A Monumental Challenge to America

Posted February 13, 2008 | 04:47 PM (EST)



RSS stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust mixx.com Share this on Facebook

The collapse of the Soviet Union at the beginning of the last decade of the twentieth century, leaving the United States as the sole superpower, led to the century being dubbed, "The American Century." The world looked forward to enlightened leadership, visionary policies, and a multilateral approach in the conduct of American diplomacy. President Clinton was, though tainted by the Lewinsky affair, widely respected in the global community. It was hoped the new president would follow, if not the same policies, an enlightened path. But in seven short years, President Bush turned the world's hope and optimism into deep disillusionment. Many in the Middle East, looking back, wonder how a single president could have committed so many blunders that so tarnished America's global standing and moral leadership.

Ironically, although Mr. Bush's Middle East policy was prompted by national security and strategic considerations championed by the neo-conservatives, everything he touched had the opposite effect than intended. Mr. Bush's Middle East adventures underscore the enormity of his foreign policy failures, from which it may take America years to recover. But for such a recovery to occur, we must first understand what went wrong and the underlying assumptions supporting such disastrous policies. The short answer is that the failures stem from a complete lack of understanding of the historical background, cultural orientation, religious extremism, and social and political schisms in every country where the administration intervened. As examples: no central government or conqueror has ever tamed, subdued, or governed the tribal areas in Afghanistan, and the enmity and distrust between the Shiite, Sunnis, and the Kurds in Iraq, has existed for hundreds of years--thus no elections could possibly engender their amity. Yet the administration plunged into these countries with an attitude of "we know best what is good for you"-- a recipe of arrogance mixed with ignorance that has proved toxic.

It was initially sound policy to invade Afghanistan to oust the Taliban and destroy Al Qaeda's base and infrastructure, and that is why the international community fully supported the war. It was, however, tragically mistaken to not fully consolidate the coalition's presence, pursue Al Qaeda to the bitter end, and invest all necessary resources and military power to prevent the Taliban from resurfacing and Al Qaeda from restructuring again as they both now have.

Instead of focusing on these ends, Mr. Bush decided, in the name of the war on terror, to wage, at astronomical cost, both financially and in terms of human sacrifice, a war of choice in Iraq, against a presumed enemy that posed no immanent danger and had neither connection to Al Qaeda nor weapons of mass destruction. The war unleashed a tragic civil war between the Sunnis and the Shiites, causing untold destruction and sowing the seeds for a divided Iraq, a divided region, and ominous discord between radical Muslims and the West. Iraq has now become the training ground for terrorists poised to terrorize the entire region.

Also, instead of capitalizing on the progress made in the Camp David negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians in the summer of 2000, Mr. Bush left the combatants to slug it out by themselves, which allowed Hamas to become a political force that must be reckoned with. Mr. Bush's convening an international peace conference in Annapolis at the 11th hour of his presidency was simply cynical theatrics. Few of those with credibility believe the announced goal to reach an Israeli-Palestinian agreement by the end of 2008 is anything but an illusion.

Refusing to negotiate with Iran to end its nuclear ambitions and insisting rather on regime change in Tehran was another failed policy that only pushed Iran to accelerate its nuclear program. Further emboldened by the debacle in Iraq and swimming in oil money, Tehran defied both America and the international community without fear of real reprisal. Today, Iran poses a greater regional threat than ever, and it will become doubly menacing with nuclear weapons.

And what of the administration's obsession to marginalize and isolate Syria? It pushed Damascus steadily into Iran's belly, a result that should have been obvious. Refusing to be ignored and threatened with regime change, Syria spared no effort to become the regional spoiler. It has allowed Hezbollah to arm to the teeth, provided political support and facilitated financial assistance to Hamas coming from Iran, while turning a blind eye to the infiltration of insurgents and weapons into Iraq. The 2006 summer war between Hezbollah and Israel was just another unhappy consequence of Mr. Bush shortsighted Syrian policy.

Finally, Mr. Bush's push for political reform and democracy has backfired wherever elections have occurred: In Egypt, elections strengthened the Muslim Brotherhood, in the Palestinian territories, they brought Hamas to power, in Lebanon, they created dangerous political instability, in Iraq, they precipitated civil war, and in Pakistan, they created neither peace nor stability. Without understanding the socio-economic and political conditions unique to each county, allowing democratic institutions to develop, permitting liberal parties to compete, without a free press and a fair judiciary, and a serious commitment to sustainable development projects to lift millions of Arabs from abject poverty, it should have been obvious that Islamic groups, better organized and financed, and with extensive social networks and services, would be the ultimate beneficiaries.

