President Joe Biden gets things backwards in the Middle East
Last week, President Biden traveled to the Middle East, stopping first in Israel before traveling to Saudi Arabia. While the trip was chiefly about mitigating the effects of the ongoing oil and energy crisis, President Biden justified his trip by arguing his visit would help the Middle East in “coming together through diplomacy and cooperation — rather than coming apart through conflict.”
President Biden’s perception of the Middle East, and what United States policy should be in the region, rests on the assumption that the Middle East is more stable, cooperative and secure when the U.S. is more involved. However, this reasoning is backwards. The Middle East does not need America to drive regional cooperation and has actually fared considerably well without it.
About 2,750 American troops are currently deployed to Saudi Arabia, to “provide air and missile defense capabilities and support the operation of United States military aircraft.” Thus, any confrontation or escalation between Saudi Arabia and Iran risks putting American lives needlessly at risk and entangling the United States in peripheral regional conflicts. If Biden’s rationale is protecting American lives and security, pulling U.S. troops out of Saudi
Arabia and its neighbors is paramount.
Under the Trump administration, the U.S. maintained a rigid stance against Iran, with tensions between the U.S. and Iran flaring on more than one occasion: the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA, the drone attack in the Strait of Hormuz, the assassination of Qassem Soleimani, etc. After taking office, the Biden administration swore to break from such an antagonistic position, reenter the JCPOA, and shift towards putting out fires, instead of stoking their flames.
However, the rhetoric emerging immediately following Biden’s trip is dangerously rem
iniscent of these Trumpera policies. In the Jerusalem U.S.-Israel Strategic Partnership Joint Declaration, the United States committed “never to allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon,” vowing “to use all elements of its national power to ensure that outcome.” Later, in an interview, President Biden expanded on this commitment, saying the U.S. saw military force as a “last resort” option to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon — an inflammatory and dangerous assertion. In the same interview, Biden was asked if he was willing to keep the IRGC’s FTO designation “even if that means that it kills the deal,” to which Biden responded, “yes.”
Hard-lining against Iran, instead of pursuing diplomacy, is counterproductive and against U.S. interests. While it is true that the U.S. does not need the JCPOA to succeed in order to safely deter Iran, the U.S. should remain wary of policies and rhetoric that encourage either costly conflict