After the UN, the Non-Aligned Movement is the largest grouping of states in the world. Originally established to keep states outside of the political and economic polarization of the Cold War, it forms an important link between the newly independent countries of the developing world. In the Middle East and North Africa, the group rose in profile, propelled by Arab nationalism and pan-Islamism, but its star faded as the Cold War came to an end — so much so that its 60th anniversary this year was a non-event. As the Middle East undergoes a relative thaw after several decades of rivalry and conflict, looking again at an alliance in the spirit of the NAM is topical. UAE officials last week described their efforts to form a “non-aggression pact,” winding down a decade of ambitious diplomacy and militarization to call for a “zero problems” approach to foreign affairs. This came after several months of a marked regional moderation of long-entrenched stances, with the fallout from the US withdrawal from Afghanistan focusing minds as to the realities of a post-American Middle East. Since the UK washed its hands of obligations “East of Eden” in the 1960s, the Middle East has been split crudely between the US and its allies on the one side and Egypt (initially), Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Iran as an alternative bloc on the other. This reality has increasingly grown more distant, following gradual US disengagement, Russian re-engagement and, most recently, Arab rapprochement with Israel. There is no doubt that, in recent months, channels for dialogue have opened where previously brinkmanship and ruptured relations had been the order of the day. Rapprochement with Qatar at the beginning of the year and then Syria’s gradual readmittance into the Arab fold have shown a progression toward an overhaul in regional relations. The Baghdad summit last month, bringing together regional rivals, ended with an affirmation supporting the “non-interference in the internal affairs of countries.” The absence of a security guarantor provokes discussions around alliances. However, the scope for this will remain limited as long as conflicts in the region continue and are unresolved. Zaid M. Belbagi Though it stopped short of suggesting a treaty or new alliance, the summit was important in that it laid the foundations for public communication between parties whose interaction had long occupied the shadows. These talks have confirmed that there has been a marked change among regional powers to seek to work together. Though opportunities for dialogue have been explored, the realities of growing insecurity illustrate the need for an alliance system to overcome new challenges. Where the NAM sought to provide a path between the polarization of the Cold War, the powers of the wider Middle Eastern region have an opportunity to establish an organization in the mold of NATO to address their security challenges. The hasty disengagement from Afghanistan, showing once again the vulnerability of the US in the face of asymmetric enemies, highlighted the insecurity of states reliant on the specter of US military support. The moribund Arab League, whose 75th anniversary last year went unnoticed, is also arguably less influential now than it was at its inception. One lesson its ineptitude has delivered is that the issues of the region cannot be resolved through exclusively Arab channels and the role of Turkey, Iran and Israel, among the region’s other non-Arab peoples, is essential to long-lasting solutions. Dr. Kristian Ulrichsen, of the Baker Institute of Public Policy, warned of this 10 years ago in his work “Insecure Gulf: The End of Certainty and the Transition to the Post-Oil Era.” Given that US disengagement is happening sooner than expected, this insecurity has only grown greater, lending itself toward an alliance of countries motivated by their own security. The absence of a security guarantor does, indeed, provoke discussions around alliances. However, the scope for this will remain limited as long as conflicts in the region continue and are unresolved. Iran’s interference in Arab affairs will continue to leave its neighbors concerned and on a war footing. Similarly, Turkish expansionism, if unchecked, will limit the scope for economic cooperation in lieu of continued political dispute. An unresolved Palestinian question renders increased cooperation with Israel complicated. Such issues could compromise an indigenous regional alliance at a moment where causes for conflict are only set to increase. Ethiopia’s Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam will increasingly affect Egypt and Sudan, in the same way that countries in the region could go to war over water. As the region moves into an age where the essential ingredient of life itself will cause contention, it is important that outstanding issues are resolved through an alliance with a view to avoiding future conflict. * Zaid M. Belbagi is a political commentator, and an adviser to private clients between London and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). Twitter: @Moulay_Zaid Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not necessarily reflect Arab News" point-of-view