I don't think we should have ever been there.

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 11:46 AM, plainolamerican <[email protected]
> wrote:

> 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]>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> 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 • 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.
>

-- 
-- 
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