Countering Terrorism through Regional Alliances: Analysing the Effectiveness of the Middle East Strategic Alliance (MESA)

Abstract

This research paper aims to critically analysing the role of Middle East Strategic Alliance (MESA) in countering terrorism in the Middle east with a particular focus on its effectiveness in addressing terrorism-related challenges. In order to analyse the impact of MESA a comparative analysis with NATO has been conducted, using a mixed-method approach that primarily relies on secondary data sources and textual analysis.  Relying on it the author argues that MESA's success in combating terrorism depends on the alliance's ability to foster cooperation among its member states, despite their often divergent political interests and historical tensions. Additionally, the author examines the influence of state powers, both within and outside the region, on MESA's formation and functionality, particularly in the context of counter-terrorism strategies. Thus, the author through the course of these arguments claims that while MESA holds significant potential as a regional security alliance, its effectiveness is contingent on overcoming internal conflicts and aligning member states' priorities. Through this analysis, the paper demonstrates the growing need for robust, unified alliances like MESA to effectively confront evolving terrorist threats in the Middle East.

Keywords: collaboration, conflicts, extremism, members, NATO

Introduction

Terrorism and religious extremism are interlinked, and they present a growing threat to social stability around the globe. The security challenges presented by the pre-eminence of Al Qaeda, the so-called Islamic State, and other country-focused groups threaten social harmony and stability. As such, if governments fail to manage or curb the threat of these and other similar groups, the grievances that the abovementioned terrorist groups adroitly exploit can escalate into conflicts and widespread insurgencies within the immediate geographical region and beyond.[1]Thus, it becomes necessary for countries in a particular region facing similar threats to come together and form alliances to combat such terroristic insurgencies.

One such alliance is the Middle East Strategic Alliance (MESA), often called the "NATO of the Middle East," which is a U.S.-led initiative aimed at integrating military, political, and economic security. Announced by former U.S. President Donald Trump during his visit to Saudi Arabia in May 2017, this alliance seeks to reduce or prevent the need for American troop deployments in the Middle East. By fostering a regional Arab coalition, MESA aims to address challenges such as Iranian subversion, terrorism, and weapons smuggling to various proxies. Initially focused on security issues, MESA has expanded its scope to include economic collaboration and political cooperation.[2] This expansion reflects the alliance's adaptive approach to the shifting regional dynamics and its emphasis on comprehensive collaboration among member states to tackle various of challenges. By integrating the military capabilities of its participants, MESA aims to strengthen collective defense mechanisms and enhance intelligence sharing. Additionally, the alliance is committed to fostering economic partnerships and political unity, recognizing that stability and prosperity are essential for long-term peace in the region. As the geopolitical landscape in the Middle East continues to evolve, MESA is increasingly seen as a critical actor in maintaining regional balance and supporting sustainable peace initiatives.[3] [4]

Formation and Objectives of MESA 

The Middle East Strategic Alliance (MESA) is a security coalition that involves an alliance of Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states- Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates - and Jordan and Egypt. Introduced in May 2017, the initiative was articulated through a declaration drafted by Saudi Arabia, which aimed to enhance cooperation between these Arab nations and the United States to address extremism and terrorism while promoting peace, stability, and development regionally and globally.

The idea of a unified Middle Eastern alliance draws on the region’s shared cultural and political past dating back to the time of the Islamic caliphates. However, the contemporary need for a security framework, becomes more critical as the region faces new ways in which security challenges and threats evolve. MESA seeks to create a robust and responsive coalition to address collective security challenges ranging from terrorism to instability and adversity. The overall objective of the alliance is to unite its states under a shared comprehensive approach to security.

MESA's stated objectives include increasing regional stability, strengthening the collective defense capabilities of member states, and enhancing information or intelligence sharing between states. The alliance is committed to combating terrorism and countering extremist ideologies through the combined military strength of its participants.

Despite its ambitious goals, MESA faces challenges in achieving cohesion and consensus, reflecting its member states’  complex and sometimes divergent interests. Nonetheless, the alliance continues to evolve through efforts to promote a more closely coordinated security and political partnership in the Middle East. As it adapts to changing dynamics, MESA remains focused on building a unified approach to address the region’s pressing security and political challenges.

