Tehran and Riyadh see China as an effective mediator precisely because it shares a non-democratic form of government and is uninterested in the values of its partnerships. Authoritarianism, therefore, is not only a defining characteristic of the regional actors but also extends to the external powers capable of influencing regional trends. 

However, the budding order isn’t without its challenges. Even as regional governments reach an understanding to refrain from seeking the collapse of each other’s political systems, their ongoing security concerns keep the potential for conflict alive. They continuously strive to maintain a balance of power against each other, which still creates an environment rife with potential tensions. It will require time to build a minimum level of trust, or at least strategic predictability, among the competing actors. It will also establish a consolidated or, in the best-case scenario, an institutionalized role for external mediators like China. 

Toward autocratic peace in the Middle East?

In the liberal school of thought, the “democratic peace theory” suggests that democratic nations are less likely to engage in armed conflict with one another. In contrast, recent developments lend credence to “autocratic peace theory.” In this case, authoritarian regimes demonstrate a heightened level of mutual understanding and are consequently more inclined to resolve their disputes peacefully. 

This evolving dynamic carries significant implications. For instance, any emerging grassroots opposition movements will likely face even more significant challenges in advocating for reform. Given the consolidation of authoritarian regimes and a scarcity of external support, such movements could be suppressed more forcefully than in the past. 

Moreover, even if these movements were to succeed, they would find themselves in a challenging international environment—a democratic lifeboat surrounded by a sea of authoritarian regimes that view its survival as threatening to their own. This peculiar circumstance could lead to a situation where democratization may arouse greater instability.

As for the West’s role in the region, its options are limited from a values-promotion perspective. It encounters two categories of authoritarian political systems: relatively aligned, conservative regimes such as Saudi Arabia and revisionist, if still non-democratic, governments such as Iran and its proxies. Both camps are also strengthened by engagement with authoritarian great powers seeking greater influence from outside the region. Regardless of whether the West increases interaction or reduces its engagement, its actions will contribute to the further fortification of authoritarian forms of government. 

Dr. Hamidreza Azizi is a Visiting Fellow in the Africa and Middle East Division at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP) in Berlin. He is also a Nonresident Fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs in Doha. 

Image: Shutterstock.