makes the region a winner. Has not the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, recently put forward a “New World Order Geometry”? – well, this is certainly part of it.
 
To what extend the deal might expand, and would it be able to converge the two states for stronger region?

To answer this question, the global losers of the Iran-Saudi deal should be considered, since they are one of three main keys to chances of convergence.

The second key is the positive impetus of the main actors, Iran and Saudi Arabia, to fill the diplomatic deal with political, business, cultural and all other aspects of national and private life, joined by related partners in China, Iraq and Oman. The third key may be global stakeholders, who also help shape the final result, and determine its potentials.

Factors are manifold, too: In these hours, President Xi working with his colleague, friend and ally President Putin on possible improvements in the Ukraine conflict, where Washington’s vassal Zelensky holds sway. This conflict, with its spill of heavy weapons into the Syrian conflict, with Europe, the EU, NATO and many others involved, may unfold special influence on this important regional deal.

Washington tries to undermine its main ally, Europe, with Germany at the top, weaken the whole NATO alliance to an extent that cannot easily be predicted in detail. But the Western global domination is finished, before Europe’s economies face the backlash and banks are failing because the threat they are posing has lost its clout.

Iran-Saudi convergence and positive developments for the region are deeply interlinked with the downfall of uninvited foreign powers in Syria.

Is it possible for Islamic Republic to start its presence in GCC by the current deal?

Iranian presence in GCC is certainly a possibility now, but much more has to happen than just this initial deal between two regional competitors – and this presence would mark a second big step for the time after the present first step is fully developed and its potentials tapped. To be very sure, without Iran the GCC can never develop its full potential. Iran is certainly a natural partner, both literally and in the extended meaning of the phrase. But there is international non-regional interference in regional politics – and this foreign effort must be dealt with peacefully, honestly and wisely. Saudi Arabia has taken the lead, shown the way – and its present and near-future steps are decisive for the future, not only in the region, the GCC in particular, but inside all the single actor states there, with their different ethnic, political, religious entities. Can the Yemen conflict be positively influenced? 

In history, when suddenly a positive step emerges, hopes often blossom uncontrollably. This isn’t bad – but hope is not reality, and many adverse developments are imaginable. But imagination is not reality either, so if, at the end of analysis, an appeal is allowed, it would be this: Let’s work together on this wonderful opportunity, let’s congratulate the actors, thank the supporters and feed the offsprings. 
A sovereign Germany will certainly do its best to strongly help all the way; at present, secret or not-so-secret sympathy may be noticed here and there.