Follow us on social

2022-09-28t142255z_1880826059_rc2eqw9uoler_rtrmadp_3_ukraine-sanctions-eu-sanctions-vonderleyen-scaled

Saudi-Iran deal exposes EU's waning Middle East influence

Following Washington's lead and failing to keep the nuclear deal alive marginalized key regional players who in turn looked to China.

Analysis | Middle East

The announcement of the restoration of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, under Chinese mediation, has exposed the limits of the European Union’s influence in the Middle East.

While the EU was careful to avoid explicitly crediting China, which it has referred to as its “systemic rival,“ for the breakthrough, Brussels declared its readiness to build on it by engaging “with all actors in the Middle East in a gradual and inclusive approach, in full transparency.”

While such a statement suggests a pragmatic approach, it begs the question why it was China, an adversary, and not the EU, that facilitated the agreement between the two Persian Gulf rivals? Is dealing with the consequences of policies pursued by others the best the EU can do, particularly given the fact that United States, its main ally, was also excluded from a development that promises to reshape the geopolitical environment that the EU will have to navigate? What does it say about the EU’s proclaimed ambition to be a major geopolitical player?

Although the EU has its hands full with countering the Russian aggression in Ukraine, its waning influence in the Middle East preceded the war and is at least partly due to its own failure to deploy the leverage it once had in that region.

In the Middle East, China is now playing the role traditionally reserved for the Europeans: talk to all sides and back it up with economic muscle. Unlike the U.S., the EU had diplomatic relations with all the players in the region, including Iran. Following the 2015 nuclear deal known as the JCPOA, the EU and Iran agreed on an ambitious roadmap to develop bilateral relations. Even after former U.S. president Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018, Iran maintained its compliance for more than a year in the apparently vain hope that Brussels would match its political statements with real financial commitments to keep the deal afloat.

The E3 (France, Germany, UK) created a special trade instrument — INSTEX — designed to facilitate legitimate trade with Iran. That initiative, however, soon hit a wall as European financial institutions were reluctant to engage in trade with Iran lest they fall afoul of  extraterritorial U.S. sanctions. In fact, a grand total of one operation was carried out via INSTEX which, just last month, dissolved. To add insult to injury, INSTEX’s European creators blamed Iran for its failure.

The E3/EU’s failure to fully comply with its part in protecting the JCPOA led whatever emerging leverage it had built with Tehran to collapse. Nor was the EU more successful in its desire to play a stabilizing role in the Persian Gulf. Following the assassination by the U.S. of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani in January 2020, the EU committed to diplomatic initiatives to reduce tensions in the region, but it never followed up with a convincing strategy to achieve that goal.

Instead, the communication on the “EU strategic partnership with the Gulf,” unveiled in May 2022, envisaged many useful initiatives in the fields of green transition, digitalization, women empowerment, etc. However, it barely touched on the thorny issues of regional security. While it purported to encompass the “Gulf,” the document excluded Iran, Iraq, and Yemen, in effect equating the “Gulf” with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). While that was a win for GCC lobbying efforts, it reduced the EU’s role to that of a technocratic manager of relations and then only with a limited group of countries — rather than a strategic player determined to help shape the region’s geopolitics.

The EU’s failure to protect the JCPOA and engage all the countries of the Persian Gulf in a truly balanced fashion contributed to the demise of Iranian moderates who staked a lot of their political capital on normalization of ties and increased trade with Europe. That failure helped hardline conservative factions consolidate their power and pivot to the “East” in their foreign policy. Subsequent supplies of Iranian drones to help Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, combined with the domestic crackdown on the protests that followed the killing by the “morality police” of the young woman Mahsa Amini, turned European public opinion decisively against the Islamic Republic. Add to that the numerous and outspoken voices of the Iranian diaspora that have transformed Iran into a domestic issue in some key European countries, and any new diplomatic initiatives with Tehran have become politically prohibitive for EU governments. 

