US Vision for a Transformed Middle East Is in Shambles

Published in Global Times
(China ) on 24 Oct 2023
by Liu Zhongmin (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Andrew Engler. Edited by Michelle Bisson.
Since the most recent wave of the of Israeli-Palestinian clashes, the U.S. has attracted widespread global attention for its role as tThe United States has drawn global attention for its role as the leading enduring and outside factor in the most recent wave of Israeli-Palestinian conflicts. Despite diplomatic efforts by Joe Biden’s administration, Middle Eastern nations have postponed high-level meetings with U.S. officials because of the United States’ blind loyalty to Israel. The recent outbreak clearly caught an embarrassed U.S. by complete surprise, leaving the Biden administration's Middle East policy struggling to stay afloat.

Although the basic causes of this round of clashes are admittedly complex, America’s Palestinian policy has suffered a serious setback given that is bent on promoting the Abraham Accords to normalize Arab-Israeli relations while it abandoned the two-state solution (during the Trump administration). The persistent neglect of this core of Middle Eastern issue was undoubtedly an important outside factor in the recent outbreak and escalation in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.

Since fighting broke out, there has been no shortage of dissenting views on Washington's Middle East policy, expressed both within the U.S. and abroad. The French newspaper Le Monde recently published an online article noting that in recent years, America has focused on normalizing Israeli-Arab relations while giving short shrift to the Palestinian issue. The recent tragedy shattered any illusions about how viable America’s New Middle East policies are. Renowned American scholar Stephen M. Walt sharply disapproved of U.S. foreign policy here saying "this latest tragedy confirms the bankruptcy of U.S. policy toward the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian conflict."

The Barack Obama, Donald Trump and now Biden administrations have all shared strategic contraction from the Middle East as a long-term objective. However, U.S. Middle East policy began to seriously deteriorate under the Trump administration, highlighted by the withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement and encouragement of the region to confront Iran; strengthening alliances with Israel and promoting the "deal of the century" to normalize relations between Israel and "moderate Arab countries”; keeping the U.S.-Saudi partnership intact while building a coalition centered around Saudi Arabia to confront Iran, effectively forming an Arab version of NATO; and promoting military deterrence by launching limited military strikes on Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Despite some incremental progress, there has been no significant improvement in Middle East policy under the Biden administration. America’s policy has become increasingly focused on its own strategic interests, fundamentally serving U.S. strategy in competing with the [other] great powers. Upon taking office, besides the Biden administration’s reckless withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, it deescalated involvement on hot issues such as the civil war in Yemen, reduced military support to allies such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, reiterated support for the two-state solution, and engaged in talks in Vienna to return to the Iran nuclear agreement. However, the Middle East has undergone rapidly accelerating change, and the region has become more strategically important in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, making America’s reduced investment in the Middle East more apparent. Washington’s strategic contraction has prevented it from realizing its objectives as its policy grows increasingly fragmented and is passively implemented.

After the Russia-Ukraine conflict broke out, United States policy of pushing the increasingly autonomous Middle East to condemn and sanction Russia and coordinate oil production went up in smoke. It is important to highlight that during President Biden's symbolic trip to the Palestinian territory, aside from the resumption of aid, the U.S. did not propose actively advancing Middle East peace negotiations and there is no real intention or ability to implement the two-state solution. Meanwhile, the Biden administration is dedicated to promoting the Abraham Accords, building upon the normalization of relations with Bahrain, the UAE and Israel that occurred during the Trump administration by normalizing relations among Morocco, Sudan and Israel.

To retain its influential position in the Middle East while cutting back on its investment there, the U.S. made significant efforts to obstruct China's engagement with the region, but these efforts have proved unsuccessful. The Middle East readily welcomed the collaborative implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative. China has been warmly received for its significant and constructive contribution to regional reconciliation. In contrast, the United States’ proposed Quartet on the Middle East (the U.S., the UAE, Israel and India) and the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor has made it more difficult to provide sustained, effective regional security and development due to how exclusive the proposals are, how they focus on profit, and their limited and unfocused nature.

In the future the limitations of U.S. Middle East policy will become even more salient. First, it is impossible to reduce strategic investment while maintaining regional hegemony. Second, the once proactive Washington has pulled back, leaving a void filled with reactive, disjointed responses. Third, the U.S. is more interested in transactions that advance its own interests. Fourth, America’s constructive role in the Middle East continues to shrink, while its destructive role remains prominent. Finally, the policies are simply unsustainable.

In short, the shortcomings of American Middle East policy are becoming increasingly obvious because the U.S. has lost its authoritative, leading role in the region. In the recent outbreak between Israel and the Palestinians, the U.S. has failed to be a systematic or constructive mediator. The U.S. mainly voices support for Israel and contributes to increasing Israel’s military strength to establish deterrence. As the situation evolves, the United States’ strategic vision for a “New Middle East” is in shambles.

