Foreign Policy of the United States - Essay Example

?Chapter 2: US Foreign Policy US Policy towards the Middle East before and after 9/11 The foreign policy of the United s is its policy by which United States interrelates and networks with other foreign countries and decides for predetermined standards for communication and interfacing with its allies or any other county regarding the matters of national interest by government or any other related organization, corporation and even including the individual citizens and foreign minorities. The United States of America is a highly influential country in the world and has the power to overwhelm the other countries by interfering into their matters and imposing the U.S. will on them with the idea that America thinks the best for all. These actions are supported by its global reach which is backed by around an economy of $14 trillion which is a giant economy which equals to approximately one-fourth of total world’s GDP; an overpowering set of arsenal of the most deadliest weapon systems with a defense budget of more than $700 billion, which accounts for roughly about 40% of the rest of the world’s military expenditure. The U.S.A’s “Secretary of State” is officially the foreign minister and is in charge of handling all foreign relationships with other countries of the world. Despite the fact that the president possesses vital authority for deciding upon the foreign policy for US, the policy is embedded with certain guidelines and unchangeable fixtures which define the national interest along with certain policies towards other countries, regional blocks and America’s own interests in the affairs of other countries. The policy is altered with respect to certain emerging conditions such as that of 9-11 situation after which the American foreign policy towards the Muslim world, especially the Middle East Block drastically moved towards new paradigms (Rahman, 2002). United States has battled for absolute supremacy since World War II and it has been somewhat successful in its aim. Middle East has been in the eyes of US interests and a part of its foreign policy since number of years. The first epoch of determining and shaping US policy interests in the region initiated after World War II during 1945 till 1973. Basic US interests were to have a free access to oil reserves and build relationships with major countries of the Middle East. As a part of its policy it also included to protect Israel’s regime after the Arab-Israel War of 1948. The second phase of US policy’s were defined in 1973-74 because of the Arab oil embargo of 1973 which caused to a oil price hike and economic recessions in major parts of the world. As a result of this, US had to re-examine its policies and make different problem solving approach to handle the situation. The approaches that were deployed as a part of US foreign policy were to increase the dependence of oil exporting countries by protecting them and increasing the arm sales to those countries. Orientalism was a part of US problem solving approach during that era and further it tried to prevent Soviet Union to take part in affairs of the region since it was a counterpart to US at the time. The Islamic revolution of Iran in 1979 marked the third stage of reshaping the US policies in the Middle East. The revolution was considered as a terrible threat to US interests since it gave rapid rise to anti-Americanism among the Muslim countries and kept the oil prices soaring. This called for a new thinking as the traditional policies of Orientalism were not appreciated. The Orientalism theory was based on Western cooperation with the authoritarian Middle East regimes which were corrupt and rich which sparked a growing feeling of alienation among the minor countries of the Middle East (Sadowsaki, 1993). During the phase, US continually struggled to establish peace among the Arab–Israel Countries and at the same time it aimed to have a steady supply of oil at reasonable prices. The fourth and major phases of US foreign policy were framed after the terrorist attacks of September 11 in 2001. This undermined the security of US as a superpower and an Islamic terrorist organization, Al-Qaeda, was accused for September 11 attacks who were supposed to be residing in different parts of Middle East and Afghanistan. As a result of these events, US policies were again redefined for strategic purposes (Pauly, 2005). Since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, US have pursued a very active foreign policy in Middle East. The promotion of democracy has been the ultimate goal of US since the year 2001. This objective has been pursued at different levels. The first level in the thirst of promoting democracy had been to support the civil societies and reform the state institutions. This has been done through projects like USAID aiming to reduce poverty. But the fundamental step at this level has been the initiative of Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) which started at the end of year 2002. This program formulated a strategy which aimed at encouraging empowerment of women and political freedom in the Middle East (Arab Human Development Report, 2002). Similarly, another project known as Broader Middle East and North Africa which was announced in 2004 endeavored to achieve democracy between G8 and Middle Eastern Countries but spearheaded by American Government. The second level for promoting democracy was aimed to be accomplished through public diplomacy. This has been there prime objective and it has been emphasized a lot of times by the top officials of US. The projects such as the launch of Radio Sawa and Al Hurrah television station which were targeting the younger generation in order to invade their minds so they can adopt Western values and embrace the culture of Westerners (Halab, 2009). Finally, the third level of encouraging democracy was tried to be attained through the role of an interventionist. Invasion of Iraq is a perfect example of how this level of democracy has been achieved. Although, we can argue that the war on Iraq was for the purpose of combating terrorism and reducing the impact of mass destruction due to nuclear weapons, but if we look at it from the other angle we find that democratization was an integral element of the military action taken by US in the Iraq. The US authorities stressed that through occupation they will build a democratic Iraq which will be a natural ally to US and it will serve as an example of a political reform to all the other countries of Middle East. Project for the New American