West Asian countries are desperate to diversify their economies, which have mainly relied on oil. And the statement is clear: Saudi Arabia will decide its own foreign policy, and it no longer needed the decree from the White House. A few years ago, it was unimaginable to have this kind of statement from Saudi Arabia. As the largest trading partner, it is natural to have countless interactions and intersections with China. He also added that Saudi Arabia is capable of having multiple partnerships and multiple engagements, and the US does the same in many instances. On June 8th, Prince Faisal clarified that Saudi Arabia’s relations with both the US and China were not a zero-sum game. The same tone was also resonated in the joint news conference by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan. The growing total value of bilateral trade is the result of the growing relationship between Saudi Arabia and the BRICS countries. It increased to $128 billion in 2021 and exceeded $160 billion in 2022. In 2017, the total value of bilateral trade with the countries of the BRICS was $81 billion. Saudi Arabia is the largest commercial partner of BRICS in the Middle East. During the meeting, Prince Faisal mentioned the growing trade relations with the BRICS countries. It was visible in South Africa’s Cape Town when they hosted the ministerial meeting of the “Friends of BRICS”. That is why the win-win approach by BRICS is now attracting many countries, including the once-friendly nations of the US. The difference between the foreign policy of a nation-state like the US and a civilizational-state like China shows us how to deal with each and every nation by respecting its differences rather than imposing the one-size-fits-all approach. The post-Hiroshima Nagasaki era made it clear that a zero-sum game is not going to destroy one country or party, but it will be the beginning of the end of human civilization itself. Since the invention of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) such as nuclear bombs, any great power fighting war against each other will enter into the quagmire of mutual assured destruction (MAD). Historically, it is evident that any nation challenging the hegemon(s) or challenging the status quo established by the hegemon(s) will increase its probability of going to war against each other. If a country is rich in resources, located in a geopolitical chokepoint, has anti-free market autarky economies, or violates the “rules-based order” established by a few Western countries, it will be the target of Western intervention. This means that any country pursuing its own socio-economic-political affairs without the “consent” of the US will naturally fall into the second category. Since the Cold War, the foreign policy of the US has mainly been based on dividing countries into two categories: countries with the US and countries against the US. In other words, the “friendly” nations of the US were waiting for the rise of another axis in global politics to escape from Uncle Sam’s dictates. The changing attitude of America’s once-friendly nations is evidence of why neo-conservative, liberal democratic one-size-fits-all policies are disastrous in foreign policy. The visit not only exposed the diminishing power of the US in the region but also turned out to be a platform for Saudi Arabia to clarify its long-term plans, which are mainly stressed on its relationship with China. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s recent three-day visit to Saudi Arabia ended in a serious setback for US interests.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |