The Failed Grand Strategy in the Middle East
The Failed Grand Strategy in the Middle East – Wall Street Journal Saturday Essay by Walter Russell Mead.
In the beginning, the Hebrew Bible tells us, the universe was all "tohu wabohu," chaos and tumult. This month the Middle East seems to be reverting to that primeval state: Iraq continues to unravel, the Syrian War grinds on with violence spreading to Lebanon and allegations of chemical attacks this week, and Egypt stands on the brink of civil war with the generals crushing the Muslim Brotherhood and street mobs torching churches. Turkey's prime minister, once widely hailed as President Obama's best friend in the region, blames Egypt's violence on the Jews; pretty much everyone else blames it on the U.S.
The Obama administration had a grand strategy in the Middle East. It was well intentioned, carefully crafted and consistently pursued.
Unfortunately, it failed…
– Walter Russell Mead
Young people, students, reading and lurking, are you getting it yet? Getting the feel of my commentary around here because at this point, you are my (our) only hope, Obi Wan….
9-11 never mattered, not really, because it’s about Iran and Russia always and forever. Great Power politics matter, sure, but is a Cold War posture the most optimal way to view Great Power politics in this era? How should we view Great Power alliances in this era? This, folks, is supposedly the best thinking out there. Brzenzki’s forever!
Whatever negative effects come out of our alliance with the Saudis (even if there are positives it’s a multipolar world which requires outside-the-bloc thinking) doesn’t matter and never will.
Yeah, we don’t want the Saudis to go nuclear (think this is about anything else? Sure, energy too but our system doesn’t do multipolar well, does it?)
– from an article in The Diplomat about Saudi Nukes
WRM has this hilarious post on his blog where, basically, he pats the Indians on their heads (after a visit to India which he chronicles on his blog) and says, “now, now, I know I don’t know much about the region but trust the US, we will figure it out.”
Think about that attitude as its been displayed around the world by US foreign policy gurus….
I am not making this up, if I have time I’ll post it.
I’d be okay with this if we didn’t talk about allies in the manner of children. Is this supposed to be clever?
Agree with Madhu on FP depicted as a projection toward children.
But what I take exception to in Mead’s piece is his comparison of the American and French revolutions. Obviously the man subscribes to a romantic rendering of what was in the American case, a very brutal war, a bloody war, and to a larger extent than the romantic rendering will permit, a civil war. Both American and French revolutions generated tens of thousands of casualties, and in the American example one of the primary motivations for the struggle was secured: the continuation of slave labor (most probably George Washington’s ultimate reason for initially joining the struggle).
Don’t get me wrong, I subscribe to the U.S. Constitution. My point is that when one’s historical and political baselines are premised on a sense of romanticism and as a result, exceptionalism, well then it’s only natural to see other people’s as children. And this not only applies to our allies but also the people’s we have a problem with. The Iranians, for example. We could have a nuclear deal with those people in a matter of weeks, as former National Security official Flynt Leverett points out. However, one of our problems (among more than one) in negotiating is the very one Madhu is referring to.
As something of a counterpoint to Mead’s piece, see this recent interview of COL Lawrence Wilkerson, U.S. Army (Ret), formerly chief of staff to U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell.
I was being sarcastic when I said 9-11 didn’t matter. What I meant is that the “get Iran” and “get Russia” crowds in DC don’t much care what relation the KSA might have had to 9-11 because anyone that is our ally against our two great forever foes of Iran and Russia is excused from any bad behavior.
Got it, people reading? You get that I was parodying a certain mindset?
Mark got my sarcasm. Brezezinski is a great power guy and for him the US is always opposed to Russia and the US has to pay attention to great power politics first, all that “no one should dominate Eurasia” stuff.
I’m sick of being allied with KSA and hostage to their neuroses about Iran and the Arab world.
There’s a lot to object to here. For starters…
The connection between outcomes in the Middle East and Obama’s “grand strategy” seems more than a bit strained. Egypt’s post-Mubarak transition was going to be messy no matter what the US did. Syria’s revolution was going to be messy no matter what the US did. Yemen will be a wreck no matter what the US does. These realities are less about the failure of US Grand Strategy than about the reality that the US does not and cannot control events in the Middle East.
The connection between the US administration and the moderate Islamists seems equally strained. Moderate Islamist governments were elected in Turkey and Egypt. These countries cannot be ignored, and neither can our oft-stated commitment to democracy. Refusing to work with these governments, or undermining them, would only reinforce the core Islamist narrative that holds that the west will never accept Islamic government even if the people want it. The US did not put these governments in power, and had little choice but to treat them as the legitimate governments of nations with which the US has long-standing relationships.
I don’t buy the idea that the Israelis and the Saudis are making our lives miserable as punishment for consorting with those they despise. The Israelis, the Saudis, and the Egyptian generals will pursue their own perceived interests regardless of anything we do or do not do. Toadying to the Israelis, to the Saudis, and to the Egyptian generals was the core of US Middle East policy for a long time. The current mess in the Middle East didn’t spring out of a hat; it’s been brewing for decades. For much of that brewing time we were allowing these “partners” to dictate our agenda in the region. I don’t see any reason to think that a return to that rather craven course is going to solve the problems.