So far, official statements from the region have ranged from rejecting Russia’s moves to treating them as a natural extension of existing policy.
- Policy Analysis
- PolicyWatch 3582
Media www.rajawalisiber.com – Governments and leaders across the Middle East have issued varying statements in response to Russia’s moves against Ukraine this week, from its February 21 decision to recognize the separatist republics of Donetsk and Luhansk to its full-scale invasion soon thereafter. The following is a summary of these responses, demonstrating the spectrum of regional stances on the crisis and expectations regarding next steps.
Turkey
On February 21, the Turkish Foreign Ministry issued a statement rejecting Moscow’s recognition of the two breakaway republics. When President Recep Tayyip Erdogan spoke with President Volodymyr Zelensky the next day, he reiterated Ankara’s opposition to any action that violates Ukraine’s territorial sovereignty. Zelensky thanked Erdogan for his continued support and his efforts to convene a UN Security Council meeting on the crisis. On February 24, the Turkish government issued a statement calling the invasion “unjust and unlawful,” noting that it “poses a serious threat to the security of our region and the world.” Meanwhile, after Kyiv asked Ankara to “shut Black Sea waterways to Russia,” Turkey responded earlier today that it “cannot stop Russian warships accessing the Black Sea via its straits, as Ukraine has requested, due to a clause in an international pact.”
Israel
In its first official statement on February 23, Israel’s Foreign Ministry expressed support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity without mentioning Russia explicitly. A day later, Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Foreign Minister Yair Lapid gave notably different statements—Bennett expressed solidarity for Ukrainian civilians without mentioning territorial integrity or condemning Moscow, while Lapid called the invasion “a grave violation of the international order.” After arriving in Greece for meetings with foreign partners, President Isaac Herzog echoed the Foreign Ministry line of supporting Ukraine’s integrity without condemning Russia. Most recently, Bennett’s office issued a statement earlier today that he had discussed humanitarian assistance with Zelensky and affirmed his support for the Ukrainian people. Notably, however, he did not condemn the invasion.
Qatar
Following U.S. requests to redirect natural gas to Europe in case of escalation in Ukraine, Qatari energy minister Saad al-Kaabi stated on February 22 that his country does not have the capacity to replace Russian gas supplies to the continent. Following the invasion, Zelensky called Emir Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani; the conversation came two days after Moscow sent Doha a letter about enhancing relations with Russia. According to Gulf media accounts of the phone exchange with Zelensky, the emir “called on all parties to exercise restraint and resolve the dispute through constructive dialogue and diplomatic methods…and not to take any actions that would lead to further escalation.”
Syria
The Syrian government affirmed Russia’s recognition of Donetsk and Luhansk. In fact, state media treated the move as an extension of existing policy, claiming that President Bashar al-Assad had conveyed “Syria’s readiness to acknowledge the republic of Donetsk” and proposed an agreement to begin founding relations with it as early as December 21, when a Russian parliamentary delegation visited Damascus. Previously, state media has used inconsistent language when referring to Donetsk over the years, alternately calling it a “republic” and a part of Ukraine. This week, the Office of the Presidency released a statement that Syria is “prepared to work to build relations with the republics of Luhansk and Donetsk and to strengthen [relations] in the context of common interests and mutual respect.” The statement aligns with Syria’s actions last May, when Assad hosted the president of Abkhazia, a breakaway region of Georgia; the government readout of that visit referred to bilateral relations between the “two countries.”
Regarding the invasion, state media reported earlier today that Assad called President Vladimir Putin and praised Russia’s actions as a “correction of history and [a] rebalance to the world…lost after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.” He also emphasized “that Syria supports the Russian Federation, based on its conviction of its correct stance that repelling NATO expansion is Russia’s right.” He then claimed that “Western countries bear responsibility for chaos and bloodshed as a result of their policies aimed at controlling peoples, as these countries use their dirty methods to support terrorists in Syria and the Nazis in Ukraine and in various parts of the world.”
Yemen’s Houthis
On February 21, senior Houthi figure Mohammed Ali al-Houthi announced the movement’s support for Russia’s recognition of the “independent republics.” He also advocated restraint so as to not “slip into a war intended to drain Russian capabilities.” He reiterated this sentiment after the invasion, tweeting, “We call on Russia and Ukraine to exercise restraint and not to close the doors to dialogue and diplomatic action.”
