Juan Cole's 2005 Iraq and Middle East review - overall, not a lot has changed
one of the things i both hate and love about the end of the year is looking back... hate it because i would much rather look forward... love it because it's a good opportunity to take stock and reflect...
Tweet
The Middle East and America in 2005: How the Region Has ChangedSubmit To Propeller
The Bush administration has several major policy goals in the Middle East, which are often self-contradictory. They include:
1. Fighting terrorism emanating from the region, which might menace the US or its major allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
2. Ensuring the security of petroleum production in the Oil Gulf, which contains 2/3s of the world's proven reserves.
3. Reestablishing order in Afghanistan and ensuring that the Taliban and al-Qaeda cannot again use it as a base for Muslim radicalism.
4. Reestablishing order in Iraq and ensuring a government and system there favorable to US interests.
5. Weakening or overthrowing the governments of Syria and Iran, primarily because they are viewed as threats to Israel. As part of weakening Syria, the US applied enormous pressure to get its remaining troops out of Lebanon.
6. Pushing for democratization in the "Greater Middle East," even at the risk of alienating long-time US friends such as Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak.
Some parts of the Bush administration are more committed to some of these goals than to others, and huge foodfights seem to be taking place behind the scenes over what priority to give them each or how useful some of them are to US interests. The Neoconservatives, for instance, are very interested in shaping Iraq, but seem much less interested in Afghanistan. The State Department seems generally very nervous about the Iraq misadventure and not very enthusiastic about democratization.
The major developments in the region of 2005 have been momentous, but what is striking is how little the over-all dynamics have changed.
Tweet