The administration's mishaps in the Middle East have not been unique. Its recklessness in dealing with the environment, in denying fundamental human rights in the name of national security, in bullying and alienating many allies, in its addiction to oil and the oil interests, and in its unilateralism, have come back to haunt it. Mr. Bush is either unwilling or unable to change before his departure. The question is will the next president rise to this monumental challenge now facing America?

To learn more please visit Alon Ben-Meir's website

Comments for this post are now closed


 
 

Comments
8
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- SamThornton See Profile I'm a Fan of SamThornton permalink

It's difficult to fault anyone for allowing "...Hamas to become a political force that must be reckoned with" other than Israel. Except for it's financial and political support for Israel internationally, the US doesn't have a dog in this fight, nor should it. Putting the onus on the US for the Hamas electoral victory is simply counterfactual.

Not to put too fine a point on it, Israel's problems are Israel's problems. US support for Israel is arguably against America's best national interests. For Israel to expect the US to solve its problems with the Palestinians is not only wrong-headed, it is enormously presumptuous.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:33 PM on 02/14/2008
- jhNY See Profile I'm a Fan of jhNY permalink

Following the wrong foreigner's agenda can get a fellow in a whole lot of trouble overseas, the sort of trouble only another foreigner with an agenda can solve, if I read this correctly.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:36 PM on 02/14/2008
- Sundialsvc4 See Profile I'm a Fan of Sundialsvc4 permalink

Perhaps the first word that the American government should forever dismiss, is "superpower."

"Superpower," as far as I know, has always been a purely-American accolade that this country has used on itself ... and also attached to the Russians during the comparatively brief time that they were also caught-up in the Arms Race.

"Superpower," as used in this context, is merely "The Angel of Death." In the relations between countries and civilizations in this world, if any country should be an Angel, we don't need it to be an Angel of Death, but of Life.

An Angel to help another man plant and harvest, and to take none of that harvest in payment. Not an Angel to incinerate that man's fields and thus leave both of them bereft and hungry.

Have we, as men and women, not yet learned such simple principles?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:24 AM on 02/14/2008
- Macready See Profile I'm a Fan of Macready permalink

Excellent . . .thought provoking blog . . . thank you . . . "Mr. Bush is either unwilling or unable to change before his departure." and our speaker of the House still fails to put impeachment on the agenda . . .this is a very deplorable and heinous state of affairs that involves our entire government who seem locked into the bush strategy -- the failure to impeach indicates this.

I don't know how to answer your last question. I think Obama is the only candidate who will rise to the challenge and it will be a long hard slog and will take years to restore America's credibility abroad.

America will have to deal with the rapid neo-con, special interest groups and corporate elements that dominate its foreign policy . . . it will be tough . . . I doubt America will ever be "top dog" again . . . the damage done by the bush administration is too deep and far-reaching . . .

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:28 AM on 02/14/2008
- researcher See Profile I'm a Fan of researcher permalink

failed policy? imperialism must fail. karma demands it. thank the universe for that.


"A nation that spends more year after year on military offense (and I mean offense) than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death". (Gunnels)


it is spiritual death time in america when the evangels are the worst of the worst war mongers.

the rest of the world looks at us with distaste for our imperialistic war mongering for profits.

even obama calls mc cain a hero for being in that other illegal war called nam. bombing women and children and we call him a hero. what is hero in man's eyes is foolish in god's eyes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:04 AM on 02/14/2008
- mbaty See Profile I'm a Fan of mbaty permalink

Iran is not going to get nuclear weapons, and we can't keep pretending like they are an imminent threat if you want to avoid some kind of confrontation. Remember that, just like the people of America, many Iranians do not agree with their government and do not want war. They are not our enemies. Period. The people currently profiting from war would love to have more no-bid contracts connected with Iran. But no one else benefits. And in the end, neither do they. Peace is the way.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:49 AM on 02/14/2008
- LizM See Profile I'm a Fan of LizM permalink

I wouldn't bet the farm on the next POTUS having the first clue about how to restore US credibility in the world and reclaim America's global leadership role.

On the other hand, it is clear that the national media, blogosphere, and voters in Iowa - at least - don't believe this is of much importance anyway. If they did, we may have had a whole other presidential election campaign underway...one that would place big ideas and solutions ahead of big dollars and celebrity.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:06 PM on 02/13/2008
- BillZBubb See Profile I'm a Fan of BillZBubb permalink

The Bush legacy: America weakened at home, weakened abroad, and floundering. Who could have seen this coming? Let's see, Bush was a slacker at school, a bully, uninterested in anything but his own amusement, then he was an alcholic and failed business man. His daddy's name got him everything and he wasted it. What a shock. But the conservatives still love him--he's one of them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:20 PM on 02/13/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in

 
 

 
 
Bloggers Index›
Read All Posts by
Alon Ben-Meir›