Politics
Can China fill the gap as next US president tackles loss of influence in Middle East?
Analysts say both Donald Trump and Kamala Harris will have to come to terms with Beijing seeking a greater role as Washington loses sway
The presidential race between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris comes at a time of rising geopolitical tensions on multiple fronts. In the third of an in-depth series, Zhao Ziwen looks at how the election will affect Middle East policy and China-US rivalry in the region.
The widening conflict in the Middle East is one of the main issues dominating the current US debate about foreign policy, with the decision to send troops and advanced missile defences to Israel prompting Iran to warn that Washington is putting its own troops’ lives at risk.
It may even have a direct impact on the result of the presidential election with anger at the White House’s pro-Israel stance threatening Vice-President Kamala Harris’s prospects of taking Michigan, a key swing state that has a significant proportion of Arab-American voters.
Do you have questions about the biggest topics and trends from around the world? Get the answers with SCMP Knowledge, our new platform of curated content with explainers, FAQs, analyses and infographics brought to you by our award-winning team.
But many observers believe that no matter what the result, the next president will face the stark truth that US influence in the region will be increasingly limited and it will feel an increasing need to focus more resources on the Asia-Pacific and its growing rivalry with China.
However, Beijing’s growing role in the Middle East could also turn the region into another battleground in the US-China rivalry, potentially reshaping the contours of Washington’s foreign policy, according to experts.
John Calabrese, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington, noted that the policy differences between a Donald Trump administration and a Harris administration might be smaller than many expect. He said that both would be constrained by the same reality: the narrowing scope of US influence in the region.
“The range of policy options available to the US in the Middle East has become narrower, and there is a clearer understanding of the limits of American influence,” Calabrese said.
“Addressing the war in Gaza, redefining relations with the Gulf Arab states, and managing Iran” will be the three main issues for the US, he added.
In the Republican Party’s 28-page platform, Trump’s vision of governance mentions the Middle East only twice, and with scant details. It calls for Washington to “stand with Israel” and “seek peace in the Middle East” but does not give any specifics.
Harris, for her part, has not released a comprehensive foreign policy outline. However, she has consistently emphasised support for Israel in her campaign while also voicing concerns about the plight of the Palestinians.
Despite the lack of clarity in their official platforms, the policies of both candidates align in key areas. Trump’s four years in office were marked by robust support for Israel, along with his administration’s “maximum pressure” sanctions on Iran.
Harris is expected to continue US President Joe Biden’s approach to the Middle East: backing Israel while maintaining a focus on humanitarian aid for Palestinians, and working with regional partners to counter Iranian influence.
“A Trump administration will likely be based on a set-up that is more committed to Israeli positions, as evidenced by his 2020 peace plan and the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital,” said Clemens Chay, a research fellow at the National University of Singapore’s Middle East Institute.
“Vice-President Kamala Harris has largely stuck to the [Biden] administration line, which has demonstrated a current lack of political will in Washington to restrain Israel.”
“Compounded by the fact that in an election year, the Biden administration’s room to operate is limited if he is to avoid exacerbating the domestic political impact of war,” Chay added.
“How a Harris administration would perhaps go further, from what is deemed at the moment a low baseline, is to achieve a ceasefire.”
Although both sides are likely to continue to support Israel, there is a growing consensus that Washington’s direct involvement in Middle Eastern conflicts – including the Israel-Gaza war – is becoming unsustainable.
Ahmed Aboudouh, an associate fellow at British think tank Chatham House and head of the China Studies unit at the Emirates Policy Centre in Abu Dhabi, suggested that the US would increasingly prioritise its competition with China in the Asia-Pacific region, reducing its direct engagement in the Middle East.
“In the long run, I still see the US recalibrating its posture in the region in a way that allows it to balance its strategic priorities towards keeping China in check in Asia and simultaneously maintaining the bare minimum security stability in the Middle East,” he said.
“This means reducing the cost of its involvement by shifting from a micromanagement approach to offshore balancing.”
Both the Trump and Biden administrations have played a role in this shift. Trump pulled the US out of the Iran nuclear deal, while Biden withdrew troops from Afghanistan.
