ARE the new voices coming out of Washington correct in saying that the American era in the Middle East is over? Are the last ounces of American regional influence really draining away in the bloody chaos of Iraq, the jagged instability of Palestinians and the possible re-disintegration of Lebanon?
An article by the former Bush aide, Richard Haass, in the influential Foreign Affairs Journal reflects a growing conviction that the world’s most powerful nation has become powerless in the Middle East. It was far more than rhetoric when President Bush categorized Iran as part of the Axis of Evil. He reflected a visceral American dislike of the Tehran regime that was born of the 1979 hostage taking of 42 US diplomats in the revolution that overthrew the US-backed Shah. US anger at this outrage was compounded by the humiliation of the bungled rescue attempt during the Americans’ 444 days as hostages. Yet in destroying both the Taleban and Saddam regimes, Bush removed Iran’s two implacable foes and left Tehran free to pursue a foreign policy that has proved devastating to US initiatives in the region.
In Iraq the Americans have managed only a single achievement, about which hardly surprisingly, they have boasted often - and that is to oversee two referendums and a general election. The Americans came to Iraq talking about “freedom” and “democracy.” Yet for the Palestinians the message has been absolutely the opposite. Imprisoned in the occupied territories, they have no freedom, thanks to the US-backed and US-equipped Israeli military. And when the Palestinians chose a Hamas government in a free and fair democratic election, Bush rejected the outcome. With further double standards, Bush continues to demand Iran give up any nuclear weapons program but refuses to demand the same of Israel that already has atomic bombs. A man can only ultimately be judged by his deeds, not his words. On that basis President Bush’s Middle East policy has been shot through with insincerity. This has been compounded by the grotesque reality that the Iraqi invasion and the subsequent loss of perhaps 655,000 largely Iraqi lives, was launched on two bare-faced lies - that Saddam had WMD and that he supported Al-Qaeda.
A further source of distrust has been the sheer lack of understanding and long-term planning that has underpinned the unflinchingly aggressive Bush Middle East policies. The administration totally ignored warnings from its friends in the region and from its own State Department experts. Bush has sought to impose, by military might, his own, blinkered and ignorant worldview. Now as he stands upon the ruins of his policy, his only remaining option is to try and salvage what he can from his humiliation. But Bush’s personal standing is as nothing against the badly damaged US reputation in the Middle East. Post-9/11 the United States had the support of the world in the war on international terror. Five years on, terror is rampant and Washington has forfeited much world sympathy. How very different it might have been with a wiser man in the Oval Office! How very different it might have been with a man in the Oval Office wise enough to listen to those who knew!
