Developing Economic Initiatives During The United States

The role of the Middle East has been very crucial to the United States, especially after WWII. The U.S. had three strategic goals in the Middle East and consistently followed them throughout various events that unfolded in the region. First, with the emergence of the cold war between the Soviet Union and the U.S., policymakers began to recognize the importance of the Middle East as a strategic area in containing Soviet influence. This also coincides with the U.S. becoming increasingly wary of Arab nationalism and the threat it posed to U.S. influence. Secondly, the emergence of the new Israeli state in 1948 further deepened U.S. policy and involvement in the region while also creating friction between the U.S. and Arab states which were

While the aftermath of World War II is often referred to as one of the primary creators of deep rooted turmoil in the Middle East region, the effects of the Cold War and the United States often over-zealous battle against communism is just as much a contributor if not more. The Arab world and the Middle East region were clearly going through quite an extraordinary period throughout World War II and its conclusion, primarily with the creation of most of the states we recognize today and struggling with the continuation of colonialism. These factors set the stage for the emergence of strong nationalist sentiments and Pan-Arab movements across the Middle East. Unfortunately, and much to the detriment of the region, the leaders of these young

Saudi Arabia and Iran are two countries that sit on opposite sides of the Sunni/Shiite divide, which can be argued as being the most prominent issue the Middle East faces today. Saudi Arabia is predominantly known to be a Sunni state, while Iran is largely inhabited by Shia Muslims. Both countries aspire to be the hegemonic powers of the region. Ethnically, Iran is known to be a Persian land, unlike Saudi Arabia that is known to be in the heart of the Arab world. These two countries are separated by the Arabian Gulf and throughout the twentieth century and up until today, the relationship between the two countries has been notoriously contentious. Within the past few years especially relationships between the two states have been very fragile with Saudi Arabia ending diplomatic ties early in 2016. The two states are strained over many issues of which are, interpretations of Islam, oil export policy and hegemonic regional leadership.

The relationship between the United States and the Middle East has not been the best. This has been as a result of past battles between the U.S and the Middle East. For example the United States led a 34 nation to fight

The United States relationship with Saudi Arabia is one that begun on February 14, 1945 when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt met King Al-Saud at the Great Bitter Lake in the Suez Canal. After World War II the United States became the most influential foreign power in Saudi Arabia. US’s main interest was focused in the direction of the oil industry. Then in 1960 Saudi Arabia was one of the main driving forces in the creation of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). During the Cold War, Saudis favored the United States while the two also continued to but heads over the issue concerning the ever present Israeli-Arab conflict. Americas constant support for Israel has, and will continue to be an issue that brings about confrontation between the Saudis and the United States. Foreign relation ties never were as intense as they were during the Persian Gulf War. Iraq's invasion of Kuwait posed a potential threat to the Saudis provoking the United States to intervene. The Saudis allowed the United States to have access to their bases during this time. Since that time, our troops have remained there which is something that has led to much controversy because many Islamist believe that we our occupying their holy land. This has sparked many extremist to take action, most notably Osama Bin Laden who used this reasoning to justify the horrors of 9/11. Post 9/11 opened a new chapter to US-Saudi

The US foreign policy towards the Middle East can be divided into three major epochs the first during the Cold War. Second after the Cold War till the 9/11 event and the third epoch is after the 9/11. During the Cold War the Containment Policy influenced the United States foreign policy in the Middle East. The three main concerns in the Middle East for the United States were oil, protecting Israel, and containing communism made the United States’ foreign policy in the region defensive, reactive, and pragmatic. The United States sought peace and stability within the Middle East region in order to prevent Middle Eastern countries from taking sides between the two superpowers. Preventing war was essential to Containment Policy. After the end

United States foreign policy with regards to Aramco, drew similar comparisons the dollar diplomacy methods used in Honduras and Nicaragua. By 1933, Saudi Arabia suffered heavily from the global depression. So, when the United States became interested in renting Saudi Land for oil exploitation, the King had no choice but to sign. Therefore, the United States used her vast quantities of capital as a leverage - much like the short-term loans issued in Honduras and Nicaragua - to assist the Saudi government during the Great Depression. However, the United States involvement in the development of Saudi oil counters George Washington’s declaration that the United States should avoid seeking favors (drilling rights for money) from the foreign nations. As the World begins to turn towards a second global conflict, the U.S. foreign policy once again uses the economic might to stabilize the rapidly destabilizing world.