Iran
President Ebrahim Raisi told Putin on February 24 that “NATO expansion is a serious threat to the stability and security of independent countries in different regions.” Other Iranian officials have stated that they oppose the war but similarly blamed the West for stoking the conflict. Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian tweeted, “The Ukraine crisis is rooted in NATO’s provocations. We don’t believe that resorting to war is a solution. Imperative to establish a ceasefire & to find a political and democratic resolution.” Likewise, Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh blamed the crisis on the “provocative actions of NATO led by the U.S.”
United Arab Emirates
On February 23, the UAE’s state news agency reported a phone call between Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed and his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov, noting that they discussed the “depth of friendship” between the two countries. Sheikh Abdullah also expressed the UAE’s “keenness to enhance…cooperation across various fields.” The UAE has not officially recognized the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, however.
Libya
On February 22, the Foreign Ministry in Libya’s Government of National Unity (GNU) released a statement outlining its refusal to recognize the two breakaway regions. The ministry also reaffirmed its rejection of activities conducted by the Wagner Group, the Russian private military company that has been deployed to both Ukraine and Libya. In addition, the GNU has called on Russia to seek a diplomatic resolution and urged the international community to recognize Ukraine’s sovereignty.
Iraq
Senior political figure Muqtada al-Sadr tweeted that the Russian invasion is not justified, referencing Iraq’s own experiences in conflict, “from which we have gained nothing but ruin, weakness, and dispersal amid exacerbation of extremism and terrorism in our Islamic and Arab countries. #NoToWar.” Earlier this month, a Foreign Ministry statement had advised Iraqi citizens in Ukraine to evacuate the country immediately.
Lebanon
On February 24, Lebanon’s Foreign Ministry stated that the government “condemns the invasion of Ukrainian territory and calls on Russia to halt its military operation immediately and withdraw its forces…and return to dialogue and negotiations as a better means of finding a solution.” Several members of parliament criticized these sentiments, and the Russian embassy in Beirut said it was “surprised” by the statement. On February 23, the ministry had noted that negotiations would “spare the people of the two countries, the European continent, and the world the tragedy and agony of war.” Meanwhile, Lebanon’s permanent representative to the UN expressed concern about the escalation, reiterated the principles of the UN Charter, and encouraged all parties to the conflict to pursue a peaceful resolution.
Jordan
On February 24, the government noted that it is following developments in Ukraine with “concern” and called on the “international community and the parties to the conflict to exert maximum efforts for restraint and de-escalation.” One unnamed official indicated that Amman is concerned about the economic effects that Russia’s invasion might have on the kingdom’s stressed economic system.
Egypt
On February 24, the Foreign Ministry released a statement that it was following developments in Ukraine with concern and called for diplomatic solutions to avoid humanitarian crises. In a cabinet meeting the previous day, Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouly noted that Egypt depends on wheat imports from Russia and Ukraine, that the crisis will continue to affect energy prices, and that the government will diversify its sources and use subsidies to stabilize the situation.
Morocco
In a February 24 statement, spokesman Mustapha Baitas noted that although the conflict will affect Moroccan markets, the government has substantial reserves of necessary products to keep the situation under control. Earlier this month, Morocco’s embassy in Ukraine advised nationals to leave the country—a significant warning given that Moroccan students are the second-largest foreign community studying in Ukrainian universities.
Other Countries
As of this writing, the governments of Algeria, Bahrain, Oman, the Palestinian Authority, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, and Yemen have not taken public positions on the crisis.
Conclusion
Because many nations in the Middle East are keen on balancing their relationships with the United States and Russia, they may be caught in the middle as the Ukraine conflict unfolds. Moreover, the invasion has already affected several sectors critical to their economies, from oil and gas to agricultural imports and tourism. Further fallout could increase instability in the region and beyond. Amid broad concerns about Washington decreasing its focus on the Middle East, the U.S. response to the Ukraine crisis could shape perceptions about American intentions in the region.
Margaret Dene, Hannah Labow, and Carol Silber are research assistants at The Washington Institute. This PolicyWatch was published under the auspices of The Washington Institute’s Diane and Guilford Glazer Foundation Program on Great Power Competition and the Middle East.