Muslim World Should Seek Strategic Independence, Not a New Patron

DID Press: The developments of recent years indicate that the security and political order of the Middle East is undergoing significant change. From the consequences of the “Al-Aqsa Flood” operation and the wars surrounding Palestine to the direct confrontation between Iran and Israel and U.S. involvement in the conflict, developments in Yemen and Ansarullah’s continued ability to influence Red Sea security, as well as the U.S. withdrawals from Afghanistan and Iraq, all suggest that previous security arrangements can no longer be sustained as easily as before.

These developments do not mean that foreign powers have ceased to play a role in the region. The reality is more complex. But they carry an important message for Muslim-majority countries: no external guarantee should be regarded as permanent or treated as a substitute for national power and regional cooperation.

The End of One Dependency Should Not Become the Beginning of Another

In recent years, some countries in the region have relied on alliances and security guarantees from foreign powers. As the security environment changes, it is natural for governments to seek to diversify their relations with other powers. But this raises a fundamental question: Does changing a foreign patron actually mean changing the underlying strategy?

If a country moves away from dependence on one foreign power only to immediately become dependent on another, the name and side of the dependency have changed, but its underlying strategic logic has not.

Dependence on the United States, Russia, China or any other major power, when it means surrendering control over vital national decisions, cannot constitute a substitute for strategic independence.

The objective of Muslim countries should not be to find a “new master,” but to build the power to choose.

Muslim Countries Should Avoid Choosing a New Patron

One strategic mistake is to frame the question facing Muslim countries as: “The United States or China?” “East or West?” or “Russia or America?”

The central question should instead be:

How can we engage with everyone without becoming dependent on anyone?

This is the essence of strategic autonomy.

Strategic autonomy does not mean cutting ties with the world. An independent country can maintain economic, political, scientific and security relations with the United States, Europe, China, Russia and other countries, while making vital decisions based on independent assessments and national interests.

From Slogan-Based Unity to Practical Cooperation

Muslim countries have significant potential for cooperation in areas including:

• Trade and joint investment
• Food security and supply chains
• Energy and electricity and gas transmission
• Water management and environmental protection
• Science, universities and technology
• Border security and counterterrorism
• Transport and regional infrastructure
• Reconstruction of war-affected countries
• Humanitarian cooperation
• Mediation and dispute-resolution mechanisms

Such cooperation does not require political differences to disappear. On the contrary, strategic maturity means being able to cooperate despite differences.

Muslim countries do not need to hold identical positions on every issue. It may be sufficient for them to reach agreement on certain fundamental common interests.

The Muslim World Should Control Its Own Decisions

Perhaps the most important question facing Muslim countries today is not, “Which major power should we align with?”

The more important question is: How can we become sufficiently strong that we are not forced to limit our future to choosing between foreign powers?

The strategy for the future should move from “changing patrons” to changing the structure of dependency. Muslim countries should maintain diversified relations with the world while strengthening their domestic capabilities; compete with one another while cooperating on shared interests; and have disagreements without allowing those disagreements to become wars.

The Muslim world does not need a “new master.” It needs stronger institutions, more capable economies, greater regional cooperation and independent decision-making.

Unity in the Muslim world does not necessarily mean establishing a single state. Cooperation could begin with a larger common market, shared scientific networks, energy cooperation, regional security mechanisms and coordinated diplomacy.

Europe has demonstrated that cooperation among independent countries with deep differences is possible. The Muslim world can also develop a model of cooperation suited to its own circumstances.

Palestine: An Issue Beyond Great-Power Competition

Regarding relations between some Arab countries and Israel, the author argues that Israel’s policies since its establishment, in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the occupation of Palestinian territories, including Jerusalem, have remained a subject of dispute and opposition from an Islamic perspective and within the framework of the Palestinian cause.

The article further states that, according to the views and religious rulings of some Islamic scholars, establishing political relations with Israel is considered religiously prohibited. From this perspective, relations with Israel are viewed by such scholars as recognition of occupation and disregard for Palestinian rights and aspirations.

Arab countries that have established political and diplomatic relations with Israel under the Abraham Accords should, the author argues, reconsider their policies toward the Palestinian issue and the strategic consequences of those relations, and avoid a course that could ultimately harm what the author describes as the interests of the Muslim world and the Palestinian cause. The Abraham Accords established or advanced normalization between Israel and several Arab states, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco.

The author also argues that what he describes as Saudi Arabia’s failure in the Yemen war demonstrated public dissatisfaction with Saudi Arabia’s position toward Palestine and its alignment with Israel, and contends that governments supporting Palestine receive greater public backing. These are the author’s political assessments rather than independently established conclusions.

National Power Is More Than Military Power

Strategic independence cannot exist without national power. National power is not limited to tanks, aircraft and missiles. A strong economy, domestic production, energy and food security, universities and research, advanced technologies, cybersecurity, water management, communications infrastructure, a sound financial system, effective institutions and active diplomacy are also components of national power.

A country that cannot produce its own food, properly manage its energy resources, control critical technologies or maintain an economy independent of external decisions will face constraints in strategic decision-making, even if it possesses considerable military capabilities.

Political independence, therefore, cannot be separated from economic, scientific and technological independence.

From Regional Rivalry to Cooperation

One of the major obstacles to greater power in the Muslim world, the author argues, is the transformation of disagreements among Muslim countries into prolonged rivalries. If regional states pursue their disputes through foreign powers instead of dialogue, greater space is created for outside actors to compete for influence.

An alternative is to establish regional mechanisms: permanent security dialogue, emergency communication channels, de-escalation agreements, regional mediation and joint economic projects.

The more capable regional countries become at resolving their own disputes, the less dependent they may become on external intervention.

Conclusion

Current developments should not push Muslim countries from one dependency into another.

Neither a new patron nor new isolation; neither dependence on the East nor dependence on the West, but balanced relations, national power and independent decision-making.

If the Muslim world is to play an effective role in the emerging global order, the author argues, it must move from “waiting for others’ support” to “building its own capabilities.” Muslim countries can cooperate with the world, but should not surrender their future to others.

Engage with the world, but decide independently.

Have differences with one another, but do not fight each other.

Maintain relations with major powers, but do not become dependent on them. Instead of seeking a new patron, build the power to determine your own course.

The Muslim world does not need a new patron; it needs strategic independence.

By Dr. Abdul Rauf Tawana | DID News Agency