Third-Party Politics

Since 1948, the United States has had an increasingly influential role in the affairs of the region, which it now dominates. Essentially, it inherited Britain’s Middle East imperial mantle in the 1940s.

Between the 1950s and the 1970s, the Soviet Union rekindled its interest in the region, and it wanted to wrest control of the Arab Middle East from the West for much the same reasons as the West had for controlling it—oil, its strategic location, and the large population base. But without Egypt, it could not do so, as that state had, since the mid-1970s, entered the American zone of influence.

Much as Britain did between 1882 and 1945, the United States con­sistently changed its perceptions and goals in the region. Also, like Britain before it, the United States has no vision for the region. Even now after Iraq’s conquest in March 2003, the United States claims to have an overall strategic view of the region, but that view is limited and misguided. This is probably due to the fact that for both Britain and the United States, there has been a callous disregard of peoples’ interests. During WWI, Britain played on the Arab expectation of independence, while substantially disregarding the populace, except when it suited its imperial purposes. Since the end of WWII, the United States has manipulated Arab leaders often as political vassals, without regard for the system of government that was imposed on people. This should help explain why throughout the Arab world the leaders are mostly pro-American while the masses deeply resent America.

Libya, which was once an Italian colony, passed to American control. Then under its present regime, it subtracted itself from that position, but the United States still expects to regain control of that country.

Iraq was under direct U.S. military occupation and control, and no one can predict the outcome of the clumsy occupation. The Gulf States, including Saudi Arabia, are dependent upon U.S. military protection, but the future of the Saudi monarchy rests uneasy. Egypt andJordan are clearly under U.S. influence, and the former is feeling the strong influence of Islamic nationalism, in light of the growing armed resistance.

Now that Israel is perceived by the peoples of the region as part of the United States’ strategic power, regional hegemony by the United States and Israel looks to them as interchangeable. Israel should therefore look for ways to reconcile itself with the surrounding Arab world. However vital the alliance with a global superpower might be, the power relationship in the region can change, and Israel needs to develop a long-term strategy that dos not rely exclusively on the military and political backing of the United States.

The political standing of countries within the region has also been changing in light of their respective power-relationship to the region’s imperial and neo-imperial suzerains. Egypt, which was once the dominant country within and outside the region, receded in its regional importance when it no longer was at the forefront of Arab nationalism and became a vassal to the United States. Saudi Arabia, which was once so influential with the United States, also receded to a secondary role when it became a suspect ally because of its Wahabi-leaning population, which is moving closer to Islamic nationalism. Paradoxically, the United States’ unbridled support for Israel, and its inability or unwillingness to press its friendly regimes in the region to achieve needed political, social, and economic reforms, is leading to the destabilization of these regimes.

C.