27 Nov 2006
Analysis: The end of U.S. dominance in the Middle East
By Claude Salhani | Published Today | Middle East , North America ,
Peace and Conflict | Rating:
U.S. attack on Iraq determining factor
By Claude Salhani
UPI International Editor
WASHINGTON -- U.S. dominance in the Middle East has ended, giving way
to a new era in the modern history of the region amid growing
anti-American sentiment. This is the conclusion of a study by Richard
N. Haas, president of the Council on Foreign Relations in an article
titled "The New Middle East" published in the November/December 2006
issue of Foreign Affairs.
Expectations of a peaceful, prosperous and democratic Middle East based
on the European model "will not be realized," says Haas. "Much more
likely is the emergence of a new Middle East that will cause great harm
to itself, the United States, and the world."
Haas writes that the most significant factor contributing to the end of
this era has been "the Bush administration's decision to attack Iraq in
2003 and its conduct of the operation and resulting occupation."
Among the casualties of the war in Iraq is the Sunni's domination, a
factor "which was strong enough and motivated enough to balance Shiite
Iran." This, explains Haas, has given rise to tensions between Sunnis
and Shiites. Fighting between the two rival Muslim groups has reached
new heights in Iraq with a car bomb claiming more that 160 lives in a
single day last week. And in Lebanon tension between the Shiite
Hezbollah and Sunnis has reached the point where it could easily tip
into armed conflict.
Another casualty of the Iraq war has been the rise of terrorism.
Terrorists have gained a base in Iraq where they developed a new set of
techniques to export, says Haas. The war in Iraq, says Haas has
"reduced U.S. leverage worldwide" by tying down a large number of U.S.
troops in the area.
Haas considers this as one of history's ironies. "The first war in
Iraq, a war of necessity, marked the beginning of the American era in
the Middle East and the second Iraq war, a war of choice, has
precipitated its end." The most significant factor contributing to the
demise of the U.S. domination in the Middle East, according to Haas,
has been the Bush administration's decision to attack Iraq in 2003.
Haas also points out other relevant factors such as the "demise of the
Middle East peace process" and the "failure of traditional Arab regimes
to counter the appeal of radical Islamism."
In the Middle East's new era the United States will be challenged by
China, Russia and the European Union. "Iran will be one of the two most
powerful states in the region," says Haas. Iran "is the most powerful
external influence in Iraq, and holds considerable sway over both Hamas
and Hezbollah."
New axis of power
Haas calls the Islamic Republic of Iran "a classic imperial power."
Iran has "ambitions to remake the region in its image and the potential
to translate its objectives into reality."
Israel, the only country in the region with a nuclear arsenal, still
"is in a weaker position today than it was before this summer's crisis
in Lebanon."
Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other large oil producers will benefit from the
rising price of oil, which Haas believes is "far more likely to exceed
$100 (per barrel) than it is to fall below $40."
Haas further predicts "Iraq, traditionally a center of Arab power, will
remain messy for years to come, with a weak central government, a
divided society, and regular sectarian violence. At worst, it will
become a failed state wracked by an all-out civil war that will draw in
its neighbors."
The political landscape of the Middle East is changing. "With Arab
nationalism and Arab socialism a thing of the past, democracy belongs
in the distant future at best," and a number of Arab regimes are
"likely to remain authoritarian." Arab unity is a slogan, not a
reality, says Haas.
"Islam will continue to make great strides and will continue to fill
the intellectual vacuum in the Arab world," he says, adding Islam will
provide a foundation for the politics of a majority of the region's
inhabitants.
Lack of imagination will continue to hurt Arab countries. Says Haas:
"The Middle East's best-known organization, the Arab League, excludes
the region's two most powerful states, Israel and Iran." Haas says the
continuing war between Arab forces and Israel will "continue to
preclude the participation of Israel in any sustained regional
relationship." While the "tension between Iran and most Arab states
will also frustrate the emergence of regionalism."
The author of the report cautions U.S. policymakers not to be over
reliant on brute military force. He points to two instances where two
superior powers -- the U.S. in Iraq and Israel in Lebanon -- were
unable to achieve their objectives. Secondly, cautions Haas, it would
be a mistake "to count on the emergence of democracy to pacify the
region."
Creating mature democracies is no easy task, says Haas. If and when the
experiment succeeds it takes decades. Among the dangers of the new
Middle East is the possibility that "Syria might be more interested in
working with Tehran than with Washington."
Washington's shunning of Damascus and Tehran as part of its foreign
policy is in fact the absence of a coherent policy. "Diplomacy," writes
Haas, "is the best option available to Washington."
Indeed, what seems to be emerging in the Middle East today is a new
axis of power with Syria as its main cog and incorporating Iran,
Hezbollah and Hamas. And following the re-establishment of relations
between Damascus and Baghdad could bring Iraq back into the
anti-American fold.
http://wpherald.com/articles/2278/1/Analysis-The-end-of-US-dominance-in-the-Middle-East/US-attack-on-Iraq-determining-factor.html
.
|
