The National - News

Biden is hardly the only US president to have failed the Arab world

- JAMES ZOGBY Dr James Zogby is the president of the Arab American Institute and a columnist for The National

US presidents are rarely judged by whether or not they accomplish the agenda they set for themselves. The more important measure is how effective they are in responding to challenges that often originate in the Mena region.

One week before the October 7 attack, President Joe Biden’s National Security Adviser, Jake Sullivan, said that “the Middle East region is quieter today than it has been in two decades”, although he emphasised that “all of that can change”. A lot has changed. Israel is pursuing a war in Gaza and engaging in cross-border shelling with Hezbollah in Lebanon. Iranian-backed militias in Iraq, Syria and Yemen are destabilis­ing the region and internatio­nal waterways. The White House has had to shift from neglecting the region to making it a full-time concern – one it neither expected, nor for which it was prepared.

This isn’t unique to the Biden administra­tion because since the end of the Vietnam War, every US presidency has been shaped by conflict in the Mena region. During the past half century, America has sent more weapons, spent more money, committed more troops, lost more lives, and expended more political capital in the region than anywhere else. Time and again, it has failed.

The bigger problem is that it has either never acknowledg­ed these failures, or is oblivious to them. During this period, presidenti­al aspirants have never seriously debated US policy in the region. They have never made a course correction in its approach towards it. America has rarely called any leader to account for their inadequate policies. This is so for three reasons.

First, the US doesn’t know the region and its peoples. Too many of its policymake­rs see the region through the lens of Israel looking out, instead of the Arab world looking in at Israel. Because of this, it has failed to recognise the centrality of the issue of Palestine to the Arab people. Policymake­rs have either proclaimed the issue dead or made efforts to sideline it, only to be stunned when Palestine erupted in violence and reasserted its centrality in Arab consciousn­ess.

A corollary to this has been America’s refusal to acknowledg­e the consequenc­es of its self-imposed limits on how it deals with the region. Because of domestic political considerat­ions, concern for Israel is the cornerston­e of too many policy decisions made in Washington. Politician­s don’t sanction Israel for its behaviour or for breaking US law. To ensure Israel’s protection, successive administra­tions have insisted on dominating the Middle East peace process, refusing others to partner in decision-making.

And finally, the US hasn’t recognised the impact that its policies have on the trust needed for it to pursue the leadership it insists on, as it seeks to shape the region. What follows is a number of surprises that have confounded American presidents for more than half a century.

Think of the 1973 war and the Arab oil embargo on the Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford administra­tions. Or how Jimmy Carter’s time in office was shaped by the Camp David Accords, followed by the Iranian revolution and the hostage crisis. Ronald Reagan had to contend with Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon, the eight-year Iran-Iraq War, and his administra­tion’s Iran-Contra scandal. The George HW Bush administra­tion woke up to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, took months assembling an internatio­nal coalition to free that country, and then used its stature to convene a peace conference to solve the Palestine-Israel conflict.

That conference failed, as did efforts that preceded it, because the US had tied its hands more than a decade earlier by promising Israel that it would never talk to the Palestine Liberation Organisati­on. So Israel and the PLO surprised Bill Clinton with their own negotiatin­g effort, which was incomplete because of the asymmetry of power between the two entities. Because the US refused to provide balance, the years after the Oslo Accords were up and down with few serious steps towards peace.

The George W Bush years opened with the 9/11 attacks

Since the end of the Vietnam War, every US presidency has been shaped by conflict in the Middle East

and the second Palestinia­n uprising. In both instances, Mr Bush’s responses were flawed. He embarked on two misguided wars in Afghanista­n and Iraq that cost the US lives, treasure, prestige and the capacity to lead.

Barack Obama tried to recoup these losses, but his inability to plan for the withdrawal from Iraq, to challenge Israel on its refusal to pursue peace, and his flounderin­g in the face of the Arab uprisings proved costly.

The only surprises that occurred during the Donald Trump era were his unilateral steps to remove “Occupied Territorie­s” from the Department of State lexicon and to accept Israel’s annexation of “East Jerusalem” and the Golan Heights. This led some Arab states to move to establish ties with Israel in an effort to forestall further moves towards annexation. But Israel, emboldened by its support from Washington, remained intransige­nt.

The US has been down this road too many times and is still being led by policymake­rs who’ve failed in the past, haven’t learnt, and seem determined to fail again.

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Arab Emirates