There's this quote (fictional or not I don't remember) from the military futurist Andrew F. Krepinevich's book "Seven Deadly Scenarios". I think it fits very well into describing the zeitgeist of US-Middle East geopolitics.
"We hated them as occupiers, but we welcomed them as guests."
Though personally I think fears of the US losing the Middle East to China and/or Russia have been overblown. The fundamental desire that drives Middle Eastern strategic thinking is security, not economics. They don't need more trade ties, they need security. From the world and from each other, because let's not forget the Middle East remains the biggest multinational region in the world that's under outright religious rule, and that same religion with its two main branches (and many other smaller sectarian ones) hasn't gone through the Reformation nor the equivalent of Europe's wars of religion between the 16th to 18th century.
Out of the three global powers mentioned, only the US is in any shape or will to provide security protection/guarantees/support and tangible physical military assets and human forces to the Middle East. In a way it's not exactly accurate to say that the US is "looking to reestablish itself" in the region, because to most countries in the region who aren't outright enemies of the US, the US never truly left and they don't truly want them to leave either.
Saudi "rapproachment" normalisation of ties with Iran under Chinese midwifing is just a Saudi hedge and nothing more substantial for the Saudis nor triumphant for the Chinese (and shouldn't be interpreted as such), because ultimately at the end of the day the religious Sunni absolute monarchy that is the House of Saud will never tolerate a religious Shi'ite "republican" theocracy that is the Ayatollahs to be equal powers. Just like the Peace of Amiens between Great Britain and France in 1802 was just a short truce for both sides to catch their breaths and prepare for round 2, so is this Chinese-brokered "normalisation" between two countries whose politics and societies are so ingrained with different sides of the same religion that fundamentally oppose each other's right to exist before God and man.
There's this quote (fictional or not I don't remember) from the military futurist Andrew F. Krepinevich's book "Seven Deadly Scenarios". I think it fits very well into describing the zeitgeist of US-Middle East geopolitics.
"We hated them as occupiers, but we welcomed them as guests."
Though personally I think fears of the US losing the Middle East to China and/or Russia have been overblown. The fundamental desire that drives Middle Eastern strategic thinking is security, not economics. They don't need more trade ties, they need security. From the world and from each other, because let's not forget the Middle East remains the biggest multinational region in the world that's under outright religious rule, and that same religion with its two main branches (and many other smaller sectarian ones) hasn't gone through the Reformation nor the equivalent of Europe's wars of religion between the 16th to 18th century.
Out of the three global powers mentioned, only the US is in any shape or will to provide security protection/guarantees/support and tangible physical military assets and human forces to the Middle East. In a way it's not exactly accurate to say that the US is "looking to reestablish itself" in the region, because to most countries in the region who aren't outright enemies of the US, the US never truly left and they don't truly want them to leave either.
Saudi "rapproachment" normalisation of ties with Iran under Chinese midwifing is just a Saudi hedge and nothing more substantial for the Saudis nor triumphant for the Chinese (and shouldn't be interpreted as such), because ultimately at the end of the day the religious Sunni absolute monarchy that is the House of Saud will never tolerate a religious Shi'ite "republican" theocracy that is the Ayatollahs to be equal powers. Just like the Peace of Amiens between Great Britain and France in 1802 was just a short truce for both sides to catch their breaths and prepare for round 2, so is this Chinese-brokered "normalisation" between two countries whose politics and societies are so ingrained with different sides of the same religion that fundamentally oppose each other's right to exist before God and man.