USA: Wrong Steps in the Middle East

Hopefully something good will come from the Washington talks between the Americans and Israelis, something with the ability to revive a peace process in a manner like Lazarus in John’s Gospel. Barack Obama is a man of great qualities and extraordinary tenacity, as shown in the historic success of health care reform. But peace in the Middle East is an equally difficult and historic topic, on which the president of the United States will face an even more solitary battle.

Of the many governmental policies, foreign policy is by definition the one whose success does not completely depend on the government that implements it, even when it is the American superpower. Sometimes even decisions of allies are enough to wreck it, or, less dramatically, to delay or lessen its effects. It is not necessary to have a moment of analytical blindness or “resistance” from enemies or rivals (who obviously each play their own part). The inopportune Israeli decision to allow new Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem is one such activity. While we condemn this, it is necessary to recognize that it is the fruit of an analysis of the weak leadership and growing solitude of the USA in the Middle East.

The feeling is that the USA is losing its grip on its allies in the region: not only Israel, but also Turkey (even though Obama initiated his first European trip in Ankara) and even Iraq, which is increasingly impatient to be rid of Petraeus’s soldiers.

If Netanyahu challenges Obama so openly, it is because he knows that America is not able to effectively sanction Israel nor to significantly improve the strategic horizon in which Israel lives. On one hand, despite disapproving, even bitter opinions, Hillary Clinton had to publicly confirm “the American commitment to Israel’s security” only 48 hours after an outburst against the Israeli authorities (an example the Arabs call a double standard). On the other hand, the Obama administration has not been able to slow Iran’s nuclear ascent even by one day, a very real nightmare for the Israeli government. Avoiding challenging Iran directly on human rights and stacked elections only to concentrate on the nuclear issue has given Moscow and Beijing much more presence in the Middle East, transforming them into de facto protectors of the ayatollah. This is the scenario the Arabs, who expected much more from President Obama after the (inspired and audacious) Cairo speech, see as well. Instead they see the “others” (Israelis, Iranians and Turks) acquire increasing presence and autonomy at their expense. A rapid and decisive change of direction is needed, a signal that compensates the retreat of the troops from Iraq and is able to clarify to everyone (allies, enemies and neutrals) that the United States intends to exercise effective leadership in the Middle East once more.