Hamas v Israel: An indirect nuclear non-proliferation warning

Proxy spats rather than wars to send a message

[South Asia]

Published 2023-10-10

Update 2023-10-10: Evidence which counters the proposed analysis has been added.

---

Here's something I don't do often, original geopolitical analysis.

I'd like to thank Alex Christoforou for helping me to start thinking in the right direction. See the previous article.

Background, to get your geopolitical feelers sensitive

Why did Saddam Hussein attack Kuwait in 1991? Kuwait were diagonally drilling (slant drilling) into Iraq's oil fields. The megalomaniacal dictator had a word with his US ambassador and asked what he could do about this. The response was that the US considered this 'a local matter', which is code for we don't mind much what you do. Recall that Hussein had been useful to the US fighting a proxy war against Iran from 1980 to 1988 following the 1979 revolution.

The point here is to understand that approval from big players is required before you start causing trouble or the big players let you know in no uncertain terms that you don't act independently in this manner. The Kuwait case is just another example of the duplicity of the US and that their foreign policy is partially controlled by local elections. See also Barbara Honegger's "October Surprise".

So, lets assume that Hamas know this lesson and that permission was required to launch this complicated attack on Israel which must have been many months in the planning. Who would Hamas' leadership ask? Hezbollah or Iran directly. But, its Iran in the end.

Back to Christoforou

He suggests that the US would be happy with a spat between Saudi Arabia and Iran, because this would undo the rapprochement created by Russia and China and potentially cause trouble with the recent BRICS expansion into BRICS+. I believe he's partially correct, in that the US would think this was of some value. This is because the dipsticks in the State Department and the White House don't understand what is going on.

Putin at the recent Valdai club repeated a phrase from some months ago, that the new 'multipolar' geopolitical power distribution is conceptually underpinned by civilizational thinking. Each civilizational grouping is to come to the table with their strengths and weaknesses and be valued implicitly. There, at the table they are to also show their respect for the others.

A whole series of projects have been launched to unseat the failing hegemon, the US neo-colonial imperialists. China's BRI is a land-power based trade network to re-configure international trade. Russia's EAEU is an extension of this in international finance which is supported by China's Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank and the New Development Bank now headed by former Brazilian president Dilma Roussef. The new investments are outside of the IMF. The new trade flows are outside of the USD, a de-dollarization.

BRICS is an international political arm. One of their tasks is a reconfiguration of the UN back to its founding principles.

Behind the BRI and BRICS is another organisation which people keep forgetting about, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. It is a security organisation founded by China, Russia and a few of the 'stans' including the largest, Kazakhstan way back before 9/11. It has been steadily expanding and essentially is parallel to Russia's CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization). These two combined are the security organisations for Asia. Iran has just been admitted as a full member into the SCO. The House of Saud are interested and are on a lower rung.

Assuming that Christoforou is correct that 'civilian' nuclear tech is part of the sweetner for the Kingdom recognizing Israel, then this creates a very big problem for every big player who is interested in stability in West Asia/Middle East. A nuclear House of Saud is also a major threat to Iran.

Consultations

Imagine that Iran's representative for the SCO has a chat with their counter-parts from Russia and China. [Not only is there no evidence to support this brazen allegation, there are multiple statements denying it. Ed] They communicate their concern, which one would think would be echoed by all present. Discussions are held and Iran suggests letting Hamas off the leash with possible support from Hezbollah.

I can imagine the R&C representatives thanking their Iranian counterpart and scheduling a follow up meeting at which the official word is given. It might amount to little more than "your proposal is understood".

To me, this is the most likely scenario. The mistake that is being made by some analysts is to think that Saudi Arabia and Iran are of equal import. They are not. Iran is vastly more important. The House of Saud is a recent British created two trick pony with oil and holy sites. Iran is ancient and has one of the most important strategic locations, possibly the most, in Asia.

If you're in Moscow, how many international borders do you need to cross to reach the Arabian Sea? One. Iran's. The key is the Caspian Sea. Earlier this year Pepe Escobar wrote a whole series of articles expressing the importance of and level of investment in the north-south trade corridor which Russia, Iran and some more peripheral players are creating. Why? Because it cuts weeks of the transport times via the Suez Canal. Iran replaces the Suez, the Eastern Mediterranean, the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea with the Caspian and some railway.

Saudi Arabia are trying to play in a league above themselves in this three way deal. The message from Russia, China and Iran is to all three parties in the Saudi-Israel deal. Back off, or we can cause you a lot of pain.

Again, it was Christoforou who helped me understand that this whole thing has got nothing to do with 'recognizing Israel'. Its about nuclear proliferation, and Russia, China and Iran are letting the US and Israel know how strongly they feel about this.

If I'm correct and the Saudi's dont get the message, expect a flare up of the currently quiet Yemeni war with drone attacks on Saudi oil production. This will remind them that they can make whatever promises about oil production to the US they want, but that OPEC+ and Iran have the final say.

There are two other important SCO member nations in Asia who who will be watching carefully, nuclear armed India and Pakistan. They dont want nuclear proliferation either.

Sources

What is the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation?, no author, The Economist, 2022-09-14

Israel Says It Has No Evidence Iran Was Involved in Hamas Attack, Dave DeCamp, Antiwar, 2023-10-09