8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 1/14

MIDDLE EAST  · NEWS & ANALYSIS · US

Is the Middle East America’s to Lose?

The colonialist idea of the US “losing” a country or a whole region should be

banned from the political discourse of the 21st century.

by Richard Fal  !une 1"# 2$1" %o &omments 

'resident (arac )bama speas at &airo Uni*ersity in &airo# +gypt# Thursday# ,

!une 2$$-. n his speech# 'resident )bama called for a /new beginning between

the United States and 0uslims# declaring that /this cycle of suspicion and

discord must end. &huc 3ennedy45hite 6ouse7was appalled by the embedded colonialism of a recent issue of The

+conomist  !une 8912# 2$1"7# boldly proclaiming its mood of geopolitical angst on

its co*er titling its featured story “:osing the 0iddle +ast.” ;ny glimmer of

doubt about the intent of the maga<ines editors is remo*ed by displaying a

somewhat bedraggled ;merican flag on the co*er accompanied by the sub9title

“5hy ;merican must not abandon the region.” The rationale offered for this

political imperati*e within this most re*ered =ournal of intelligent establishment

guidance stries me as e*en more appalling than this pro*ocati*e pacaging gi*ingthe plot away before we e*en begin reading the story.

8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 2/14

5hat the +conomist 'roposes

The argument set forth rests on the colonialist assumption that the 0iddle +ast

is ;mericas to lose# although not >uite# as the lead editorial ends with an

enigmatic distinction? “The idea has taen root that ;merica no longer has what

it taes to run the 0iddle +ast. That it e*er could was an illusion. (ut ;mericahas a *ital part to play. f it continues to stand bac# e*eryone will be worse of@

including the ;mericans.”

5e are ne*er told whether the catchall /e*eryone includes the people of the

region# and whether they e*en matter in the calculations of this organ of elite

opinion primarily concerned with the wellbeing of the 5est# which is lined

seamlessly to the operations of the neoliberal world economy.

The strong implication of this lead editorial# ne*er ade>uately eAplained# is that

;merica should inter*ene more throughout the 0iddle +ast to re*erse# or atleast contain# present disrupti*e trends. 5hy this is so is ne*er really eAplored

beyond the misleading supposition that ;merican military capabilities can

impro*e the situation if brought more directly to bear and without eAplaining

why# insisting that eAisting alignments with political actors in the region#

regardless of their character# should be reinforced and strengthened.

The pragmatic side of what The +conomist  seems to be proposing is two9fold?

First# a militarist prescription for the pursuit of ;mericas regional interests#

which are identified as counter9terrorism# oil# and pre*enting nuclear

proliferationB secondly# a willingness to accept contradictions in protecting these

interests# such as siding with ran against the slamic State S7 in ran and

opposing ran in Syria.

t is within this framing that “CtDhe 0iddle +ast desperately needs a new#

in*igorated engagement from ;merica. That would not only be within ;mericas

power# it would also be in ;mericas interest.” ts central criti>ue is that

'resident )bamas policy is too wea and wa*ering to be effecti*e# which is

clarified by the insistence that “ChDe must be ready to use force. 0r. )bamas

taboo about deploying ;merican soldiers against S in ra> has led to a self9

defeating shortage of special forces to guide air stries to their targets.”

n their *iew# )bamas approach has created a /*acuum that has “eAacerbated

the strife and disorder.” The fuller story in the body of the maga<ine also

welcomes the prospect that either 6illary &linton or any of the Republican

presidential hopefuls seem determined to be far readier than )bama to

inter*ene forcibly throughout the region.

(ehind this scathing criticism of )bama is the e*ident belief that ;mericas

geopolitical muscle if applied with sill# militarily and diplomatically# could ha*e

8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 3/14

lessened the chaos and *iolence that now per*ades the region. Such an argument

seems deeply flawed.