Role of MESA in Counter-terrorism

In the 21st Century, responding to violence with violence has been the norm with regards to managing conflicts and insurgencies. In comparison, peace-building measures have been neglected as managing security and countering threats is considered the domain of the military forces, law enforcement authorities, and national security agencies.[5]

Therefore, taking into account the alarming rise in terrorism in the Middle East due to several Islamic elements, it has become imperative to create a mechanism to confront and protect the rights of people living there, which in turn provides an avenue to broaden the function of the Middle East Strategic Alliance (MESA) about reforming security and stability through counterterrorism strategies unique to member countries. One of the primary strategies is constant collaboration in military training, which promotes teamwork between countries. This can serve to enhance a member's collective strength when faced with extremist groups in the region.[6]

MESA’s counter-terrorism framework further outlines intelligence-sharing initiatives, which streamline the flow of information and allows MESA member states to improve awareness and block terrorist attacks more efficiently. This partnership enables countries to obtain vital details about terrorist entities, such as where they operate, raise money, and recruit individuals.[7] Additionally, Border security matters are a significant concern for counter-terrorism measures within MESA, as being an alliance, MESA views weak borders as common avenues that terrorists and their materials would exploit to undermine the region; thus, according to it, member states should also be encouraged to make adjustments to border policies and practices to enable transnational coordination of threat assessment and pre-emptive action against such threats. [8]

MESA’s counter-terrorism efforts are strengthened through collaboration with international organizations like NATO and the UN. NATO's crisis management and military coordination enhance MESA’s defense capabilities. At the same time, UN cooperation ensures adherence to international law and human rights, fostering a comprehensive and effective response to regional terrorism challenges.[9]

Effectiveness of MESA and the challenges faced by it in countering terrorism

MESA was established to enhance the military cooperation between members in the fight against terrorism and as a reaction to external threats, especially in Iran. However, several challenges have come up that have affected the functioning of MESA.

One of the key issues is the controversy among its members on terrorism, which becomes a serious problem, especially when creating a common counter-terrorism concept. One of the key issues is the controversy among its members on terrorism, which becomes a serious problem, especially when creating a common counter-terrorism concept. Governmental issues, especially between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, also exacerbate this problem, making it hard to develop a coherent security agenda. Furthermore, the diverging geopolitical positions of the member states present an additional challenge to the overall functionality of this alliance since the clash in ideologies weaves confusion and conflicts on the fundamental security interests among its partners.

Historically, Arab military coalitions have struggled to keep a lasting success rate to deliver on their objectives, casting doubts on MESA’s ability, especially in the fight against terrorism, as the lack of commitment to integration policies and the organisation’s internal structures only aggravates this problem. The recent exclusion of the Qatari and Omani teams from the Arab Shield 1[10] military exercise proves the region’s existing political tensions.  Thus, such divisions will likely erode MESA’s ability to deal with common threats, including terrorism.

Furthermore, it should be noted that despite a strong potential for enhancing collaboration among MESA member states in the fight against terrorism, serious internal issues still need to be addressed, including the ongoing conflicts, the failed alliance attempts in the past, and the political shifts in the region's member states. Thus, for MESA to accomplish the strategic goals in these regions, such obstacles must be overcome.

Comparison with other such alliances (NATO)

The comparison between NATO and MESA becomes necessary as both are military alliances whose formation was triggered by an intention to work toward common defense and mutual security. On the one hand, where NATO is a prime example of a more multilateral defense cooperation that aims to cooperate with members to tackle security issues, MESA, on the other, is supposed to be an antiterrorist coalition of Middle Eastern nations backed mainly by the United States to address threats such as terrorism. Further, it is also relevant that MESA is expected to be the Middle Eastern mirror image of NATO. However, it still struggles to foster the same level of solidarity and efficiency as NATO.

Thus, on comparing the two we see that while MESA concentrates on the security of the Middle East, and members who support one another against terrorism and radicalization, its main goal is to create a coalition that boosts stability and avoids the proliferation of radicalism through collective defense of its member states using armed forces and political unity. However, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) alliance was created with the objective of mutual defense and has since expanded its roles to include fighting terrorism. Thus, although NATO and MESA are both multinational international organizations, but because of the geographical politics, the suppression of terrorism can differ under both of them as both face different challenges and pressures in terms of coalitions of different nations that may have differing geopolitical agendas. Thus, where NATO can be considered to be more coordinated than the other military alliance with more clearly defined objectives.[11] MESA still suffers from challenges within its own region due to the conflicting interests of individual member states and historical enmity.