This “offshore balancing” strategy has also been evident in Washington’s efforts to normalise relations between Israel and Arab states, particularly in the Persian Gulf region, to counter Iran’s influence.
The Abraham Accords, a landmark diplomatic achievement initiated during Trump’s presidency, were among the few foreign policy successes inherited by the Biden administration. However, the potential for a historic Saudi-Israeli normalisation deal has since stalled because of the Gaza conflict.
Aboudouh noted that the Israel-Gaza war and the rising hostilities between Israel and its neighbours had essentially closed the door on any significant US withdrawal from the region in the near future.
“As the war in Gaza and the regional escalation have taught since [Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israel], the door for the US to exit the region is completely shut,” he said
“Washington is being taken captive by the region,” he said. “As much as the region has always been shaped by the US preferences. This means that withdrawing from the Middle East in a strategic sense is not on the table.”
Washington has stepped up its deployment in the region because of the Gaza war and its spillover into Iran and Lebanon. Biden was also directly involved in ceasefire negotiations for nearly a year, showing a political commitment that has not been seen in the region for years.
“It is unlikely the case where Washington will reduce its involvement in the Middle East in the near future, given the fact that the Pentagon has been extremely rapid in deploying its forces – naval, air, or otherwise – since the start of the Gaza war,” Chay said.
While Washington grapples with these challenges, China is stepping up its influence in the Middle East, positioning itself as a counterpoint to US dominance.
In addition to brokering a deal to resume diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran last year, China helped broker a unity deal among 14 Palestinian factions, including Hamas, in July.
Beijing’s diplomatic manoeuvring in the region has been aimed at positioning itself as a vital voice – particularly among Global South countries – in the Israel-Hamas conflict.
“China has shown it is ready to challenge the US position in the region. The Gaza conflict has been the biggest opportunity since [Chinese President] Xi Jinping came to power to do so,” Aboudouh said.
“Beijing could skilfully undermine Washington’s credibility and image across the Global South by siding with the Palestinians and consistently demanding a ceasefire,” he added.
Calabrese said that a major battleground in the rivalry between Beijing and Washington could be the Gulf region, given China’s cooperation with US allies there.
This is especially true of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, whose cooperation with China in sensitive hi-tech and military fields is viewed by Washington as an unprecedented risk.
“Washington will closely monitor China’s engagement in the Gulf, particularly efforts to prevent Beijing from establishing a military presence or making advances in artificial intelligence and other critical technologies,” Calabrese said.
“Success in this area will depend on the US’ ability to strengthen its security and tech commitments to offset Gulf states’ growing ties with China.”
China’s growing influence in Iran – Washington’s biggest regional enemy – is also being closely watched by the West.
Since the Israel-Gaza war started, Beijing – the biggest buyer of Iranian oil – has maintained close communication with Tehran on regional issues ranging from the Red Sea crisis to Israel’s strikes against Hezbollah in Lebanon.
According to Calabrese, Washington insiders – and especially Trump’s supporters – still believe that “Iran is central to all the challenges facing American interests in the Middle East”.
“These voices will likely push for tighter sanctions enforcement and a stronger retaliatory stance against actions by Iran and its proxies,” he added.
Some observers noted there was still a gap between Beijing’s aspirations and its capabilities.
Chay said that while China’s competition with Washington in the Middle East was largely economic, its willingness to become an active regional mediator remained limited.
“Beijing’s activist approach has been largely constrained to small diplomatic wins,” he said.
“But when it comes to taking on significant security or mediation roles, there is a lack of political will to intervene at the scale the US has historically done.”
Aboudouh agreed, pointing out that Beijing’s moves were primarily aimed at undermining Washington’s standing in the region, without shouldering the same security responsibility or diplomatic costs.
“China’s strategy is to position itself as an alternative to the US, but without engaging in the heavy lifting required to de-escalate regional tensions,” he said.
