New Tactics to Protect US Interests in the Middle East

New Tactics to Protect US Interests in the Middle East

The US ‘s long-term dream is to have a constant flow of oil from the Middle East and to keep Israel well-protected and make sure that citizens are content enough not to attack American interests.

The US has lived its dream for some years now as supporting tyrannical Arab leaders has helped it maintain the status quo in their favor. However, since the uprisings began in early 2011 all that is changing.

In Middle Eastern political lingo, we hear a lot about ‘stability’ but it mainly refers to guaranteeing that American wealth, weapons and political power is retained. In terms of American dealings with Arab countries,insecurity means danger,so it is believed that holding hands with unsavory corrupt regimes, which are willing to support American interests, is better, even if these governments oppress their own people. The price tag for retaining US interests in the Middle East has been the suppression of democracy, which is now threatening the US ‘s reputation throughout the region.

Since the uprisings and the deepening insights that have accompanied them, the US has realized that its former definition of stability is now harming their interests. Time after time the US has found itself on the wrong side of the region’s democratic transitions because it focuses on protecting its own interests.

 The Middle East has emerged from its long-term stagnation and is now a fast-changing region. In this context of spiraling change, the concept of stability is out of place and ineffective. 

The US is so closely aligned with the Middle East and so sure that its national interests are inseparable from it that it involves itself in every event that takes place, instead of following a ‘hands off’ approach and leaving the region to sort itself out.

Being honest about their concern with oil may bring the Arab countries to at least respect the US for being candid. If the US takes one step further and bargains with democratically-chosen governments in the region, it may even win some form of cooperation despite the short-term instability that may well ensue. This new approach by the US would change the way Arab countries deal with America ; money for a commodity delivered, not money for promoting stability for US interests.

As change is now the status-quo of the Middle East, the US may, in fact, achieve long-term stability by allowing civilians a free rein to deal with the US in terms of business ventures rather than America exercising brute force either directly – by military intervention – or indirectly, by supporting dictators who busy themselves suppressing dissent for the sake of American interests.