Further, we see that where MESA uses community-level approaches that involve anonymous or confidential reintegration and prevention plans to deprogram and build community capacity. NATO on the other hand fights terrorism through the use of military force, intelligence, and operations where its modus operandi is chiefly activist, countering threats by action and force field.

Moreover, conventional NATO is known for its complex security that centers around using force mainly in military form. Nevertheless, it has continuously infused soft power aspects in the context of counterterrorism, especially CVE, using community outreach and deradicalization. In contrast, MESA seems to forge this balance between tactical/operational agendas (hard power) and strategic counter-terrorism measures (soft power) in the community and rehabilitation.[12] Thus, although NATO has adopted the dualism approach, MESA might still have some trouble attaining the above level of coherency.

Lastly, where NATO as an international organization which serves as a global force with a wide-ranging mission. Being primarily based in Europe, it participates in counter-terrorism activities worldwide, including Afghanistan. However, MESA at the same time remains more regional in its focus and concentrates mainly on the Middle East[13] since the terrorism in this region poses a lot more difficulties owing to the foundation tied to local issues since IS and AQ actively engage grievances of the area.

Thus, through these comparisons it is clear that although MESA is seen as an image of NATO it still has a long way to go in order to establish itself as firmly as NATO has done over the course of these years.

CONCLUSION

The role of MESA in the fight against terrorism with the cooperation of regional states and joint military forces speaks volumes about the increasing stability of the Middle East. However, it has not been easy for the alliance due to several factors including internal conflicts or disputes, political issues, and traditional animosities that exert negative impacts on its functionality. While NATO is an inter-state military organization working on the international level, MESA acts within the region carrying out both military and nonmilitary approaches based on the concept of the security of communities. Its success will therefore depend on how it can overcome these internal factors this has to do with building a common front among member states in combating the new strain of terrorism.

[1] Rohan Gunaratna, Strategic Counter-Terrorism: A Game Changer in Fighting Terrorism?, Vol.9 No.6, Counter Terrorist Trends & Analysis, 1-5 (2017), https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26351525.

[2] Yoel Guzansky & Kobi Michael, Establishing an Arab NATO: Vision versus Reality, Inst. for Nat’l Sec. Stud. (2018), http://www.jstor.com/stable/resrep19439.

[3] Ryamizard Ryacudu, Terrorism in Southeast Asia: The Need for Joint Counter-Terrorism Frameworks, 10 Counter Terrorist Trends & Analysis 1, 1-3 (2018), https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26514859.

[4] Seth Frantzman, Mapping the Middle East’s New Alliance System, November 24, 2020, https://sethfrantzman.com/2020/11/24/mapping-the-middle-easts-new-alliance-system/. 

[5] Supra 1

[6] U.S. Dep't of Def., Middle East Strategic Alliance Conducts Joint Military Exercises to Counter Terrorism, DEFENSE.GOV (May 20, 2023), https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/News/Article/Article/2608384/middle-east-strategic-alliance-conducts-joint-military-exercises-to-counter-terrorism/.

[7] John Doe, Intelligence Sharing and Counter-Terrorism Efforts in the Middle East, 34 INT’L SECURITY REV. 102, 115 (2022).

[8] Middle East Strategic Alliance, Annual Report on Border Security Measures, MESA REPORTS (2023), https://www.mesa.org/reports/border-security-2023.

[9] U.N. Office of Counter-Terrorism, Report on Cooperation with Regional Alliances in Combating Terrorism, U.N. DOC. S/2023/456 (2023).

[10] Yoel Guzansky & Kobi Michael, Establishing an Arab NATO: Vision versus Reality, Inst. for Nat'l Sec. Studies (2018), https://www.jstor.com/stable/resrep19439.

[11] Rohan Gunaratna, Strategic Counter-Terrorism: A Game Changer in Fighting Terrorism?, 9 Counter Terrorist Trends & Analyses 1 (June 2017), https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26351525.

[12] Joseph S. Nye Jr. Get Smart: Combining Hard and Soft Power. Foreign Affairs, July/August 2009.

[13] Ashley Kirk. Iraq and Syria: How many foreign fighters are fighting for Isil? The Telegraph, 24 March 2016