While the EU has lost what little leverage it has ever had on Iran, its relationship with Saudi Arabia, in theory a key economic, diplomatic and security partner for the bloc, is not a much better. The kingdom ignored pleas from the West to increase its oil production in order to lower energy prices and politically damaging inflation in the U.S. and EU that were exacerbated by Russia’s war on Ukraine. While some argued that this was a result of the West distancing itself from a “key partner” by criticizing the ruinous Saudi war in Yemen, the gruesome murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and the repression of women’s rights activists, the truth is that the EU, as a bloc, never imposed any sanctions on Riyadh for these transgressions. What little restrictions some individual states, to their credit, imposed on arms sales to the Saudi kingdom, were either reversed or offset by fellow Europeans filling the gap.

For Saudi Arabia, that would not change the fact that the kingdom sees itself as an ambitious sovereign power untethered to the West and eager to diversify its relationships. Normalizing relations with Iran is a perfect illustration. As significant as the deal itself is, the fact that the West’s nominal regional partner agreed to hand this diplomatic achievement to the West’s peer rival speaks volumes.

China’s bold move in brokering Saudi-Iranian normalization, which no doubt was aided by  regional players, notably Iraq and Oman, also illustrates the broader shifts towards greater multipolarity and intra-regional agency in the Middle East. China’s rise, however, was facilitated by the EU’s own declining ability to influence events in the region. The best the EU can do now is try to capitalize on any development leading to greater security and stability in the region.


European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Union Foreign Policy Chief Josep Borrell address the media on the Ukraine crisis, in Brussels, Belgium, September 28, 2022. REUTERS/Yves Herman
Analysis | Middle East
Elbridge Colby
Top image credit: Elbridge Colby is seen at Senate Committee on Armed Services Hearings to examine his nomination to be Under Secretary of Defense for Policy in the Dirksen Senate office building in Washington, DC, on Tuesday, March 4, 2025. (Photo by Mattie Neretin/Sipa USA).

Elbridge Colby: I won't be 'cavalier' with U.S. forces

QiOSK

In his senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday, Elbridge Colby, nominee for Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, stood out as one of the few people auditioning for a Pentagon job who say they may want to deploy fewer U.S. troops across the globe, not more.

“If we’re going to put American forces into action, we’re gonna have a clear goal. It’s going to have a clear exit strategy when plausible,” he told the Senate Armed Services Committee.

keep readingShow less
Trump Zelensky
Top image credit: Joshua Sukoff / Shutterstock.com

Ukraine aid freeze: Trump's diplomatic tightrope path to peace

Europe

Transatlanticism’s sternest critics all too often fail to reckon with the paradox that this ideology has commanded fervent devotion since the mid-20th century not because it correctly reflects the substance of U.S.-European relations or U.S. grand strategy but precisely because it exists in a permanent state of unreality.

We were told that America’s alliances have “never been stronger” even as the Ukraine war stretched them to a breaking point. Meanwhile, Europeans gladly, if not jubilantly, accepted the fact that Europe has been rendered poorer and less safe than at any time since the end of WWII as the price of “stopping Putin,” telling themselves and their American counterparts that Russia’s military or economic collapse is just around the corner if only we keep the war going for one more year, month, week, or day.

keep readingShow less
Nigerian soldier Boko Haram
Top Image Credit: A Nigerien soldier walks out of a house that residents say a Boko Haram militant had forcefully seized and occupied in Damasak March 24, 2015 (Reuters/Joe Penny)

Nigeria’s war on Boko Haram has more than a USAID problem

Africa

Insinuations by a U.S. member of Congress that American taxpayers’ money may have been used to fund terrorist groups around the world, including Boko Haram, have prompted Nigeria’s federal lawmakers to order a probe into the activities of USAID in the country’s North East.

Despite assurances by the U.S. Ambassador to Nigeria, Richard Mills, who said in a statement that “there was no evidence that the United States Agency for International Development, USAID, was funding Boko Haram or any terrorist group in Nigeria,” Nigeria’s lawmakers appear intent on investigating.

keep readingShow less

Trump transition

Latest

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.