To begin with# it is hardly accurate to portray )bama as standing aloof from the

struggles going on in the 0iddle +ast. t is acti*ely militarily engaged against S

and Syria and is in the process of becoming militarily reengaged in ra> at thepresent time. t was a strong ad*ocate of the regime changing %;T)

inter*ention against Eaddafis dictatorial rule in :ibya# and it has >uietly gone

along with the counter9re*olutionary shift in +gypt that destroyed the hopes of

humane go*ernance# at least temporarily# that surfaced with such eAcitement in

early 2$11 throughout the region.

0y own *iew is that this degree of ;merican military and diplomatic engagement

brought more# not less# chaos to the 0iddle +ast. ;nd now# as if to tae the

criti>ue of The +conomist  immediately to heart the U.S. o*ernment hasannounced plans to pre9position hea*y weaponry and military personnel in se*eral

points in the region so as to be in a better position to inter*ene rapidly should

further crises emerge.

&ritici<ing the )bama ;pproach

n my *iew# the burden of persuasion should always be upon those who fa*or

greater reliance on military force whether in the 0iddle +ast or elsewhere.

5ithout acnowledging any inconsistency#The +conomist  concedes that the (ush

in*asion of 2$$G and subse>uent occupation of ra> was a disaster# illustrati*e

of imprudently inter*ening in a massi*e fashion. ;s e*ery ma=or effort at

inter*ention by the United States has re*ealed# upping the ante by inter*ening a

bit more# is a slippery slope that has e*entually led to defeat after defeat# most

*i*idly e*ident in the tra=ectory and outcome of the Hietnam 5ar.

This un>uestioning militari<ation of the political imagination# which is what comes

through in this sharp criticism of )bamas approach# does not e*en pause to

consider the benefits of allowing the dynamics of self9determination to control

political outcomes in the 21st century.

;n unlearned lesson of geopolitics in the post9colonial world is that the power

balance has decisi*ely shifted as between inter*ention by the 5est and national

forces of resistance. These forces ha*e learned to be more effecti*e in their

combat tactics# but abo*e all# ha*e come to understand that time  is on their

side# that a foreign inter*ener will gi*e up the >uest at some point implicitly

acnowledging that military dominance is not able to impose a political outcome

at acceptable costs.

This is not =ust a matter of democratic societies becoming impatient in the face

of a drawn out distant wars with >uestionable =ustifications# which causes death

8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 4/14

and in=ury to its young citi<ens# but the deeper reali<ation that the post9colonial

politics of resistance o*er time sub*erts the will and morale of the inter*ener.

This happened as clearly to the So*iet Union in ;fghanistan as it did to the

United States in Hietnam# or later in ;fghanistan and ra># and is more of a

reflection of the structure of shifting power relations than of a weaening ofideological resol*e.

The central metaphor of /losing the 0iddle +ast presupposes that it was

;mericas to lose rather than an acnowledgement of the empowerment of the

peoples of the region and their go*ernments with respect to the control of

national and regional destinies. The metaphor of winning and losing is a colonialist

framing of geopolitics that amorally *indicates hegemonic ambitions# especially

the *irtues of 5estern control. t gi*es priority to 5estern interests in a non9

5estern geographic domain# and pretends that such an orientation con*enientlyalso happens to be an eApression of fidelity to 5estern *alues# including

democracy and human rights# and of benefit to the affected societies.

%owhere in the eAtensi*e article are doubts raised about the unconditionality of

support for Saudi ;rabia and the other ulf monarchies that oppress their

populations and sub=ect women to humiliating social constraints or to srael that

has dispossessed most 'alestinians from their own homeland# and held the rest

capti*e.

The +conomist  has the temerity to couple its sharp criticism of )bamas

allegedly soft diplomacy by anticipating what is misleadingly described as a

“return to the center” that is eApected to occur after the U.S. presidential

elections in 2$18? “The neAt ;merican president may well be warmer towards

srael# and more willing to turn a blind eye to new settlements in the occupied

territories. 6e or she might do more to reassure ulf monarchies and spea

more sternly to ran.”

