As linkages between the Iran war and other conflicts become clearer, so does the need to build alliances to counterbalance other adversaries. The Iran war has become much more complex, especially with the growing behind-the-scenes involvement of China and Russia. Chinese and Russian intelligence, materiel, logistics, diplomatic, equipment, and economic support to Tehran leave little doubt about Iran being a proxy of China and Russia.
Many analysts place the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel against the backdrop of the Russia-Ukraine war. The possibility that Russia could divert American military, technological, and financial resources away from Ukraine by unleashing a regional conflict involving multiple actors remains the subject of debate among strategists and intelligence agencies. Today, as renewed American war looms, China and Russia seek to accelerate U.S. decline by its entanglement and degrading its capabilities in the Middle East.
Tokyo can constrain Chinese ambitions in the South China Sea and the East China Sea, and, in the process, compel China to focus resources and efforts in this region.
Even regionally, the Middle East is undergoing a security-architecture overhaul. The Mecca Pact marks a milestone in the erosion of the U.S. strategic footprint. For Beijing and Moscow, the decline of Washington’s credibility as a security provider in the region is not only a manifestation of sixth-century bc General Sun Tzu’s statecraft, but also a calibrated outcome of their roadmap for U.S. decline.
An India-Israel-Japan alliance could help contain and counter Iran and its major power supporters. Japan anchors the Western Pacific and the first island chain. Tokyo can constrain Chinese ambitions in the South China Sea and the East China Sea, and, in the process, compel China to focus resources and efforts in this region to safeguard its security interests. Likewise, Japan’s historical territorial disputes with Russia are legitimate reasons for Tokyo to engage Moscow in the region.
India’s central position gives it an edge in the Indian Ocean, which it can leverage to control the Malacca Strait chokepoint. In the Middle East, Israel can safeguard global maritime connectivity passing through the Red Sea, Suez Canal, and Mediterranean, and secure the Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb chokepoints.
Engaging China and Russia in their own geographies will likely erode their will and resources to foment trouble in the European and the Middle Eastern theatres. The main planks of this collaboration, spanning the Middle East and Indo-Pacific, are diplomatic coordination, defense and homeland security, counter-disinformation, cyber and critical infrastructure, semiconductors, space, supply chains, and strategic connectivity corridors.
Each of these countries has strategic partnerships with the United States and the European Union, which can facilitate diplomatic coordination on global issues.
Such an alliance might be a way to counter the Mecca Pact. Israel, with its high-tech defense, agricultural know-how, border management, cyber, robotics, and intelligence capabilities, could pair with Japan’s financial, trading, and technological prowess; India brings large manpower, skilled professionals, and manufacturing capacity. A trilateral alliance could be much more synchronized and coordinated due to shared identity as democracies and middle powers, with similar (through not identical) concerns about China.
Each of these countries has strategic partnerships with the United States and the European Union, which can facilitate diplomatic coordination on global issues. Strong ties among the three stakeholders also create structural incentives for strategic convergence.
For too long, Washington has compartmentalized its adversaries, rather than recognizing that they work together. This erodes U.S. influence globally but also endangers U.S. partners. If America’s top democratic partners in the Middle East and Asia band together, though, the benefits will far outweigh any bilateral partnerships among them.
