At the Manama Dialogue, where world leaders gathered in Bahrain with strategists, military officers, defense officials, and industry leaders, the talk centered on two overriding themes: Iran and the new direction of American foreign policy.
Attending the Manama Dialogue for the second year, I was left with no doubt that the whole world was anxiously waiting to see what next steps America will take. At both the open forum, and the discreet discussions between senior officials being held on the margins, all ultimately returned to the overriding question of how Donald Trump’s administration will handle Iran.
More broadly, the dialogue brought into focus the question of whether America’s commitment to its Arab allies will be redoubled or reneged.
During the opening panel, the retired US Army general and potential Cabinet pick in the Trump administration, David Petraeus, fittingly described five main points on how US foreign policy could take shape as the Obama administration draws to a close:
1) Refocusing on “ungoverned spaces” that have become the crucible in which extremists are able to exploit vacuums of governance. From North Africa to Central Asia, Petraeus reiterated that it was not a question of whether allowing ungoverned spaces would lead to proliferation of global extremism, but a matter of when. Allowing ungoverned spaces to fester will ultimately backfire.
2) Effects of extremists cannot be contained. Watching a problem and hoping that it goes away can no longer be a workable policy. The number of refugees entering Europe is a stark reminder of that. Indeed, as Petraeus mentioned this point, I was instantly reminded of how for three years the Obama administration obstinately clung to an official policy of “containment” in Syria, claiming that the spillover could be contained within Syria’s border.
3) US leadership now more than ever is paramount and vital. The reason is simple: Only the US has the quantity and quality of military assets required to defeat extremists. Only the US can muster a global “armada” of unmanned aerial vehicles, armed drones, and an unmatched ability to fuse intelligence across multiple platforms quickly and with lethal force. But most importantly, none of these strategic assets would be sufficient if the US is not able to work alongside a coalition of Islamic countries. Petraeus raised an important point here: The fight against extremists today is more of a clash within a civilization within the Muslim world than a clash between civilizations — that is, the West versus the Islamic world. Several experienced US security chiefs agreed that Muslim countries have been a key factor in America’s successes in the fight on terror.
4) If the United States can’t just rely on military hardware to fight extremists, it will need a policy that enables a comprehensive campaign with a strong civil-military component. This worked in Iraq for Petraeus. Local partners succeeded in defeating extremists when they were enabled with US support on the political, civil developmental, and military fronts as a whole package.
5) The final lesson raised by Petraeus was that the ongoing struggle will be a generational one. It will last beyond a decade. Therefore the strategy has to be sustainable. The US and its allies must carefully weigh the costs that will ensue.
Tackling Iran’s malign activities
None of this of course will be possible without a detailed plan that addresses the challenge of Iranian-backed militias. For Petraeus, the defeat of Daesh is only a matter of time. But if there is no accompanying plan to tackle Iranian malign activities and counter it, then the tactical military defeat of Daesh will not be long lived. Only if the US strengthens its cooperation with GCC states, can the Iranian Al-Quds Force be prevented from achieving Iran’s hegemonic aims.
During his two years in Mosul as the commanding general of the 101st Airborne Division, Petraeus had to learn the complex terrain and embed himself with the local culture and build trust with allies. He understands that the real battle lies ahead after the smoke has cleared from the battlefield. Governance, inclusivity, and responsive representation for local communities are what sustains battlefield victories against extremists.
It is a lesson that the Trump administration will hopefully take to heart when crafting its Syria policy. For Petraeus, his policy views on this issue are based on an operational imperative: Lasting peace cannot be imposed in Syria by a man such as Bashar Assad who has engendered so much misery and hate.
Core American and Western interests are at stake here. Prince Turki bin Faisal, sitting next to Petraeus, reminded the audience that Iran’s ambitions are global and the scope of their interference is worldwide. In other words, Iran is not just an Arab problem.
Whether we like it or not, whether Obama wanted it or not, and whether the Trump administration is ready to come to terms with this new landscape, one thing was clear at the Manama Dialogue: The Western and Muslim worlds are more and more inexorably tied together.
