The United States is backing off from the Middle East -- and the Middle East from the United States.
America is in the midst of the greatest domestic gas and oil revolution
since the early 20th century. If even guarded predictions about new
North American reserves are accurate, over the next decade the entire
continent may become energy-independent, without much need of petroleum
imports from the Middle East.
America's diminishing reliance on
the Persian Gulf coincides with mounting Chinese dependency on Middle
Eastern oil and gas. So as the Persian Gulf becomes less important to
us, it grows even more critical to the oil-hungry, cash-laden -- and
opportunistic -- Chinese.
After two wars in the Middle East,
Americans are as tired of our forces being sent over there as Middle
Easterners are of having us there.
The usual Arab complaint
against the United States during the Cold War was that it supported
anti-communist authoritarians in the oil-rich Gulf and ignored
democratic reform. After the 1991 Gulf War, the next charge was that
America fought Saddam Hussein only to free an oil-rich, pro-American
monarchy in Kuwait, without any interest in helping reformists in either
Kuwait or Iraq.
After the Gulf War of 2003, there was
widespread new anger about the use of American arms to force-feed
democracy down the throat of Iraq. Finally, during the 2011 Arab Spring,
the Arab world charged that the United States was too tardy in offering
political support for insurgents in Egypt and Tunisia, and again late
in "leading from behind" in helping European nations remove Libyan
dictator Muammar Gaddafi. Now the Arab world is hectoring America to
help overthrow Bashar al-Assad in Syria.
Let's get this all
straight. America has been damned for its Machiavellian shenanigans in
supporting authoritarian governments; for its naive idealism in using
force to implant democracies; for its ambivalence in not using force to
protect democratic protestors; and for its recent isolationism in
ignoring ongoing Arab violence. Why, then, bother?
There are
other growing fault lines. The old conventional wisdom was that Sunni
Muslims shared Israeli fears of a Persian bomb on the horizon. The new
conventional wisdom is that the Arab masses that are propelling the
Muslim Brotherhood into power in Egypt prefer the idea of a nuked Israel
to the danger of a nuclear Iran.
The subtext of Middle Eastern
anti-Americanism is that the region, if given a chance, will embrace
its own brand of freedom But that does not appear to be happening in
Egypt or Libya. And for now, democracy does not seem to be the common
glue that holds together various Syrians fighting to overthrow the
odious Assad dictatorship.
Newly elected Egyptian President
Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood attended college and later
taught classes in California. Apparently Morsi once came here to enjoy
American freedom and for his family to be protected by our tolerance and
security. Is that why he is crushing liberal opponents and the Egyptian
media -- to ensure that they never enjoy the protections and
opportunities that were offered to him while a guest in the United
States?
Note that anti-Americanism was often attributed to the
unique unpopularity of Texan George W. Bush, who invaded two Middle
Eastern countries, tried to foster democracies, and institutionalized a
number of tough antiterrorism security policies. In turn, Barack Obama
was supposed to be the antidote -- a Muslim family on his father's side,
his middle name Hussein, early schooling in Muslim Indonesia, a number
of pro-Islamic speeches and interviews, apologies abroad, and a
postracial personal story.
Yet recent polls show that Obama is even less popular in the Middle East than was Bush.
Staggering U.S. debt also explains the impending divorce. With $5
trillion in new American borrowing in just the last four years, and talk
of slashing $1 trillion from the defense budget over the next 10 years,
America's options abroad may be narrowing. President Obama also
envisions a more multilateral world in which former American
responsibilities in the Middle East are outsourced to collective
interests like the United Nations, the European Union and the Arab
League.
Perhaps soon the problem will be that we simply will
not have enough power to use it for much of anything -- and would have
to ask the U.N. for permission if we did.
Usually nothing good
comes from American isolationism, especially given our key support for a
vulnerable democratic Israel. But for a variety of reasons, good and
bad, our Humpty-Dumpty policy of Middle East engagement is now
shattered.
And no one knows how to -- or whether we even should -- put it together again.
No comments:
Post a Comment