The Middle East State System

The wars of the Middle East over the past one hundred year are very complicated. When the Ottoman Empire chooses the losing side in WWI, then France and Britain started drawing new borders to the region as a result of the Sykes Picot agreement. After WWII, the United States intervened its force to change the governments of countries in the Middle East. Now, the same behaviors have been continued by the major powers in the world for their own interests, as stated by Jeffrey D. Sachs, the special advisor to the Secretary General of the United Nations on the Millennium development

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

For the United States, the Gulf region remains one of the most geo-strategically important locations in the world for diplomatic, intelligence cooperation, and business opportunities such as hydrocarbons and arms. This strategic cooperation has provided the region some stability, particularly with the rise of Iran and the Shi’a crescent and the chaotic outcome of the war in Iraq. The council members have also relied on the United State to fend off some of the domestic challenges to the existing regimes that are both internally and regionally rooted.

American foreign policy relates to what is done in foreign countries by the United States of America. The foreign policies include controlling of the governments of foreign countries or setting some rules in those countries. The foreign policy of America has always been changing all through the US existence. The changes have stemmed from the dynamics of exogenous and substantial influences of watershed up to the international system and also the effects and changes of endogenous inside the government of the United States. Outstanding assertions like the policies of Monroe, intercontinental encounters such as the Second World War, War of the Spanish and Americans, and the cold war and also conflicts that were termed as local including the Korean War and the Vietnam War considerably shaped the American foreign policy (Kissinger et al., 1969).

Recently, and especially since the 1990s, a popular conception of the world is that the age of empires and superpowers is waning, rapidly being replaced by a kind of global community made up of interdependent states and deeply connected through economics and technology. In this view, the United States' role following the Cold War is one of almost benign preeminence, in which it seeks to spread liberal democracy through economic globalization, and, failing that, military intervention. Even then, however, this military intervention is framed as part of a globalizing process, rather than any kind of unilateral imperialist endeavor. However, examining the history of the United States since nearly its inception all the way up to today reveals that nothing could be farther from the truth. The United States is an empire in the truest sense of the word, expanding its control through military force with seemingly no end other than its own enrichment. The United States' misadventure in Iraq puts the lie to the notion that US economic and military action is geared towards any kind of global progression towards liberal democracy, and forces one to re-imagine the United States' role in contemporary global affairs by recognizing the way in which it has attempted to secure its own hegemony by crippling any potential threats.

After U.S. had an isolationist foreign policy for a long time, U.S. has shifted its power from isolationism to the internationalism. In international relations, united states is the dominate force, which has the biggest military arsenal in the world. However, the position on how the United States should deal with terror is not only relay on the preeminent power that American security has. It also depends on the policymaker. According to James N. Rosenau, the foreign policy can be influenced by five potential resources(Michael Cox &Doug Stokes p6). There are external government, social environments, government structure, bureaucratic roles and personalities of individuals. The directions in U.S. foreign policy moves differently because

Baxter, K. and Akbarzadeh, Shahram, _US foreign policy in the Middle East_, Routledge, London, 2008.

Moreover, Brzezinski stated that “Now a non-Eurasian power is preeminent in Eurasia—and America’s global primacy is directly dependent on how long and how effectively its preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained”(Brzezinski, 1997). Aside from destabilizing the USSR to seek the hegemony, the carter admission also provided financial and military aid to the Mujahedin in order to secure a global dominant in Eurasia as a means of achieving what they considered to be an essential long-term objective of the United States. What the elite policymakers did is merely use military force to defend its national interests and seek the balance of power in the Persian Gulf region instead of pursing the human rights and equality as they justified themselves in the liberalism

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.

After December 26 1991, when the Soviet Union fell, the bipolarity of the international system was effaced. In the post- Cold War era, the United States faced the problem, without a defined enemy, to adopt a new foreign policy. To begin to analyze the political foreign policy of the United States, one must first understand the international system. According to Political Realism, a theory of international thought, the state is the key unit within the acts within the system. These states act according to their key norms, which are allowed by the system. However, these sates are also affected the domestic and external factors which control how they act. The domestic factors include political culture, their economic system, the leadership

Middle East considers one of the most studied areas in the world due to its rich history of politics, social, economic, and its culture and civilization. Its borders are still arguable geographically, generally in the west it starts from morocco until Iran in the east, however, many scholars don’t agree on including Turkey either as a Middle Eastern or as a European country (Milton-Edwards, 2006. P: 4). The origin of the name was invented by the colonies as a necessity to describe the place geographically, which was the era of bringing “Middle East” the language of academic writings and political scientists. Changes, innovations, and new ideologies create gaps between the transformations of any perspectives to a different

Looking at the last 6 months, what issues have defined our foreign policy in the Middle East. This should be an action-based assessment. What interests do these policy points serve and why?

the conflict in the middle east between 1948-1973 was not purely fuelled by the interest and concerns of the superpowers but rather of a series of conflictual incidents, aswell as the main wars that took place from the years from 1948-1967 such as the: 1948 War, The Six Day War of 1967 and the Yom Kippur war of 1973. But although the conflict was not fuelled by the superpowers, the influence of the superpowers and the reach of the superpowers into the Middle East was evident in the years both prior and following 1978. But even despite the influence and interests of the superpowers between and including 1948-1967 being undeniably evident, the extent of this influence cannot be said to have “fuelled the conflict”.