• Oubai Shahbandar is a former Department of Defense senior adviser and currently a strategic communications consultant specializing in Middle Eastern and Gulf Affairs.
Attending the Manama Dialogue for the second year, I was left with no doubt that the whole world was anxiously waiting to see what next steps America will take. At both the open forum, and the discreet discussions between senior officials being held on the margins, all ultimately returned to the overriding question of how Donald Trump’s administration will handle Iran.
More broadly, the dialogue brought into focus the question of whether America’s commitment to its Arab allies will be redoubled or reneged.
During the opening panel, the retired US Army general and potential Cabinet pick in the Trump administration, David Petraeus, fittingly described five main points on how US foreign policy could take shape as the Obama administration draws to a close:
1) Refocusing on “ungoverned spaces” that have become the crucible in which extremists are able to exploit vacuums of governance. From North Africa to Central Asia, Petraeus reiterated that it was not a question of whether allowing ungoverned spaces would lead to proliferation of global extremism, but a matter of when. Allowing ungoverned spaces to fester will ultimately backfire.
2) Effects of extremists cannot be contained. Watching a problem and hoping that it goes away can no longer be a workable policy. The number of refugees entering Europe is a stark reminder of that. Indeed, as Petraeus mentioned this point, I was instantly reminded of how for three years the Obama administration obstinately clung to an official policy of “containment” in Syria, claiming that the spillover could be contained within Syria’s border.
3) US leadership now more than ever is paramount and vital. The reason is simple: Only the US has the quantity and quality of military assets required to defeat extremists. Only the US can muster a global “armada” of unmanned aerial vehicles, armed drones, and an unmatched ability to fuse intelligence across multiple platforms quickly and with lethal force. But most importantly, none of these strategic assets would be sufficient if the US is not able to work alongside a coalition of Islamic countries. Petraeus raised an important point here: The fight against extremists today is more of a clash within a civilization within the Muslim world than a clash between civilizations — that is, the West versus the Islamic world. Several experienced US security chiefs agreed that Muslim countries have been a key factor in America’s successes in the fight on terror.
4) If the United States can’t just rely on military hardware to fight extremists, it will need a policy that enables a comprehensive campaign with a strong civil-military component. This worked in Iraq for Petraeus. Local partners succeeded in defeating extremists when they were enabled with US support on the political, civil developmental, and military fronts as a whole package.
5) The final lesson raised by Petraeus was that the ongoing struggle will be a generational one. It will last beyond a decade. Therefore the strategy has to be sustainable. The US and its allies must carefully weigh the costs that will ensue.
Tackling Iran’s malign activities
None of this of course will be possible without a detailed plan that addresses the challenge of Iranian-backed militias. For Petraeus, the defeat of Daesh is only a matter of time. But if there is no accompanying plan to tackle Iranian malign activities and counter it, then the tactical military defeat of Daesh will not be long lived. Only if the US strengthens its cooperation with GCC states, can the Iranian Al-Quds Force be prevented from achieving Iran’s hegemonic aims.
During his two years in Mosul as the commanding general of the 101st Airborne Division, Petraeus had to learn the complex terrain and embed himself with the local culture and build trust with allies. He understands that the real battle lies ahead after the smoke has cleared from the battlefield. Governance, inclusivity, and responsive representation for local communities are what sustains battlefield victories against extremists.
It is a lesson that the Trump administration will hopefully take to heart when crafting its Syria policy. For Petraeus, his policy views on this issue are based on an operational imperative: Lasting peace cannot be imposed in Syria by a man such as Bashar Assad who has engendered so much misery and hate.
Core American and Western interests are at stake here. Prince Turki bin Faisal, sitting next to Petraeus, reminded the audience that Iran’s ambitions are global and the scope of their interference is worldwide. In other words, Iran is not just an Arab problem.
Whether we like it or not, whether Obama wanted it or not, and whether the Trump administration is ready to come to terms with this new landscape, one thing was clear at the Manama Dialogue: The Western and Muslim worlds are more and more inexorably tied together.
• Oubai Shahbandar is a former Department of Defense senior adviser and currently a strategic communications consultant specializing in Middle Eastern and Gulf Affairs.
