|
Washington
Should Rethink its Middle East Policy
by
Leon Hadar
by Leon Hadar
If you've been
watching the television images from Lebanon, Israel and Palestine
and have been getting a little depressed, cheer up! US Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice has explained to reporters that the scenes
of death, destruction and human misery from Beirut, Haifa, and Gaza
were – get this! – "birth pangs of a new Middle East."
If the folks
who had promised – let's see – that Iraqis would be welcoming US
troops with flowers; that a New Iraq would serve as a model of democracy,
peace and prosperity for the entire Middle East; that renewed efforts
would be made to bring about Israeli-Palestinian peace – are now
ensuring us that we've been watching the birth of a New Middle East,
well, permit me to be a bit skeptical.
What I've been
watching on television are scenes of war in the Middle East. Or
to put it differently, it's another sequel in that familiar and
violent television program called the Old Middle East. War has been
the norm in the Middle East since 1945, with wars between Israelis
and Arabs, between Iranians and Arabs, between Arabs and Arabs,
not to mention quite a few military coups and civil wars.
Microcosm
In fact, Lebanon
itself has been a setting for a long civil war between its many
ethnic and religious sects that lasted for most of the 1970s and
early 1980s and was interrupted by an Israeli invasion of Lebanon
in 1982 and the military control by Syria. In a way, Lebanon is
a tiny microcosm of the politics of the Middle East, which have
been dominated since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire by rivalries
between tribal, ethnic and religious groups.
The artificial
borders that were drawn by British and French imperialists after
World War I have remained in place for most of the 20th Century
thanks to the support by global powers for autocratic regimes in
the region despite the fact that most of the nation-states there,
with the exception of Turkey and Iran, have lacked a clear sense
of national identity.
Many analysts
had expected that the end of the Cold War and dawn of globalization
would lead to some movement of political and economic reform in
the region. Israel's peace accord with Jordan and the Palestine
Liberation Organization and the economic renaissance of Lebanon
in the 1990s had created a mood of optimism in the region.
But no one
had expected that a US president would launch a revolutionary process
to democratize and remake the Middle East, not unlike Napoleon who
attempted to spread liberty in Europe in the early 19th century.
But as in the
case of Napoleon, the attempt by President George W Bush to achieve
his goals through the use of military force has backfired, creating
the conditions for a civil war in Iraq, radicalizing the Palestinians,
empowering the Hezbollah in Lebanon, and antagonizing the Syrians
and the Iranians, and as a result, destabilizing the entire Middle
East, from Iraq to Israel/Palestine through Lebanon.
What President
Bush should do in the last two years of his term in office is to
try to "de-revolutionize" the Middle East that his policies
has brought about. Among other things, Washington should try to
end its policies of isolating Syria and Iran. While Hezbollah is
not a puppet of these two governments, they do exert an enormous
influence on it.
A dialogue
between Washington and Damascus and Teheran could help create the
regional environment in which a Hezbollah, weakened by the military
confrontation with Israel, would have no choice but to disarm while
moving to complete its political integration as a political party
into the Lebanese system. At the same time, international peacekeeping
troops could be deployed into southern Lebanon to prevent Hezbollah
from threatening Israel's security.
Such constructive
diplomatic engagement by the US could lead eventually to negotiations
between Washington and Teheran aimed at providing support for the
government in Baghdad and maintaining security in Iraq as well as
resolving the current nuclear crisis. Next on the agenda should
be a renewed effort to reactivate negotiations between Israelis
and Palestinians, perhaps by engaging the political wing of Hamas
and the moderate Fatah group.
Reforms
needed
No one denies
that the Middle East needs a shot of political and economic reform.
That should take place peacefully with diplomatic and economic engagement
with the world and not through violent revolution imposed from the
outside.
More specifically,
one hopes that the states in region will not embrace radical forms
of identities, including militant political Islam and that the concept
of a modern nation-state in which ethnic and religious groups can
coexist and women enjoy equal rights should become the norm, not
the exception in the region.
Defusing tensions
in the region, including by resolving Palestinian-Israeli conflict,
providing stability to Lebanon and preventing a full-scale civil
war in Iraq could help accelerate the process of peaceful evolution.
These
are the kinds of goals that Washington should place on the top of
its agenda instead of pursuing New-Middle-East fantasies. It should
remake its policy of remaking the Middle East before it's too late.
July
27, 2006
Leon
Hadar [send him mail] is
Washington correspondent for the Business
Times of Singapore and the author of Sandstorm:
Policy Failure in the Middle East (Palgrave Macmillan). Visit
his blog.
Copyright
© 2006 Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. All rights reserved. Reprinted
with permission of the author.
Leon
Hadar Archives
|