Last month’s meeting in Riyadh between US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov sparked a vital discourse on the future of American foreign policy, particularly in relation to the conflict in Ukraine.
The talks underscored the urgent need for diplomatic solutions that prioritize peace over confrontation. While some analysts caution that hasty peace agreements risk undermining longstanding principles against territorial expansion through force, others argue that the US must recalibrate its strategies to respond effectively to a rapidly changing global environment.
Historically, the US has upheld the principle that acquiring territory through force is illegitimate, a belief enshrined in the UN Charter created after the Second World War. However, inconsistencies in the application of this principle have raised significant concerns about its universal relevance. The plight of the Palestinian people and the experiences of Iraqis and Afghans expose a stark contrast between American rhetoric and actual policy, leading to questions about whether US foreign policy genuinely reflects its declared values.
The current trajectory of US foreign policy indicates a decline in global influence, as traditional grand strategies become less effective amid the rise of new powers and shifting alliances. Although the US retains a formidable military presence and a significant role in international institutions, an impending financial crisis threatens to reduce funding for military and diplomatic initiatives, potentially leading to grave long-term consequences. This scenario raises urgent questions about the US’s ability to project power on the global stage, and whether it must adopt a more pragmatic approach.
The stakes are incredibly high, not just for Americans but also for citizens worldwide. The Middle East remains a volatile and strategically significant region, and US policies here will have far-reaching repercussions. As evidenced by the wars in the region, misguided US policies can inflict severe damage on both American interests and the lives of countless individuals. Therefore, it is imperative to examine the driving forces behind US policy in the Middle East and determine its future direction.
The current state of many Arab nations, often labeled failed states because of ineffective leadership, further complicates the geopolitical landscape.
Dr. Turki Faisal Al-Rasheed
A significant factor is the political influence of the Israel lobby. In their influential work, “The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy,” John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt argue that this lobby has played a pivotal role in shaping American policy on the Israeli Palestinian conflict and was instrumental in facilitating the controversial invasion of Iraq. Critics contend that such policies may not only diverge from US national interests but may also undermine Israel’s long-term security.
Considering these challenges, American strategy should pivot toward maximizing opportunities rather than relying on outdated balance-of-power paradigms. This pragmatic approach should prioritize critical foreign policy areas while discarding obsolete narratives. The enduring rivalry between the US and Russia has historically benefited a select few, with the military industrial complex thriving on conflict. This dynamic often overlooks the aspirations of many Arab nations, who face challenges stemming from Israel’s security concerns and unwavering US support for Israel.
The costly war in Iraq was a stark reminder of the human and financial toll of misaligned policies, claiming American lives and inflicting immense suffering on countless Iraqi civilians. The current state of many Arab nations, often labeled as failed states because of ineffective leadership, further complicates the geopolitical landscape. The rise of populism and nationalism adds an additional layer of uncertainty. In this context, it is essential for Saudi Arabia to enhance its commitment to diplomacy and sustainable development, addressing the root causes of conflict to foster collaboration and stability. While the US can sustain flawed policies for an extended period, it cannot afford to ignore reality indefinitely.
For decades, the “linkage theory” has dominated discussion of Middle Eastern geopolitics, positing that resolving the Arab Israeli conflict is essential for progress. Today, Israel plays a central role in a region largely shaped by American interests. The decision to prioritize Israeli security interests above all else, despite good intentions, has distorted American policy. While Israel is the region’s only established democracy, its resistance to democratic reforms in the broader Middle East complicates the situation.
The rationale behind Israel’s position is clear: Arab populations tend to harbor anti-Israel sentiments. If allowed to vote freely, they are likely to elect leaders who reflect these views, leading to governments that prioritize Palestinian rights and statehood. Conversely, many Arab regimes have sought to suppress public dissent, aiming to maintain stability at the cost of democratic engagement. This dynamic creates a troubling dichotomy: while a quiet status quo may be preferable for Israel, it raises significant ethical questions.
While stability suggests consistency and predictability, quiet can be deceptive, masking underlying tensions that may erupt into conflict.
Dr. Turki Faisal Al-Rasheed
This preference for authoritarian stability has led to tensions with the US. Proponents of authoritarian regimes argue that democratization would result in the election of undesirable leaders. However, the promise of authoritarian stability is often an illusion. These regimes may appear stable until they collapse. Michael McFaul, former US ambassador to Russia, has astutely noted: “The longer a democratic regime survives, the less likely it will collapse. The longer an autocracy survives, the more likely it will collapse.”
Unfortunately, the Biden administration, like its predecessors, conflated quiet with stability. While stability suggests consistency and predictability, quiet can be deceptive, masking underlying tensions that may erupt into conflict. The status quo in the Middle East often seems untenable, and recognizing this reality is essential for the future of US foreign policy.
In analyzing recent developments, it appears that US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin are pursuing a rapprochement aimed at enhancing dialogue and fostering economic cooperation between their nations. Both leaders recognize Europe as a promising arena for trade and collaboration that could benefit all parties, rather than a battleground for conflict and narrow interests. However, achieving this vision is fraught with challenges from various stakeholders, including those who profit from war and instability, as well as interests within the military-industrial complex. Balancing these competing forces will be crucial to realizing their ambitions for mutual economic growth.
The Trump administration’s proposed approach could be a unifying framework for achieving peace and prosperity in the Middle East. By prioritizing diplomacy over conflict and promoting collaborative solutions, the US can move away from conflict-driven policies that serve narrow interests. Saudi Arabia is uniquely positioned to play a pivotal role in this transformation, offering an opportunity for the US to embrace a more constructive approach to foreign policy.
Rethinking American foreign policy in the Middle East necessitates a commitment to diplomacy, sustainability, and the acknowledgment of the aspirations of all peoples in the region. By fostering collaboration and addressing the root causes of conflict, the US can contribute to a more peaceful and prosperous future for both it and the people of the Middle East. The time for change is now, and the opportunity for a transformative approach to foreign policy is within reach.
* Dr. Turki Faisal Al-Rasheed is an adjunct professor at the University of Arizona’s College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, in the Department of Biosystems Engineering. He is the author of “Agricultural Development Strategies: The Saudi Experience.” X: @TurkiFRasheed
Leave a Reply