Century and the Ascendancy of the Neo-conservatives The simple terminology of “neo-conservatives” refers to the fact that there already was a conservative movement that prevailed in America. The ‘neo-conservatism’ therefore was the new form of the actual conservative movement of 1930s. The movement was a supporter of independence and thus was against any external adventures to conquer any other independent land. The actual conservative movement of 1930s lost its hold after what happened at the Pearl Harbor Naval Base (Steven, 2009). This ultimately not only gave way to advocate active involvement of America in the World War II but also made Japan an example of hell on earth after the two nuclear bombs were dropped in civilian population, swiping two of the major cities of Japan, hence celebrating a sign of Power by the U.S. over the whole world. The movement got fame after the WWII and implicitly had a political backing to take a stance against Communism as of Soviet Union. As opposed to the conservative movement of 1930s, the neo-conservatives did not possess an intellectual leadership within their own factions to promote any of the political reforms. Currently they are comprised of lawyers, politicians, millionaires and even academicians who share the same objectives of, directly or indirectly, influencing the foreign policy of United States. The aim is to serve not only the unchangeable policies of the US towards the rest of the world but also serve to their goal of new world order which would be led and controlled by the US (Cantori, 1994). The Middle East has always been a critical block to American foreign policy and due to its vested interests. The region compromises of all Muslim countries except for the forcefully imposed regime of Israel (in Palestine) and the forced displacement of Palestinians has not only been a constant reason of war between the natives and powerful occupiers but also with the neighboring Muslim world. This makes it the most unstable, despite being Oil rich, region in the world (Sniegoski, 2008). Although the U.S. foreign policy was designed primarily to leverage its allies and other countries to counter communism and most importantly, Russian Federation in the previously bi-polar world; however, after the fall of the Soviet Union the American policy towards the Middle East led by the Jewish lobby in Congress changed dramatically (Wiarda, 1996). The primary interest of securing the oil reserves, while keeping the Muslim Majority Block under control has been there prime interest. When the middle east countries were pushed into the gulf war by certain lobbies, U.S. had to declare its new policy towards the middles east of the ‘New World Order’, an authoritative pronouncement according to which none of the states have the any authority (or even rightful claim) to control and regulate an exhaustible naturally occurring scarce resources, such as ‘Black Gold’ (Cantori, 1994). The 9/11 incident, still an unproven case against the Muslim world has pushed America in to a never ending war, in which it openly discriminates against and labels the Muslims, as a scapegoat. In its pursuit of Oil, the U.S. has made its closest allies into compromising foreign fellows by its confused and yet biased foreign policy towards the Middle East. The NATO forces in Afghanistan and Iraq are still facing resistance, aggravating the situation day by day. In an attempt to exaggerate and escalation of commitments by the policy makers under the disguise of promoting democracy in the region, US foreign policy has led the country towards a hazardous and politically infamous path. The idea of the U.S. being at the height of its supremacy, having no rival to challenge has perhaps increased its lust to augment its influence on the rest of the world. Its advancements into the technological, military and political supremacy over the other parts of world including the second largest sect of Mankind, the Muslims, is perhaps one of the aspects of its foreign policy after the 9-11. The opinion of the public in the Arab World considers the United States aim for the promotion of democracy in the Middle East as an outright hypocrisy. They reject the possibility of US administration being concerned about democracy for instrumental reasons such as terrorism but they believe that there policy for promotion of democratization is for their own vested interests (Dalacoura, 2005). The unfriendly policy towards the Middle East, might be working well with the current U.S. supremacy over the rest of the world, but U.S.A.’s inclusion into a constant state of war (in Afghanistan & Iraq) have already been hitting the economy severely (Amirahmadi, 1993). And if the policy remains the, the neo-conservatives’ view of securing the interests of U.S. over the whole globe would render the economy without a true ally and it may soon have to surrender the supremacy to another much more peaceful and less threatening regime such as that of the emerging China or even Russia. The Middle Eastern Muslim block is therefore an indispensable asset to the U.S. and it must reform its policy to promote bilateral positivity and not forced diplomacy. Bibliography Amirahmadi, H., 1993. The United States and the Middle East: A Search for New Perspectives. NY: Albany Arab Human Development Report, 2002. Creating opportunities for future generations. New York: United Nations Development Program Cantori L. J., 1994. The Middle East in the New World Order. Gainesville, FL. University Press of Florida. Dalacoura, K., 2005. US democracy promotion in the Arab Middle East since 11 September 2001: a critique. International Affairs. 81 (5), pp.963-979 Halab, Y., 2009. US Foreign Policy in the Middle East: From Crises to Change. US: Ashgate Publishing Limited Pauly, R.J. (2005), US Foreign Policy and the Persian Gulf: Safeguarding American interests through selective multilateralism. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited Rahman, S., 2002. Another New World Order? Multilateralism in the Aftermath of September 11. Harvard International Review. Sadowski, Y., 1993., The new Orientalism and the democracy debate, Middle East Report, pp.15–21. Sniegoski S. J., 2008. The Neoconservative Agenda, War in the Middle East, and the National Interest of Israel. NY: Ihs Press Steven, W. H. & Spanier, J., 2009. American Foreign Policy since World War II. US: CQ Press Wiarda, H. J., 1996. The United States and the Middle East: Continuity and Change in U.S. Foreign and Strategic Policy in the Post-Cold War Era: A Geopolitical Perspective. CT: Greenwood Press. Read More