More Articles from SCMP
Renewal of US-China science pact said to be close, but may hold until after Election Day
Hong Kong to set up HK$10 billion I&T fund in bid to bring in HK$100 billion in investments
Hong Kong extends multi-entry mainland China visa for non-permanent residents to 5 years
Politics
President Tinubu Transmits to The Senate Lists Of Ambassadorial Nominees
President Bola Tinubu has transmitted to the senate two lists of 34 career and 31 non career ambassadors nominees for screening and confirmation.
Prominent names listed as non career ambassadors include Reno Omokri, Femi Fani-Kayode, Gen. Abdulrahman Dambazau, Victor Ikpeazu and Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi.
Also listed as non career ambassadors nominees are Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, Vice Admiral Ete Ibas, Senator Jimoh Ibrahim, Senator Nora Daduut, Fatima Ajimobi, and Senator Ita Enang among others.
The two lists brings to 68 number of persons nominated so far as ambassadors awaiting confirmation by the Senate.
Politics
PRESIDENT TINUBU FORWARDS NEW AMBASSADORIAL LIST TO SENATE, NOMINATES DAMBAZAU, IBAS, CHIOMA OHAKIM AND OTHERS
By Prince Uwalaka Chimaroke
4-DEC- 2025
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has submitted a fresh set of ambassadorial nominations to the Senate, featuring a mix of distinguished public figures and seasoned professionals drawn from across the country.
Among the notable nominees are former Chief of Army Staff and ex-Minister of Interior, Abdulrahman Dambazau; former Chief of Naval Staff and immediate past sole administrator of Rivers State, Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas; former senator Ita Enang; and Mrs. Chioma Ohakim, former First Lady of Imo State.
The President formally transmitted two comprehensive lists containing 34 career and 31 non-career ambassadorial nominees, bringing the total number of nominees awaiting Senate confirmation to 68.
The newly submitted lists mark another significant step in the administration’s ongoing diplomatic restructuring, aimed at strengthening Nigeria’s representation and presence across global missions.
The Senate is expected to commence screening and confirmation proceedings in the coming days.
Politics
I’m Not Playing Politics with Nnamdi Kanu’s Release – Gov Otti Replies Chief Ogbonna
Our attention has been drawn to a statement credited to a Former Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs in Abia State, Chief Charles Ogbonna, wherein he called Governor Alex Otti unprintable names and also alleged that Governor Otti didn’t visit President Tinubu to discuss the issue of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, but to plan on how to defect to the APC, among other childish verbal attacks.
Chief Ognonna has been unleashing unprovoked verbal venom and vituperation on the Governor, but we chose to ignore him, not only because we have been busy with the task of governance, but because we also know that he is traumatised by the obscurity he was plunged into after the 2023 general election and felt he should be allowed to experience some healing that could help normalise his reasoning.
Ordinarily, we would have still ignored Chief Ognonna’s latest idle tirade and allow him delude himself with fantasies of fury, but because the Nnamdi Kanu issue is both sensitive and very important to this government, we felt we should respond and put the records straight.
In continuation of Governor Otti’s efforts aimed at securing Kanu’s release, the Governor subsequently had a meeting with the President after visiting the IPOB leader at the Sokoto Correctional Centre on Sunday, November 30 2025. This is in continuation of earlier meetings the Governor had been having with the FG on this matter in the past two years.
The issue of Kanu was the only subject matter that took Governor Otti to Aso Rock and to the Glory of God, the meeting was both positive and fruitful, as the President was so gracious and generous.
Chief Ogbonna’s allegation of Governor Otti going to lobby to join the APC is both petty, ignoble, laughable and very irresponsible. At the risk of sounding immodest, any political party Governor Otti chooses to join today would roll out the drums and red carpet to welcome him with joy and excitement. If anything, many notable and respected APC leaders are not just desirous of having him in their fold, but are strongly appealing to Governor Otti to join their party because they know that he is not a liability.
Ogbonna accused Otti of betrayal, but he didn’t say who Otti betrayed, how and when.
He claimed that Otti doesn’t have capacity, yet Otti defeated him in his Polling Unit, Ward and LGA where his PDP Candidates from House of Assembly to President lost woefully.
