Why the Arab partners of 'Nato+' are more important than ever

Golden or diamond – this is how 75th anniversaries are usually described. In Nato ’s case, such romanticism does not readily lend itself to a formidable international military alliance that has endured for three quarters of a century. Although there were plenty of smiles for the cameras at the bloc’s summit in Washington this week, many challenges – old and new – confront Nato’s 32 members. The war in Ukraine , global terrorism, the need to maintain military spending with stretched budgets and the questions posed by a possible Donald Trump presidency are just some of the issues the alliance’s leaders must contend with. The world is a very different place to that of April 4, 1949, when the North Atlantic Treaty was signed in the US capital by the alliance’s 12 founding members. Instead of two superpowers facing each other in a dangerous and precarious standoff, a more multipolar world presents Nato’s current configuration with an array of shifting threats, real and perceived, to deal with and regional partnerships to maintain. The Middle East, thanks to its vital geopolitical role, has always been an important part of Nato’s equations, even if only one state in the Mena region – Turkey – is an active member of the alliance. That is apparent in the relationships that Nato has developed with the region, through groups like the Mediterranean Dialogue and Istanbul Cooperation Initiative. During this week’s summit, a number of of non-member partners, including the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Jordan, were invited to join the talks in Washington. It is important to note that Arab states have been attending various Nato meetings since the 1990s. That engagement is vital and, in some cases, deepening. This week’s announcement that Nato will open a liaison office in Amman was described by departing Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg as significant milestone in the alliance’s strategic partnership with Jordan. It is a development that also reflects what Arab-Nato co-operation should be about: promoting regular dialogue, sharing experience and technology, and working together to counter mutual threats such as cyber-attacks and terrorism. Such co-operation should never be taken for granted by the alliance. Stability and security in this region are paramount, not only for the people who live here but for global security and prosperity, especially if one considers the current threats posed to international shipping in the Red Sea and the Strait of Hormuz. Many Arab states recognise the benefits of engaging constructively with Nato, and some in the region want it to go even further. Last week, Dr Ebtesam Al Ketbi, president of the Emirates Policy Centre, wrote in these pages on the importance of revitalising the Istanbul Co-operation Initiative to bring the alliance closer to Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the UAE. Engagement is one thing, but partisanship is another. Arab states are not interested in playing the kind of political power games that can accompany the competition between big military alliances. Indeed, the advantages of remaining non-aligned have been seen in several Gulf states playing a key role in recently mediating prisoner swaps between Russia and Ukraine. In the case of the UAE, a policy of principled non-alignment and pragmatism has been a cornerstone of its foreign policy since the country’s inception. Nato has a lot to consider on this 75th anniversary, and although Ukraine remains its key focus for now, its relationship with the Middle East will always be an important one, and it is one that must be approached from a position of equality and partnership. The non-members states of “Nato+” have never been more important.