The author is a professor at the Middle East Institute of Shanghai International Studies University


刘中民:美国“新中东”战略构想支离破碎

自新一轮巴以冲突爆发以来,作为巴以问题长期最大外部因素的美国,其角色和作用引起了世界广泛关注。虽然拜登政府也做了一些外交努力,但是其一味偏袒以色列的态度,也让部分中东国家临时取消了与美国高层的会面。显然,新一轮巴以冲突完全出乎美国意料之外,并使拜登政府的中东政策陷入疲于应付、收效有限的尴尬处境。

从本轮巴以冲突爆发的根源来看,固然与巴以双方复杂矛盾等诸多因素密切相关,但美方巴勒斯坦政策严重倒退,一意孤行地推进阿以关系正常化的“亚伯拉罕协议”,漠视甚至放弃政治解决巴勒斯坦问题的“两国方案”(如特朗普政府),导致作为中东核心问题的巴勒斯坦问题不断被边缘化,无疑是新一轮巴以冲突爆发且烈度升级的重要外部因素。

在冲突爆发后,美国内外对华盛顿中东政策的批评不绝于耳。法国《世界报》网站不久前发文称,近年来美国重视推动以色列—阿拉伯关系正常化,轻视解决巴勒斯坦问题,而新一轮巴以冲突粉碎了美国这种不切实际的“新中东”幻想。美国知名学者斯蒂芬·沃尔特更加尖锐地批评说,“新一轮的悲剧确认了美国长期以来在巴以问题上的政策破产”。

寻求从中东进行战略收缩,是从奥巴马到特朗普,再到拜登政府的长期战略。但美国中东政策的严重倒退始于特朗普政府时期,其突出表现包括:退出伊核协议,策动地区国家全面对抗伊朗;强化与以色列的盟友关系,通过推动所谓“世纪协议”实现以色列与“温和阿拉伯国家”关系正常化;组建以沙特为中心的反伊朗联盟即“阿拉伯版北约”,极力维护美沙同盟关系;通过在叙利亚、伊拉克、阿富汗等国家发动有限军事打击进行军事威慑。

拜登政府上台后,尽管其中东政策相对于特朗普的我行我素有所改善,但由于美国中东政策日益趋于功利主义和实用主义,并在根本上服务于大国竞争的全球战略,使其中东政策并无实质性的改善。上台之初,拜登政府启动重返伊核协议的维也纳谈判,为也门内战等热点问题降温,减少和压缩对沙特、阿联酋等盟友的军事支持,重提解决巴以问题的“两国方案”,以及不计后果地从阿富汗撤军。但伴随俄乌冲突爆发后全球和中东地区形势的变化,美国在中东不断减少投入与该地区格局加速变化、战略地位提高之间的矛盾更加突出,华盛顿在中东进行战略收缩的局限性更加突出,其政策应对的被动性、破碎性也更加突出,政策目标很难实现。

俄乌冲突爆发后,美国寻求中东国家配合谴责、制裁俄罗斯,并在石油生产方面服从美国要求的政策努力化为泡影,中东国家的战略自主性不断增强。十分值得注意的是,在拜登对巴勒斯坦的象征性访问中,美国除恢复对巴勒斯坦的援助外,根本无意推动重启以中东和平进程,对于以“两国方案”为基础政治解决巴勒斯坦问题可谓既无力更无心。与此同时,拜登政府却十分热衷于继续推进“亚伯拉罕协议”,并在特朗普政府时期巴林、阿联酋与以色列关系正常化的基础上,实现摩洛哥、苏丹与以色列关系正常化。

为在减少投入的情况下维持在中东的霸权,美国还极力对中东国家与中国的合作制造障碍,但未能阻止中国与中东国家合作的扩大,相反中东国家积极接受共建“一带一路”倡议,中国在中东地区和解过程中发挥了为地区国家所乐见的重要建设性作用。相对而言,美国提出的“中东四方机制”(美国、阿联酋、以色列、印度)、“印度—中东—欧洲走廊”计划等明显具有排他性地缘政治色彩,都是功利性、局部性、应对性很强的举措,在本质上也缺乏可持续性,更难以在地区安全和发展中提供持续有效的公共产品。

展望未来,美国中东政策的局限性将更加突出。一是矛盾性,即减少战略投入与维系中东霸权之间的核心矛盾;二是被动性,华盛顿中东战略已缺乏主动战略谋划的动力,更多是被动应对,缺乏系统性和全局性;三是交易性,美国更多采取利益交易实现其利益;四是破坏性,美国中东政策的建设性作用不断缩小,破坏性作用则十分突出;五是不可持续性。上述特征决定了美国中东政策很难持续。

总之,美国的中东政策愈发呈现出消极属性,其对中东事务已很难再发挥权威性引导作用。在新一轮巴以冲突中,美国除表达对以方的支持并通过增加军事进行威慑外,并未在斡旋冲突、危机解决方面发挥系统的建设性作用。伴随局势的演进,美国“新中东”战略构想支离破碎。(作者是上海外国语大学中东研究所教授)

This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Austria: Soon Putin Will Have Successfully Alienated Trump

Russia: Will Trump Investigate Harris? Political Analyst Responds*

Australia: At Debt’s Door: America’s Superpower Is Waning and Trump’s Part of the Problem

Topics

Germany: Trump for the Charlemagne Prize!

Canada: It Turns Out Trump’s Tariffs Were Illegal After All

Australia: Trump’s Tariffs Were Already Ever-Changing. Now, Court Fights Add to the Uncertainty

Austria: Soon Putin Will Have Successfully Alienated Trump

Canada: Scorning Trump’s Golden Dome Would Be a Mistake

Related Articles

Austria: Trump Ignores Israel’s Interests during Gulf Visit

Hong Kong: The Lessons of World War II: The Real World Importance of Resisting Hegemony

Israel: Trump’s National Security Adviser Forgot To Leave Personal Agenda at Home and Fell

Mexico: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice