The United States And The Middle East

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

After World War 2, the United States took over Britain’s job of overseeing the Middle East. The United States tried to avoid conflict while preventing the spread of communism. They successfully stopped the spread of communism, but couldn’t have done much worse trying to prevent conflict and stabilize the Middle East. The United States policy destabilized the Middle East, Iraq in particular, by overthrowing the Hussein regime at a poor time and deepening the anti-Western attitude in the Middle East.

“The United States recognizes the provisional Government as the de facto authority of the new State of Israel.” These are the words of President Harry Truman from a speech he gave shortly after Israel became a recognized nation in 1948. Consequently, the political leaders of the United States have brought America on a rough journey to the current state of foreign policy and relationship with Israel. Since 1948, the United States’ active position in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has seen very little change or progress towards achieving settlement between these two nationalistic states. In the last 65 years, the majority of U.S. presidents repeated mistakes made by their predecessors in office, and this in turn has had little

Since the middle east had rich oil the Soviet Union and western powers fought for territory and influence. The Soviet Union tried to control the countries Iran and Turkey, but the U.S. won them over by giving them military help and financial aid. But the Arab nations betrayed the U.S. trust by helping Israel their enemy. The Soviet Union saw that and saw that as an opportunity to take the Arab countries.

“Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve” (George W. Bush). Bush was referring to Tuesday September 11, 2001. This day is what woke up the sleeping giant that was America and forced America to form into a great country again. Events in the 2000’s such as the signing of Bush Doctrine, creation of homeland security, Google, the successful mapping of genome, Obama becoming the first non-white president, Wikipedia was launched, all helped improve our country. Between politics, american values, foreign affairs/conflicts, popular culture, the economy, and technology/ innovation all make this century worth studying.

Following September 11, 2001, there seemed to be a sense of fear towards Arabs and Muslims in America. Since then, the tension between the United States and the Middle East has escalated. Based on the attention terrorist attacks receive, stereotypes tend to arise toward Muslims. Terrorists can be any ethnicity or religion, but typically jihadist terrorists’ gain the most attention in the media and the press. In America, Arabs, Muslims, and Jihadists tend to all get grouped together, even though they are not synonymous terms (Amble, 2012, pp. 340, 342). Not every Arab is a Muslim and not every Muslim is a terrorist. In fact, only a small portion of Muslims partake in terrorist activities and the Islam religion actually prohibits deliberate murder of unarmed individuals in battle and suicide (Pratt, 2013). If many stereotypes of Muslims seem to be incorrect, then it is crucial that Christians become educated on what Muslims actually believe. Critiques of the Islam faith that the Christian makes cannot be rooted in the actions of a few radicals. Just as certain people do evil things in the name of Christianity, without truly knowing Christ, I believe terrorists do the same. By targeting the aspects of violence in Islam I believe the Christian can close doors to witnessing. Instead, I think there are two core criticisms between the Islam religion and Christianity that can be analyzed to persuade a Muslim, law and logic. These two categories would allow us to meet with Muslims at

When looking at the history between the United States and Latin America, you see many interactions between them, all that aided the relationship that they have today. Despite that the United States and Latin America are in the same part of the world, the beliefs in which they govern may differ. This difference has often been seen playing a major role in the disputes that have occurred in past. The United States and Latin America have faced many social, economical and governing barriers in forming a strong and positive relationship in the early twentieth century, this is due to the differences that the two had between cultures and the constant demand for power. However, the two countries have found ways to meet in the middle of their cultural differences, to form an equally fair relationship.

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.

The cover page of this TIME magazine, an issue of 1979 invoked purely the orientalist idea of the Middle East. It represented the faulty equation of Islam= Muslim= Arab= terrorist or religious fanatics.

The late 1980s and 1990s were host to many economic and political changes. Around the world there were failures and successes centered around key principles. The world was in the midst of reform that led to many changes. In North Africa the islamists, the state’s economy, and the women faced many challenges.

This course aims to educate students regarding the modern (post-1970) trajectory of US foreign policy in regards the Middle East, and how such policy has influenced the Middle East state system. Both in recent history and presently, the US role in the region has been pivotal in shaping the regional system as well as ensuring the stability of the regional status quo. The various interests that drive US foreign policy in the region will be examined.

Between the period of 1948 and 1973 there was quite a bit of animosity and conflict between the Arab world and Israeli’s. This was caused by a struggle for land in the state of what was known as Palestine but to many it is now known as Israel. This conflict in the Middle East caused many wars between Israel and its surrounding Arab states. At the same time both USA and the USSR were trying to spread their ideologies and get a foothold in the Middle East because of strategic position, they would have access to the Indian and Mediterranean Oceans through the Suez Canal. They would also gain a resource advantage of oil as the Middle East is rich in oil. The involvement of these Superpowers was not the initial cause of the conflict it did “add fuel to the fire”. However the USSR and USA did not engage in any of this conflict because they did not partake in any of the wars by sending no troops what so ever so it could be said that they had little if any involvement in the conflict happening in the Middle East.

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”.