He accused Governor Otti of inconsistency, yet he abandoned Alhaji Atiku Abubarkar less than 48 hours after the result of the Presidential Election was announced, in spite of the empty noise and boast he made about the PDP’s Presidential Candidate, all for Atiku’s money when it was needed and available.
He alleged that Governor Otti is playing politics with Nnamdi Kanu, yet, he is angry that the Governor is engaging the FG to secure Kanu’s freedom. Is there anything more contradictory and ridiculous than Ogbonna’s utterances?
At this point, the general public needs to know the genesis of Chief Ogbonna’s anger and aggression.
Having acquired Agbozu Cocoa Plantation when he was in government, the present government decided to reclaim the Plantation which was yielding nothing to the state under Charles Ogbonna. In line with Governor Otti’s policy of operating a government with human face, which sees him pay compensation so as not to hurt any citizen or investor, he approved a compensation package which was paid to Chief Ogbonna. He was excited and full of thanks and appreciation to Governor Otti for the gesture, because he knew he didn’t deserve it. Unfortunately and in line with his insatiable quest for power and money, he thought that another opportunity had opened for him to surreptitiously sneak into the government as he later nominated his son to be appointed by Governor Otti. The Governor flatly declined the request and subsequently appointed another person from the same Ogbonna’s Community, a development that made him feel slighted, diminished and broken and has since then gone out of control, throwing tantrums and hoping to be invited for settlement.
Chief Ogbonna’s problem, like some of his co-travellers is his failure to wake up from his slumber and realise that the era of ruins is over and that Abia has moved forward, never to be dragged back.
His primitive arrogance and mediocre mindset that limit his understanding of government and governance to political appointments, settlement and sharing of public funds without service to the people has so blinded him to the extent that he attacked the Governor recently for awarding the badly broken Umuahia-Ikot Ekpene road, claiming that the FG had aleady awarded it and thus should not be awarded by the Governor. How could any human being with conscience prefer that his people continue to suffer and die in their numbers just because he feels that building the strategic road would earn the Governor a huge political capital? Ogbonna needs to be reminded that such evil mindset has no place in the New Abia.
Even though Ogbonna’s character deficiency doesn’t position him for any modicum of respect, however, having advanced in age, he is expected to conduct himself honourably and responsibly so as not to attract insults to himself.
Finally, Ogbonna needs to be educated that one of the hallmarks of a great leader is his ability to apply wisdom, emotional intelligence and deploy the instrument of diplomacy in solving problems that have the propensity to impact the security of life and property of the people negatively if handled wrongly.
Governor Otti didn’t campaign with Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s name in 2023, and doesn’t need to campaign with his plight for 2027, however, he strongly believes that resolving the problem of Kanu’s conviction is one of the ways to achieving peace, security and healing in our land. Unfortunately, Chief Ogbonna is not grounded, both in character and knowledge of the ingredients of modern leadership, hence his kindergarten politicisation of Governor Otti’s engagements with the FG and visit to the President.
Now that Ogbonna has become an errand boy in the APC, he needs to be reminded that he can pursue his stomach agenda without necessarily carrying out this misplaced aggression against Governor Otti, because it makes him look more pathetic than he can ever imagine.
Ferdinand Ekeoma
Special Adviser to the Governor
(Media and Publicity)
December 4, 2025.
-
Business1 year ago
US court acquits Air Peace boss, slams Mayfield $4000 fine
-
Trending1 year agoNYA demands release of ‘abducted’ Imo chairman, preaches good governance
-
Politics1 year agoMexico’s new president causes concern just weeks before the US elections
-
Politics1 year agoPutin invites 20 world leaders
-
Politics1 year agoRussia bans imports of agro-products from Kazakhstan after refusal to join BRICS
-
Entertainment1 year ago
Bobrisky falls ill in police custody, rushed to hospital
-
Entertainment1 year ago
Bobrisky transferred from Immigration to FCID, spends night behind bars
-
Education1 year ago
GOVERNOR FUBARA APPOINTS COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR KEN SARO-WIWA POLYTECHNIC BORI
