Monday, July 23, 2018
banner
Home /  NATION  /  US irritated by siege nations' rigid stand: American analyst

US irritated by siege nations' rigid stand: American analyst

US irritated by siege nations' rigid stand: American analyst


QNA
Washington
THE United States is irritated by the siege countries' rigid refusal to ease their action and rhetoric against Qatar, US political analyst Giorgio Cafiero has said.
Cafiero said that the crisis has undermined Washington's interests in the region by pitting America's close allies against each other and enabling other countries to assert more influence in the Arab world.
In an article titled 'Gulf Dispute Heightens US Frustration with Saudis' published in US foreign policy weblog LobeLog, Cafiero said Washington is coming to terms with its limited capacity to push the involved parties toward a settlement for the conflict that began nearly five months ago with Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates and Egypt severing diplomatic and economic relations with Qatar.
Cafiero referred to US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson's statement that Riyadh had rebuffed his efforts to bring the four countries and Doha to roundtable talks. As Tillerson put it,"We cannot force talks upon people who aren't ready to talk."
The US State Department is becoming increasingly frank about its view that Doha is not responsible for the lingering row in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).
Citing a"real unwillingness" from the siege countries to engage in negotiations, Tillerson said days before leaving for the Gulf that the burden is on the Saudi/UAE-led coalition to"engage with Qatar because Qatar has been very clear they're ready to engage."
The siege members and Qatar are close US military and economic partners deeply linked, where all US administrations have sought to capitalise on the benefits of relative unity within the GCC to pursue interests shared by Washington and the Gulf countries.
Cafiero said the siege countries' actions against Doha puzzled officials in Washington, who were uncertain about exactly what the Saudi/UAE-bloc was actually demanding from Qatar. Although the siege countries later issued a series of 13 demands, and later a list of six principles, the goals of Riyadh and Abu Dhabi were still unclear, he added.
Cariero referred to the words of Timothy Lenderking, the deputy assistant secretary of state for Arabian Gulf affairs at the Near East Bureau, who said that"what is being asked of Qatar should also be asked of those countries," which shows that the general consensus in Washington's diplomatic establishment has been that Qatar has made significant progress and that other GCC states are legitimately subject to such criticism on this front.
Washington is reluctantly realising that the longer the dispute persists, the dimmer the prospects for settlement. The increasingly harsh media coverage of countries involved in the crisis has further poisoned the GCC environment and efforts by the siege countries to encourage leadership change in Qatar will only strengthen Qataris' support for their Emir, ultimately undermining any hope for restoration of trust between Doha and Saudi Arabia and the UAE, Cafiero said.
The siege countries seems to have no interest in making concessions at the roundtable to resolve the Gulf dispute, without face-saving measures to ensure that the Saudi/UAE-led bloc does not appear weak in engaging Qatar, Cafiero added. The prolongation of the diplomatic row heightens the risks of institutional damage to the GCC where the council's breakup would inevitably have an impact on Washington's interests in the Middle East.
Cafiero added that Qatar crisis has yet underscored how Saudi Arabia's vision for countering terrorism is at odds with the US. For all of the symbolism behind Trump's trip to Saudi Arabia, it still did not put the US government and the Saudi rulers on the same page on the question of who in the Middle East constitutes a terrorist.
Cafiero concluded that Tillerson's inability to push Riyadh toward engagement with Doha truly underscores Washington's limited influence in the GCC dispute and its growing frustration with its erstwhile Saudi partner.

Pages

POST A COMMENT