GEOPOLITICAL CLOUDS OF THE ARAB SPRING

The term "Arab spring" entered the world's political lexicon in 2011. Some people see the political subtext expressed by this term with hope and others with disappointment as the process called "Arab spring" may lead to changes in a vast geopolitical area. At the same time, these events are viewed as a link to geopolitical, military and energy factors that manifest themselves at different levels. And they make the problem complex and contradictory. What might be possible geopolitical consequences of the "Arab spring"?

The global games of great powers

The US armed invasion of Iraq had a major influence on the content of many geopolitical and military processes in the world. Washington realized that at the present historical stage, it is extremely difficult to gain a lasting victory and dominate other countries by force. In parallel, the standing of the United States sharply fell in the Islamic world. The protest of Muslim countries was supported by opposition from various directions. One of the main indicators of this was the manipulation of oil prices. Washington had to make some conclusions. The most important of them was that the US must change and adopt a new policy towards the rest of the world. It is this point that led to the main idea expressed by Barack Obama in Ankara: "We have changed, and now you have to change, too!" Thus, the US launched a new policy in the regions they consider the most important for themselves. The first on the list of such regions was the Middle East.

Naturally, this US step was to have an impact on major geopolitical forces in the world - the EU, Russia and China, who were obliged to respond to America's "soft" policy towards the Islamic world. Thus, on the one hand, a new line of the "hidden struggle" between large geopolitical powers was launched, and on the other - the EU, Russia and China made changes to their policy towards the Middle East. Now these two things have a significant impact on the current events. Large states began to abandon direct intervention options against regional states, preferring the model of influencing the processes through the use of domestic factors in these countries, while remaining in the shadow.

But this required leverage and money. This aspect takes the main place in the "temperature regime" of the "Arab spring". In other words, major powers decided to manage processes by manipulating ethnic, political, historical, cultural and other differences within regional nations. Let's look at the example of Libya.

For several centuries, several tribes have been struggling for power and influence in Libya. Figuratively speaking, the history of modern Libya's statehood is the history of wars between them. The last head of state, Muammar Gaddafi, overthrew King Idris I, who belonged to the Senussi tribe, during the revolution of 1969. Automatically, one of the priorities of Gaddafi's domestic policy was the expulsion of members of this tribe from government posts and positions. Thus, Gaddafi began to establish the authority of his Berber tribe - al-Gaddafa, which is considered the second biggest tribe in Libya.

However, to this end, he had to forge an alliance with the country's largest tribe - Warfalla - and also another major tribe al-Magarihi. It must be noted that there are 140 tribes in Libya, but only 30 of them are considered leading tribes. Along with the already mentioned two, Gaddafi tried to maintain relations with other tribes at different levels. But Libya's tribal map is different in that the animosity and strife between different tribal groups has never abated there. In the main, analysts say, the West took advantage of this very factor. In other words, they made the most of the contradictions of tribal psychology in Libya. It is no accident that the chairman of the

National Transitional Council of Libya, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, belongs to the Al-Kharabi tribe. It is the tribe, to which the deposed King Idris I belonged (the al-Kharabi tribe belongs to the Senussi tribe). So, in fact, the Senussis exacted revenge on Gaddafi. But in the political world, these processes were presented as the democratization of Libya. Although, in fact, both positions are justified, since to ensure long-term control over Libya's energy resources, the West is interested in building a loyal and democratic government in this country. And the Senussis, along with performing this function, also defeat their domestic rivals. As it were, each player receives his own share in accordance with his abilities and goals.

Now similar processes are taking place in Syria. An attempt is being made to use the Shia-Sunni and Kurdish factors here. Attempts to use the Kurdish factor for their purposes are being made by other states of the region. This is evidenced by the recent mysterious murder of Kurdish politician Mesh'al in Syria. In addition, political games related to the Kurdistan Workers' Party in order to influence the internal situation in Syria are still continuing. Most likely, various parties will continue attempts to use the Kurds for their own purposes for a long time. The major blow will again be dealt to ordinary Kurdish workers - in order to achieve their goals, global and regional players do not hesitate to exploit the ethnic sentiments of ordinary people. At least, despite the presence of a number of particularities different from Libya, the philosophy of the political game is the same - to inflate internal contradictions in order to achieve specific goals! Interestingly, in this situation, the Syrian leadership does not seem flexible enough. However, some steps are being taken. For example, the media reported a number of meetings between Kurdish politicians and Bashar al-Assad to reach agreement on the granting of citizenship to the Kurds in return for which the Kurds will not join the ranks of the radical opposition, etc. Given the extreme sensitivity of Turkey, Iran and Iraq to the Kurdish question, complex political combinations are also possible. In any case, we can predict that in the long-run, these combinations will lead to political-psychological and ideological fragmentation in the region. And the deepening political-ideological and interstate conflicts between the peoples of the region will only benefit third forces.

The developments that happened and still continue in Egypt are also reminiscent of many aspects of the scenario of events in Libya and Syria. Naturally, they have their own peculiarities as well. For example, Hosni Mubarak did not take the path followed by Gaddafi or al-Assad. But in Egypt, it is still not clear who will get political power. The same can be said of other Arab countries.

Despite the fact that these processes are related to internal ethnic, political, psychological and ideological contradictions between specific Arab countries, their assessment on a global scale is given mainly in the geo-political context, and this is the most important aspect of the issue.

Cold "months" of the "Arab spring"

Although the series of revolutions and civil wars in the Arab world are called "spring", the world feels "chilly" because of them. Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Central Asian states are already mulling over the consequences of this process. The US, Russia, China and the EU are discussing for whom this "spring" will be the most devastating. For example, on the other side of the ocean, various options for attacking Iran have already been put into circulation. Different assumptions about the role of Turkey are also being voiced. In a word, the opinion is gaining ground that what is happening in the Middle East has finally alarmed the whole world. One gets the impression that it is now extremely difficult to predict the processes in a particular state. Although there is some truth here, there are also many thought-provoking aspects.

Firstly, the ongoing developments in the Arab countries testify to the need to consider the Israeli factor. Israel makes no secret of its ambitions to achieve dominance in the region. At the same time, it is interested in forces loyal to Israel coming to power in the Arab countries. But political analysts point out that in these countries, the greatest authority belongs to those who prefer the Islamic ideology - mostly these are anti-Israel groups. In this regard, they often mention Al

Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood. That is to say on the one hand, if the strife in the Arab countries plays into the hands of Israel, on the other - it still not clear who will come to power there. This may cost Israel dearly. At the same time, Israel is left face-to-face with a strong regional leader such as Turkey, which, in light of the recent developments in the Arab world, has strongly expressed its claims to the leading role, and some already see Erdogan as the leader of the Muslim world.

Another aspect is related to Iran - it will have to actively defend Syria, which could be its last bastion. After all, the revolutions give rise to political groups that do not serve the interests of Iran, and its influence on the radical political groups is weakening. This point is crucial for Tehran because Iran has been putting pressure on Arab states through them for many years.

The Russian factor is of great significance. For example, in an interview with Russian TV channels, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin stressed that "... the main struggle is for world leadership. We are not going to argue with China here. China has other rivals here. Let them fight each other." That is to say the "Arab spring" is only a fraction of geopolitical games. But Russia will react to all this, considering their global scale. Putin's statement indicates the dark sides of the "Arab spring" and that aspects behind this process are fundamentally different from the information presented by the media now.