Kerry in the Middle East
Secretary of State John Kerry is touring the capitals of the Middle East. He will be there until March 6, visiting Ankara, Cairo, Tel Aviv, Ramallah, Al-Riyadh and Abu Dhabi.
Politicians in the region are very interested in hearing from the representative of President Barack Obama in his new term. They are expected to express both concern and interest in the superpower, which has established a strategic relationship with the region since the end of World War II. Aside from bilateral interests, there are issues of common importance in the region regarding peace, security and global stability.
The bloody situation in Syria is the most urgent issue to address. The U.S. administration has so far been criticized for its lack of decision and action, despite its rhetoric against the Syrian regime.
Washington cannot promote a political solution that would lead to an end to the conflict. Its opposition to the arming of rebels against President Bashar Al-Assad is the main reason for the spread of the crisis and destruction and the increasing number of victims. It has given extremists great fuel and influence in Syria’s daily events.
The consequences of U.S. policy are contradictory to its stated aim of combating terrorism and the expansion of Islamic fundamentalism. A lack of American vision and leadership is the general judgment that John Kerry will hear in Ankara, Cairo, Riyadh and other Gulf countries.
Another persistent problem is the Iranian nuclear program, which was the subject of negotiations this week in Almaty, Kazakhstan, between the P5 +1 and Iran without concrete results. The Israelis promote their cause with fervor, trying to get a commitment from the U.S. to confront Iran and arguing that the sanctions have been ineffective and that military action will have to be an option.
The Iranian threat will be discussed with the leaders of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, who are concerned about Iran's regional ambitions and about their own safety in any military conflict with their neighbor.
The third problem facing John Kerry in the Middle East is the oldest in modern history: the Arab-Israeli conflict and the lack of any solution despite the famous "peace process" that began almost two decades ago. These governments have not shown good faith in the two-state solution.
With the continual expansion and construction of settlements in the West Bank, the Jewish expansion in Jerusalem, and the construction of the wall of separation, among other acts and measures, the Palestinian state has become a distant possibility.
The Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, has proven difficult to deal with for President Obama’s administration. The Palestinians have already lost their bet on American patronage and peace initiatives many times. No U.S. president has been able to fulfill his promises to them.
Interpretations of the confusion and indecision of U.S. policy change among different observers. The role of the U.S. is still very important in policy planning for leaders in the region, despite America’s poor image in the area.
Leaders and the people expect a more active and constructive U.S. role. The complexity of the problems and relationships between entities in this part of the world suggests the need for a powerful external influence, in accordance with its history of the last two centuries.
The author was Lebanon’s Ambassador to Mexico from 1999 to 2011.
Politicians in the region are very interested in hearing from the representative of President Barack Obama in his new term. They are expected to express both concern and interest in the superpower, which has established a strategic relationship with the region since the end of World War II. Aside from bilateral interests, there are issues of common importance in the region regarding peace, security and global stability.
The bloody situation in Syria is the most urgent issue to address. The U.S. administration has so far been criticized for its lack of decision and action, despite its rhetoric against the Syrian regime.
Washington cannot promote a political solution that would lead to an end to the conflict. Its opposition to the arming of rebels against President Bashar Al-Assad is the main reason for the spread of the crisis and destruction and the increasing number of victims. It has given extremists great fuel and influence in Syria’s daily events.
The consequences of U.S. policy are contradictory to its stated aim of combating terrorism and the expansion of Islamic fundamentalism. A lack of American vision and leadership is the general judgment that John Kerry will hear in Ankara, Cairo, Riyadh and other Gulf countries.
Another persistent problem is the Iranian nuclear program, which was the subject of negotiations this week in Almaty, Kazakhstan, between the P5 +1 and Iran without concrete results. The Israelis promote their cause with fervor, trying to get a commitment from the U.S. to confront Iran and arguing that the sanctions have been ineffective and that military action will have to be an option.
The Iranian threat will be discussed with the leaders of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, who are concerned about Iran's regional ambitions and about their own safety in any military conflict with their neighbor.
The third problem facing John Kerry in the Middle East is the oldest in modern history: the Arab-Israeli conflict and the lack of any solution despite the famous "peace process" that began almost two decades ago. These governments have not shown good faith in the two-state solution.
With the continual expansion and construction of settlements in the West Bank, the Jewish expansion in Jerusalem, and the construction of the wall of separation, among other acts and measures, the Palestinian state has become a distant possibility.
The Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, has proven difficult to deal with for President Obama’s administration. The Palestinians have already lost their bet on American patronage and peace initiatives many times. No U.S. president has been able to fulfill his promises to them.
Interpretations of the confusion and indecision of U.S. policy change among different observers. The role of the U.S. is still very important in policy planning for leaders in the region, despite America’s poor image in the area.
Leaders and the people expect a more active and constructive U.S. role. The complexity of the problems and relationships between entities in this part of the world suggests the need for a powerful external influence, in accordance with its history of the last two centuries.
The author was Lebanon’s Ambassador to Mexico from 1999 to 2011.
Next article![]( "Kerry Gets the Cold Shoulder")