5hat a strange set of hopeful eApectationsI

)bama turned a pretty blind eye to sraeli settlement eApansion during the last

se*eral years# e*en instructing his representati*es to *ote in isolation to shield

srael from U% censure o*er settlement eApansion.

6is administration has also gone along with the basic approach of the ulf

monarchies# although timidly *oicing some recent doubts about the wisdom of

respected Saudi air stries directed against the 6outhis in Jemen.

;nd it is astonishing to note that the )bama presidency is situated by The

+conomist in the political spectrum as left of centerK The idea of returning to

the center implies that ;merican regional policy these last siA years had

somehow *eered toward the left. ;nd therefore# for me what The

8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 5/14

+conomist calls the center would more accurately be described as the right# or

e*en the hard right.

n most respects# including policy toward ran# ra># and srael# )bamas

essential approach has been to sustain continuity with the policies of the eorge

5. (ush presidency. There was the same willingness to threaten ran with amilitary attac if seen to be crossing the nuclear threshold# a similar stance

toward supporting the Shia go*erning process in ra># and the same

endorsement of sraels defiance of international law# as well as insulating its

nuclear weapons capability from e*en a whispered challenge.

There are more fundamental deficiencies in this analysis by The +conomist  of

what has gone wrong in the region and what to do about it. There is a seemingly

blind eye toward the rele*ance of the history of 5estern responsibilities for

the unfolding political ordeal that is being enacted throughout the 0iddle +ast.This perspecti*e o*erloos such defining antecedents as the playing out of

(ritish and French o*ert colonial ambitions in the aftermath of 5orld 5ar and

of the statist goals of the Lionist 0o*ement as abetted by (ritish policies

during its period of mandate administration.

mposing arbitrary boundaries on the region by +urope meant establishing

unnatural political communities that could be held together or broen apart7

only by *iolence from abo*e or below7. n a re*ealing respect# :ebanon is a

poster child of this era of Syes9'icot diplomacy# ha*ing been car*ed out of

)ttoman Syria to satisfy Frances egocentric cra*ing at the time for a colonial

possession in the region with a &hristian ma=ority.

The +conomist1s  policy prescriptions are also notable for their failure e*en to

mention international law or the United %ation. These normati*e sources of

authority and constraint are e*idently seen as of utterly no concern to the

geopolitical optic through which the maga<ines august editors percei*e policy

options for the region. (ut if &hina were to assess its approach to the

so*ereignty disputes in*ol*ing the Spratly slands with the same ca*alier

attitudes toward the rele*ance of normati*e authority# the 5est would be up in

arms# persuasi*ely contending that such beha*ior is dangerously destructi*e of a

moderate political order in the 'acific.

The )ld eopolitics *ersus the %ew eopolitics

+*en when it comes to the pragmatic le*el of analysis# find that The

+conomist1s sense of editorial guidance is woefully shortsighted. :ets accept

their focus on terrorism# oil# and nuclear proliferation e*en accepting as

accurate their portrayal of ;merican interests.

Surely# the best way to combat =ihadism  is a measured withdrawal from theregion.

8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 6/14

;s for oil# the ;rab producers in the region ha*e shown through the years that

their policies are maret9dri*en with scant attention to ideology as shown by

their readiness to throw the 'alestinians under the bus.

0ost persuasi*e of all# nuclear proliferation would be best pre*ented by

establishing a nuclear free <one in the 0iddle +ast# which all go*ernmentseAcept srael fa*or# and ha*e done so for se*eral years.

n other words# the idea of trying to fill the so9called *acuum following the

+uropean retreat# which began during 5orld 5ar and was consummated by

the 1-"8 Sue< 5ar# with ;merican military power and diplomatic muscle

epitomi<es the /old geopolitics of 5estern hegemony rather than relying on a

potential /new geopolitics of self9determination.

There is# of course# little assurance that the outcome of the interplay of

domestic and regional forces in the 0iddle +ast will be ethically satisfying orpolitically stable# but there is at least some lielihood that going with the post9

colonial historical flow will produce better results than further reliance on the

United States to continue battling the strong currents of nationalism.

