The US interventionist policy has been a complete failure ... unless you 
think leaving thousands of American soldiers disfigured and paralyzed as a 
worthy sacrifice.

On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 9:40:18 AM UTC-6, Travis wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The Consequences of American Retreat from the Middle East
>
>
>
> *by Efraim InbarBESA Center Perspectives 
> <http://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/consequences-of-american-retreat-from-the-middle-east/>February
>  
> 24, 2016*
>
> *http://www.meforum.org/5870/american-retreat-from-the-middle-east 
> <http://www.meforum.org/5870/american-retreat-from-the-middle-east>*
>
>  
>
> [image: Description: http://www.meforum.org/pics/large/2401.jpg]
>
> *A cartoon in Al-Sharq al-Awsat depicts President Obama befriending Cuba 
> while blowing smoke in the Middle East (whatever that means).*
>
> The US, under President Barack Obama, has signaled its intent to reduce 
> its presence in the Middle East. The US fought two unsuccessful wars in the 
> region – a frustrating lesson about the limits of its power. At the same 
> time, US dependency upon Middle Eastern energy has been reduced thanks to 
> domestic progress in fracking technology. Moreover, Washington has decided 
> to "pivot" to China, an emerging global challenger, and also to cut defense 
> expenditures, leaving fewer military assets available for projecting power 
> in the Middle East. (For a while during President Obama's tenure, the US 
> had no aircraft carriers in the eastern Mediterranean or in the Gulf at 
> all, an unprecedented situation.) In addition, the American campaign 
> against ISIS has been extremely limited, and has met with little success.
>
> Unfortunately, this disengagement signals both fatigue and weakness.
>
> *American retreat from the Middle East signals both fatigue and weakness.*
>
> Washington also has desisted from confronting Iran and has gone to great 
> lengths to accommodate it. President Obama's contention is that by 
> completing a nuclear deal with Iran, he resolved one of the outstanding 
> security issues in the region before leaving office. However the deal 
> legitimizes a large nuclear infrastructure in Iran, and ignores the 
> cardinal national security interests of at least two US allies: Israel and 
> Saudi Arabia. The subsequent removal of international economic sanctions – 
> with no reciprocal requirement for any change in Iranian regional policy – 
> positions Iran to reap great financial benefits at no cost. President 
> Obama's Iran policy has occasioned a dramatic change in the regional 
> balance of power, yet Washington appears largely unperturbed.
>
> Whereas US policy on Iran has been guided primarily by wishful thinking, 
> the apprehensions of regional actors with regard to Iran's hegemonic 
> ambitions have multiplied in response to the nuclear deal. While Washington 
> claims to be confident that Iran will play "a responsible regional role," 
> leaders in Ankara, Cairo, Jerusalem, and Riyadh see Iran as almost entirely 
> unaltered from its pre-deal state in any meaningful political sense, with 
> the potential to produce nuclear bombs in a short time.
>
> The gravest consequence of the US policy of disengagement from the region 
> is the increased probability of nuclear proliferation. Powers contending 
> for regional leadership, such as Egypt, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia will not 
> stand idly by in the nuclear arena, particularly as the US is no longer 
> seen as a reliable security provider. US attempts to convince regional 
> powers to rely on an American nuclear umbrella in an attempt to prevent 
> nuclear proliferation are likely to fail. The emergence of a multi-polar 
> nuclear Middle East, which is a plausible consequence of the American 
> nuclear accommodation with Iran, will be a strategic nightmare for everyone.
>
> *The gravest consequence of US disengagement is the increased likelihood 
> of regional nuclear proliferation.*
>
> An emboldened Iran, which traditionally acts through proxies rather than 
> through military conquest, might intensify its campaign to subvert Saudi 
> Arabia, possibly by playing the Shiite card in the Shiite-majority and 
> oil-rich Eastern province. The loss of that province would considerably 
> weaken the Saudi state and might even bring about its disintegration.
>
> Iran could use subversion, terrorist attacks, and intimidation of the Gulf 
> states to evict the thinning American presence completely from the Gulf. In 
> the absence of American determination and ability to project force, Iranian 
> superior power might "Finlandize" the Gulf countries. We could also see 
> also the Finlandization of the Caspian basin, where Iran shares the coast 
> with important energy producers like Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan. The 
> Caspian basin and the Persian Gulf form an "energy ellipse" that contains a 
> large part of the world's energy resources.
>
> Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan are very fearful of growing Iranian influence. 
> Those countries, which adopted a pro-Western foreign policy orientation 
> after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, might decide to return to the 
> Russian orbit, because Russia appears at present to be a more reliable ally 
> than the US.
>
> Russia is fully alive to the potential for a reassertion of a Russian role 
> in the region in the wake of American retreat. To that end, it has taken 
> the major step of intervening militarily in Syria to assure the survival of 
> Assad's regime. The Syrian littoral is a vital base for enhanced Russian 
> naval presence in the eastern Mediterranean, and this preceded Russian air 
> participation in the Syrian civil war. In addition, Russia wants to protect 
> energy prospects that depend on Assad's survival. It already has signed 
> exploration contracts with the Assad regime with regard to the recent gas 
> discoveries in the Levant basin.
>
> Syria has been an ally of Iran since 1979 – the longest alliance in the 
> Middle East. The preservation of the Assad regime is critical to Iranian 
> interests because Damascus is a linchpin to its proxy, the Hezbollah in 
> Lebanon. Russia's efforts on Assad's behalf thus directly serve the 
> interests of the Iranian regime. If successful, those efforts will further 
> Iranian influence in the region.
>
> *With American credibility waning, traditional U.S. allies are beginning 
> to hedge their bets.*
>
> Outside Syria, we may see Iran join Russia in supporting Kurdish political 
> ambitions in order to weaken Turkey, Iran's rival for regional leadership. 
> The Kurds are a thorn in Turkey's side. Iran and Turkey are supporting 
> opposing sides in the civil war in Syria, where the Kurds are carving out 
> autonomous regions. Depending on how the war transpires, Kurdish national 
> dreams might benefit from the power vacuum created by the disruption of the 
> Arab statist structure and the American exit from the region.
>
> As to Egypt, American reluctance to support the al-Sisi regime plays into 
> Russian hands. The Russians are selling weapons to Egypt, negotiating port 
> rights in Alexandria, and supplying Egypt with nuclear reactors. In Iraq 
> too, we see the harbingers of a Russian presence in coordination with Iran, 
> as American influence in that state continues to wane.
>
> The rise of a more aggressive Iran – a direct consequence of the US 
> retreat – may bring about greater tacit cooperation among Egypt, Jordan, 
> Saudi Arabia and Israel. The big question is whether Turkey will join such 
> an anti-Iranian alignment.
>
> US weakness in the region inevitably will have ripple effects in other 
> parts of the globe. American credibility is now subject to question, and 
> allies elsewhere may determine that it would be wise to hedge their bets. 
> Greater challenges await the US beyond the Middle East
>
>
> __._,_.___
> ------------------------------
> Posted by: "Beowulf" <[email protected] <javascript:>> 
> ------------------------------
>
>
> Visit Your Group 
> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmdmx0OGtjBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NTY0NDI1NzU->
>  
>    
>    
> [image: Yahoo! Groups] 
> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlaXNkcmNpBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ1NjQ0MjU3NQ-->
>  
> • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • 
> Unsubscribe <javascript:> • Terms of Use 
> <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> 
>
> __,_._,___
>
>
>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to