The American Paradox in Syria

Barack Obama, far from being a trigger-happy man, is preparing to forcefully sanction the employment of chemical weapons in Syria. In the Middle East, the incident will reinforce the beliefs of countless numbers of people who demonize America. Whatever happens, it will be blamed for all of the region’s misfortunes.

America would be blamed for the tragedies that unfold. As leader of the Western world, it would manipulate, corrupt, intimidate or seduce people, always with the same dark and sinister desire: to take away the ability of Arabs to control their own destiny.

America — the everlasting almighty power of the Middle East? It is a myth, a legend. Yet it’s a debate over which Arabs are now more divided than ever.

Let us take some examples. The press in Cairo accuses the U.S. of propelling the Muslim Brotherhood to power to maintain more control over Egypt – the columnists do not detail how exactly. Damascus propaganda states that Bashar al-Assad is a victim of an American-Israeli-Jihadi conspiracy — Washington, al-Qaida and Israel all aligned to bring down the only regime that stands up to the West. On the Internet, there is a rumor that incriminates Barack Obama’s so-called hypocrisy. The American president, you see, was only waiting for an excuse to intervene in Syria … That excuse turned out to be the chemical attack of Aug. 21.

The legend of the all-powerful USA — and its president — does not consider the facts; it ignores them. It is one of the types of disease that the World Health Organization forgot to treat in the region: the conspiracy theory.

As with all myths, this one has an element of truth. America undoubtedly has a lot for which to apologize. Founded on a double alliance with Saudi Arabia since 1945 and Israel since 1967, its presence in the Middle East has served its economic and strategic interests. This was true during the Cold War and more so during that short period of time from the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 to the beginning of the millennium, when America found itself in a position of almost absolute domination.

This is no longer the case. American influence in the region is in decline. America is constantly losing its powerful hold on the Middle East, and the events in both Egypt and Syria over the past few weeks confirm this notion. The irony is that the likely American missile strike on Syria shows that the leadership of the U.S. is running out of steam; however, it shows more than that. It is also a move designed to eliminate its rather shattered credibility.

Washington is readying a warning shot. The cruise missiles must first send a political-strategic message: “no” to the use of chemical weapons. Their prime objective is not to change the lay of the land. Beyond the aid that it gives to a section of the rebellion, America does not want to further intrude on the Syrian tragedy. Two days after the gas attack carried out in the suburbs of Damascus, Mr. Obama told CNN: “The notion that the U.S. can somehow solve what is a sectarian, complex problem inside of Syria sometimes is overstated.”

‘Overstated’ Influence

Similarly, it turns out that the ability of the U.S. to influence the situation in Egypt is largely “overstated.” The Americans repeatedly, and without success, warned Mohammed Morsi about his authoritarian, sectarian and suicidal tendencies. After the July 3 military coup, they begged the new head of Egypt, General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, not to go head to head with the Muslim Brotherhood. Again, without any success.

None of the pressure coming from Washington intimidated the Egyptian generals — not even the attempted and pending threat of interrupting military aid of $1.3 billion granted each year to Cairo since 1979.

In the case of Egypt, the local allies of America are divided and undermining its influence. Qatar and Turkey support the Muslim Brotherhood. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries support the Egyptian military. They put $12 billion of unconditional aid at Cairo’s disposal to compensate in advance for a potential suspension of U.S. aid to Egypt.

The political credibility of the U.S. – and of “the West” in general – is not at its highest, either. Obama had to rebuild a brand single-handedly tarnished by his predecessor George W. Bush. But Guantanamo is not closed. The Israeli-Palestinian issue has only just been reopened after four years of abandonment. During the “Arab Springs,” human rights defense varied according to the fleeting interest of the U.S.

Finally, to explain this weakening of America’s influence in the Middle East, there is the Obama factor. Possible strikes on Syria must not be shied away from. The 44th president of the United States wants to disengage from the region. He believes that it is of little strategic and economic interest to America today. He almost makes it seem like the U.S. has grown weary of the curse of the Middle East, after a series of uninterrupted wars and massacres, while the rest of the world seems cleverly preoccupied with economic development.

Mr. Obama has weighed the limits of American power in the Middle East. It is uncertain whether or not it pains him to do so.