This clarion call for enhanced trust in the nostalgic imaginary of the old

geopolitics seems historically tone deaf. t represents a reliance on the old

geopolitics of militarism that should ha*e been discredited long ago by its

record of failure and its incredibly high opportunity costs.

;t the *ery least# adopting this new geopolitics of self9determination might

enable the politicians and citi<enry of the United States to tae a much needed

and long o*erdue loo within its own borders# and de*ote much more of its

imaginati*e and material resources to creating a humane society at home#

starting with its physical and moral infrastructure.

)ne good starting point for such a program is with the language of political

discourse. This idea of the 5est /losing a country or# as with The

+conomist1s  co*er story# losing a whole region# should be banished from the

21st century political imaginary# and with it the reali<ation that such a concept of

winning and losing is worse than anachronistic# it is obsolete.

t might be helpful to recall that for many years the ;merican political right

accused the U.S. o*ernment of /losing &hina only to disco*er later in the &old

5ar that &hina had become a *aluable geopolitical ally in the core struggle with

the So*iet Union# and still later# that &hina as much as any country# eeps the

world economy from unra*eling.

  (arac )bama# ra># slamic State# srael# :ebanon# :ibya# Saudi

;rabia# Syria# US Foreign 'olicy# Hietnam 5ar# Jemen

Richard Fal

8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 7/14

Richard Fal is an international law and international relations scholar whotaught at 'rinceton Uni*ersity for forty years. Since 2$$2 he has li*ed in Santa

(arbara# &alifornia# and taught at the local campus of the Uni*ersity of

&alifornia in lobal and nternational Studies and since 2$$" chaired the (oard

of the %uclear ;ge 'eace Foundation. From 2$$M until 0ay 2$1,# he was the

U.%. Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the 'alestinian

territories occupied since 1-8N.

0ore articles by this author O 

!o"#lar Aro#$d the We%

1 Fruit That PQestroysP Qiabetes

Fight Qiabetes 

6ow to Stop Snoring and mpro*e Jour 6ealth

howlifewors.com 

0om Qisco*ers P(otoA ;lternati*eP

Fit 0om Qaily 

8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 8/14

5oman ;dds ce &ubes to 6er :aundry For a enius Reason

firsttonow.com 

Jou 5ont (elie*e 5hat This 89Jear9)ld Qoes to 6is (aby (rother

First To 3now 

:ocal 0om :oses (elly Fat with This %ew &utting9+dge 'ill

6ealth %ews 2, 

1- Things That 'robably )nly 6appen in Qubai

firsttonow.com 

8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 9/14

0agic Tric i*es 0oney to Those in %eed

firsttonow.com 

?

S+;R&6

(oos by Richard Fal

 

8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 10/14

 

8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 11/14

 

8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 12/14

 

et F!' Weel(

The latest $e)s* a$al(sis* a$d comme$tar( strai+ht to (o#r i$%o,

+mail

F'! respects your pri*acy and you can unsubscribe any time.

5hat )thers ;re Reading

SUBSCRIBE!

8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 13/14

Turey? From “<ero problems” to “precious loneliness”

(ush &on*icted of 5ar &rimes in ;bsentia

)bama in the 0iddle +ast? From (ad to 5orse

Top Ten 0yths about the sraeli9'alestinian &onflict

srael s :ying? ;rab States %ot )pposed to ran %uclear Qeal

The 0yth of the U.%. &reation of srael

Rogue State? sraeli Hiolations of U.%. Security &ouncil Resolutions

6ow the &ase of Urainian (illionaire Qmitry Firtash +Aposed the USs

6ypocrisy

• 'alestine

• Syria

• ;fghanistan

• Uraine

8/21/2019 2 is the Middle East America’s to Lose

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2-is-the-middle-east-americas-to-lose 14/14

'arodies of 'arity? srael and 'alestine