Background: In the midst of the Cold War and the Arab-Israeli conflict, conflict arose over Gamal Abdel Nasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal. This was of particular concern due to Nasser’s increased connection with the Soviet Union, through the Czech Arms agreement and the Aswan Dam. Following Nasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal, Great Britain, France, and Israel invaded Egypt. In facing this crisis, the U.S. had to consider Cold War politics with the Soviet Union, relations with Arab and Israeli nations, and relations with the invading powers

Conflict over energy resources—and the wealth and power they create—has become an increasingly prominent feature for geopolitics particularly in the Middle East . The discovery of oil in the late nineteenth century added a dimension to the region as major outside states powers employed military force to protect their newly acquired interests in the Middle East. The U.S.’s efforts to secure the flow of oil have led to ever increasing involvement in the Middle East region’s political affairs and ongoing power struggles. By the end of the twentieth century, safeguarding the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf had become one of the most important functions of the U.S. military establishment. The close relationship between the United States and the Saudi royal family was formed in the final months of World War II, when U.S. leaders sought to ensure preferential access to Saudi petroleum. The U.S. link with Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region has demonstrated to be greatly beneficial to both parties, yet it has also led to ever deepening U.S. involvement in regional politics.

A transformed Middle East has shaken traditional relationships with former allies. Indeed, there was a time when Washington coordinated effectively with leaders like the monarchs Hussein, Hassan and Abdullah; or Sadat, Mubarak, even Arafat, who could deliver their constituencies and act on the Arab stage. No longer. The rise of Iran, largely as a result of the Arab world’s melt­down and the U.S.­Iran nuclear agreement, has strained relations further. And if America lacks partners on whom it can rely, how in essence can it manage problems effectively, let alone lead to resolve them? A transformed Middle East has shaken traditional relationships with former allies. Indeed, there was a time when Washington coordinated effectively with leaders like the monarchs Hussein, Hassan and Abdullah; or Sadat, Mubarak, even Arafat, who could deliver their constituencies and act on the Arab stage. No longer. The rise of Iran, largely as a result of the Arab world’s melt­down and the U.S.­Iran nuclear agreement, has strained relations further.

The United States’ exchange of protection for oil with the Royal Family lead to terrorism in the Middle East due to the American forces and presence that existed in Saudi Arabia. In the film “Blood and Oil”, the United States’ agenda within the Middle east became more than just protecting the Royal family for Oil, it became that the US was protecting their income of oil. Ronald Reagan states in a clip, “Saudia Arabia provides the bulk of the energy that is needed to turn the wheels of industry in the western world; There’s no way we can stand by and see that taken over by anyone who would shut off that oil”. During the invasion of Iraq in Kuwait, Dick Cheney went to Saudia Arabia to convince King Fahd that the Royal Family and the country

What are the underlying factors, cultural differences, and outside intervention leading up to the current hostilities between Yemen and Saudi Arabia today? To answer some of these fundamental questions, I will use the relevant aspects of the five core ideas about the social conflict which are championed by Louis Kriesberg and Bruce Dayton’s book “Constructive Conflicts.” Kriesberg and Dayton posit that that social conflicts are universal, and can be beneficial; social conflicts are waged with varying destructiveness; social conflicts entail contested social constructions; social conflicts can be transformed, and that social conflicts are dynamic and tend to move through stages.

Saudi Arabia has an economy that is largely dependent on oil, with the government maintaining the biggest control over the country 's significant economic activities. Saudi Arabia owns about 16% of the global oil reserves and is the number one exporter of oil (Saudi Arabia, 2013). In addition, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was instrumental in the formation of the OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) group, which initially comprised Iraq, Venezuela, Iran, Kuwait and Venezuela (Energy indicators, 2004). Currently, the petroleum industry constitutes about 80% of the country 's budgetary incomes; about 40% of the country 's GDP and 87% of Saudi 's export earnings. Agriculture, in addition to petroleum products, has been a major contributor to the kingdom’s economy since 1970s (Saudi Arabia, 2013). The country has been able to produce enough agricultural products for their consumption as well as surplus for exportation to the GCC member countries.

Taking your assigned country (unless you have Turkey, Israel, or Palestine) please explain its importance, or lack thereof, to the United States and its foreign policy in the Middle East. Please discuss the countries relationship with Saudi Arabia. And finally, please discuss any major involvement it has had in the peace process with Israel. If you are assigned to one of these countries, you may select any other country and write about it.

The most relevant work for the question of this thesis is the book of Dr. Nasser M. al-Tamimi—China-Saudi Arabia Relations, 1990-2012 (2014)—which not only discuss China’s Middel East policy towards Saudi but also Saudi’s Eastward strategy in the 21st century. Dr. al-Tamimi’s piece offers a comprehensive look into the Sino-Saudi relationship in the post-Cold War era, where when the Chinese economy finally started booming as well as its energy needs surging under Deng Xiaoping’s economic reform. According to his book, al-Tamini indicates that the mutual relation between the two countries would likely to continue progressively based on the ever growing energy consumption in the East. This view is proceeded from al-Tamimi’s earlier work— ‘China Saudi Arabia relations : economic partnership or strategic alliance?’ which published as discussion paper by the HH Sheikh Nasser Al-Sabah Programme in Durham University. And in both works, the author has suggested the Sino-Saudi connection at this moment would only focuses on trading cooperation but keeps a low profile in political engagement.