‘Nothing but trouble’
Entire Mideast melted down at the same time, but U.S. not at fault, experts say
As the list of Middle East countries collapsing into civil war lengthens, scholars predict the bloodshed could continue for years, if not decades, drawing increasing amounts of western military, humanitarian and economic resources into the oil-rich region.
Aaron David Miller, a Middle East expert at the Wilson Center and former U.S. State Department official, describes the future of the Middle East in three simple words: “Nothing but trouble.”
“I mean rarely does an entire region of the world melt down roughly at the same time, with more moving parts all running in the wrong direction,” he said. “It’s going to get worse before it gets worse.”
The region seems to be a perfect storm of merging forces. Added to the religious and sectarian strife is the prospect Iran could develop nuclear weapons, which could ignite a nuclear race throughout the Arab world. This is despite the seeming agreement reached Friday after prolonged negotiations in Lausanne.
While experts say a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian standoff could have a positive effect beyond the two sides, it is by no means central to the troubles in the region.
Nor do they blame the U.S. While they agree its militarism has not been helpful, they do not believe U.S. intervention bears any real responsibility for what one described as “this very, very dark period.”
“We haven’t helped matters but if I had to account for the percentage of responsibility for this broken, angry, dysfunctional region it’s 90% them and 10% us,” Mr. Miller said.
If the Arab Spring of 2011 revealed anything it was the fragility of Mideast nations, he said. The region was a mess before 2011. Now it is far worse and the future promises more of the same.
No Arab state with the possible exception of tiny Tunisia has the basic criteria for “even thinking positively about the future,” he said.
These include leaders who can rise above sectarian and ethnic affiliations for the good of the nation, institutions that are transparent and accountable to the populace, and mechanisms of debate that avoid boiling over into violence or mass demonstrations when critical issues are discussed.
Primarily because of oil’s importance to the global economy, U.S. involvement will remain and could even expand, says William Inboden, a former George W. Bush national security adviser, now a teacher at the University of Texas.
U. S. President Barack Obama’s policy of disengagement is widely viewed as a failure, he believes. Change is needed.
“I actually think we will see the United States become much more re-engaged in the region again,” he said.
“It’s driven by two things. Thus far, the hands-off posture doesn’t seem to be working too well. Also whoever becomes president [in 2016], both sides have already signalled that they are going to be much more active in the Mideast.”
Prof. Inboden argues the U.S. presence ultimately has been “more a force for good and stability than for instability.”
“Would you say the region would be better off with Saddam Hussein still in power?,” he asked. “He had invaded two of his neighbouring countries and threatened to invade a third. He was a very destabilizing, malicious presence in the region.”
The Middle East has been an incubator of global and regional power struggles, he said. Years after the Cold War ended, the West still vies with Russia for allies in the region. Then, there are the struggles among Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt. And, finally, there are the religious conflicts between Sunnis and Shiites and the tribalism that defines the social and political structures of much of Arabia.
“There are no easy answers,” Prof. Inboden said. “As I tell my students, the art of foreign policy making is not choosing between a good and bad choice, it’s choosing between multiple bad choices or a bad choice and a really bad choice.”
Still, making predictions in the Middle East “is a fool’s errand because we almost always get it wrong.”
Amy Hawthorne, a Mideast specialist at the Atlantic Coun-
We will see the United States become much more re-engaged
cil, a Washington think-tank, is more optimistic.
The 2011 uprisings expressed many young Arabs’ deep frustration with authoritarian rule. This demographic comprises the majority of Arab populations, she noted.
While their hopes for a more liberal society, a global economy and more open, accountable and inclusive government systems have been dashed, they have not vanished.
“If you see how hard some of the [Persian] Gulf countries are pushing to try to make sure that the 2011 uprising never happens again, that tells you they know what’s beneath the surface. They know what’s coming,” she said.
Yet, she notes, that same demographic of young Arabs has produced the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham.
“Because what happened in 2011 was so profound and such a shock to the system, even though these uprisings have opened up the gates of hell in many countries, that moment in time can’t be erased. It’s in people’s consciousness and they are not going to give up,” she said.