Oman's Political Neutrality Under Pressure

Omanis suddenly woke up to a fierce attack on their country.

What is happening with Oman? Before I tell you, it is important that we understand

that when a country is subjected to a campaign of this scale, the pressure in politics

has a purpose. To send a message, raise the cost of a position to push the country

to change it, or because it is a rival that is starting to rise.

So, what is happening to Oman? The answer lies in the three

prices Oman is paying. First, the cost of neutrality.

On the Iran issue, for example, Oman refuses to take sides with or against it.

It sees Iran as a neighbor, not an enemy, but it also does not

embrace its policies in the region, and it sees dialogue as better than

confrontation. Even Washington has shown its displeasure with Oman, and we all

remember Trump’s threats toward Oman in the context of Iran and Hormuz.

Iran itself is also trying to push Oman out of the neutral zone.

When it targeted the southern passage, Oman opened it for ships to pass through, and when it

bombed the port of Musandam. But for Oman, this policy

This is what preserved it at the height of the war. And in Yemen, we find the same policy.

Oman says: The crisis is Yemeni, and its solution lies in dialogue,

while at the same time condemning attacks on Saudi Arabia, yet it refuses

to take sides and maintains its role as mediator. But this

neutrality has come under attack from Yemeni parties.

Then came the flydubai incident, although its results have not yet been announced,

the Omani co-pilot was linked to the shooting down.

An individual act was attributed to the state itself. And here, a pause and a comment

outside the analysis. Let us assume the co-pilot really is a terrorist.

Is it right to accuse an entire country of an individual's crime? Is

it right to buy into what Western media promotes when it described

the man as praying frequently and not shaking hands? Does that mean everyone who

prays frequently and does not shake hands is naturally a terrorist?

These are dangerous generalizations, and it is important to be mindful of them in the context of

portraying us as terrorists and our countries as harboring them.

In any case, let us return to the point. Why is all this being directed at Oman? It seems

that there is an attempt to raise the cost of neutrality on Oman, and it seems that

what is required is for Oman to be either here or there, meaning that it must leave

the zone of neutrality. The second cost is the economy and Oman’s entry into

the competitive arena. Suddenly, the world began discovering a country

called Oman. Investments are pouring in, and economic ties are expanding with

India and Africa, tourism is growing, stunning geography, and a

strategic location of increasing importance. Its non-oil economy now

accounts for nearly 70% of GDP, and this has made it

enter the competitive arena in a big way, but

economic competition has a cost. The third cost is rejecting

normalization with Israel. Underline this point three times.

Oman’s foreign minister said plainly this year: We will not normalize

relations with Israel, and this position also carries a political cost.

But the question now is, will Oman continue and stand firm in the face of

all these pressures? What do you think?