Feature
Achieving the Impossible
Toward a coherent policy on Middle East unrest.
(Editor’s note: This is an updated version of the article that appears in our May 2011 issue.)
President Barack Obama’s response to the spread of unrest across the Middle East has been an unpredictable combination of neutrality (Tunisia), reluctant involvement (Egypt), and force (Libya). Even after his speech to the nation on March 28, the president has yet to formulate a policy that explains his actions.
America needs a guiding philosophy. Indeed, Washington’s approach to the Mideast uprisings should echo the Reagan Doctrine of the early 1980s, which served as a road map for America’s plan both to roll back the influence of Communism in the Third World and to exploit opportunities to expand the reach of capitalism and democracy.
Similarly, the U.S. approach should look for ways to roll back the ideology of radical Islam, while occasionally seizing opportunities to spread our values. There can be no question that we are at war with the ideology that propelled Iranian militants to attack our embassy in Tehran in 1979. A variant of that same ideology drove 19 hijackers from al Qaeda to fly planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon in 2001.
If a country supports this ideology, embraced by both Shi’ites and Sunnis in their own way, we have little to lose by backing the protest movements that seek regime change. There are two regimes that currently fit this description: Iran and Syria.
In Iran, the world may yet witness a repeat of the demonstrations that erupted in the aftermath of the rigged elections of June 12, 2009. The prospect of another four years under Mahmoud Ahmadinejad drew hundreds of thousands of protesters into the streets. Inexplicably, President Obama did little to support the nascent Green Movement, emboldening the Iranian regime to mount a brutal crackdown. Now, after nearly two years of dormancy, Iranians have reportedly drawn courage from other protests across the region, and the country shows hints of a new revolution. Obama, for his part, must throw America’s full support behind these brave souls-with rhetoric, finances, technology, or even military assistance.
Iran, which the State Department has listed as a state sponsor of terrorism since 1984, is pursuing an illicit nuclear weapons program and simultaneously supporting Hezbollah, Hamas, the Taliban, and even al Qaeda. It’s hard to imagine a regime worse than the one currently in power. Consequently, the United States has little to lose by supporting its downfall.
The full-blown protests that erupted in Syria in March afford Washington a similar opportunity. The United States has listed Syria as a state sponsor of terrorism since 1979. It supports Hamas and Hezbollah, and has also sent fighters into Iraq to attack U.S. forces. The regime in Damascus has long been Iran’s partner in crime around the region.
For years, the Syrian government’s brutality has deterred would-be dissenters. Amidst a Muslim Brotherhood uprising in 1982, President Hafez al-Assad slaughtered some 20,000 people (a conservative estimate) in Hama, Syria’s fourth-largest city.
With the memory of Hama lingering, it came as no surprise that the Syrian people remained on the sidelines as protest after protest rocked the Middle East in January and February. But after weeks of poking and prodding the regime to test its response, demonstrators took to the streets in the southern city of Daraa on March 18. Though the regime cracked down and killed four demonstrators, thousands returned the next day. They torched buildings and tore down posters of President Bashar al-Assad.
The protests now show no signs of abating. The regime has offered cosmetic reforms, but the people have not gone home. This is an opportunity. Indeed, if Assad falls, it’s hard to imagine a regime worse than his.
While the specifics of how America can support the downfall of these regimes require additional thought, there should be little doubt that action is justified. Similarly, we should not hesitate when it comes to preventing U.S. allies from succumbing to our enemies.
A CASE IN POINT is the tiny Persian Gulf island nation of Bahrain. As it has for decades, the majority Shi’ite population-accounting for about 70 percent of the kingdom’s 1,000,000 subjects-demands that the government respect its rights. Demonstrations that tentatively began with calls for greater representation have evolved into an unabashed campaign to bring down King Hamad bin Khalifa. The shift came in mid-February, after Bahraini forces fired on peaceful protesters in Manama.
Bahrainis unquestionably deserve better. However, Iran has penetrated Shi’ite society there, and could exploit the unrest. If a Shi’ite government gains power in Bahrain, even via democratic vote, it could become an Iranian proxy. This would be a loss for America. First, while it is far from a liberal democracy, Bahrain has been a valued ally. Specifically, it provides a home to our Navy’s 5th Fleet. It also serves as a geographical buffer for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Iran’s regional nemesis, on the Persian Gulf. Both are reasons to prevent Hamad’s overthrow.
Another friendly autocrat under duress is Jordan’s King Abdullah II. The Islamic Action Front, Jordan’s arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, has mounted an increasingly vociferous protest movement against the regime that has forced the young monarch to make political concessions for greater representation. On the surface, this is a good thing. However, it likely means the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, which has had strong showings at the polls in the past. The rise of the Brotherhood could bring an end to Jordan’s peace agreement with Israel, challenge existing trade agreements with the United States, and potentially herald the rise of Sharia law in a country where secularism has prevailed for decades.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (11) | Leave a comment
More Articles From Feature
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/05/16/achieving-the-impossible
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Confessions of a Soft-Drinking Newspaperman
- Gerry Ford at 100
- Way Beyond the Lemonade Stand
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Dee See| 5.16.11 @ 6:39AM
"We are using MASSIVE third world
(largely muslim) immigration to destroy
British culture once and for all ---FOREVER."
-TONY BLAIR
(Daily Mail cited by ALAN WATT)
"Gordon Brown has himself admitted
the borders were thrown wide open to
'humiliate the native right'.
Understand, multi-culturalism means
the morals and order of an old asian
treaty port. Multi-culturalism is being
used as it always has been used, by the
globalist elite to standardize and destroy
REAL culture all the way around."
-ALAN WATT
And likewise with the franchise slumming
of the Middle East.
Blair, Brown-----------Clinton, Bush, Obama are ALLLLLL 'on board'.
'The agenda' of the capstone creeps rules.
DO WAKE UP
Alan Brooks| 5.20.11 @ 11:52PM
Where is that great Near East expert Tim*/ Clint?
Pecos Pete| 5.16.11 @ 7:40AM
"... the president has yet to formulate a policy that explains his actions." Yes indeed. But King O keeps on looking pretty whether it be foreign or domestic policy. Some people really like him on Oprah, or SNL. The teleprompter is his adviser.
Golf and basketball are his best policies. What's his policy for the Texas fires? Or the Miss River floods? How's that Libya thing working out as a policy?
old white guy| 5.16.11 @ 9:53AM
islam. the world is at war with islam. mohammed said it was ok to conquer by the sword or by immigration. we are losing. too bad the west is unable to see the value of their religion or their culture. the middle east will soon be in total termoil and israel will be at war. what the hell will the u.s. do? i'm guessing they will sit on their hands.
C Smith| 5.16.11 @ 10:52AM
“No,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton bluntly stated when asked on “Face the Nation” if the U.S. would intervene in Syrian unrest as in Libya. She defended her position by saying that the situations in Syria and Libya are respectively "unique." Yes, each are unique, but not for reasons mentioned:
Syria's human rights record is among the worst according to Human Rights Watch. Syrian secret police detain, torture, and are suspect in the disappearance of an estimated 17,000 political prisoners. Libya, by comparison, is not even in the ball park.
Syria, according to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), supports the following terrorist organizations: Hezbollah, the Iraqi insurgency, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Libya of course is culpable for Lockerbie, but even here Gaddafi personal sanction on the matter is debatable.
Iran and Syria maintain a mutual defense agreement, while Iran and Libya are enemies with the former encouraging the West to arm their anarchist allies.
Syria possesses weapons of mass destruction (chemical and biological) and the capability to deliver them according to U.S.defense and intelligence reports. However, a September 2007 Israeli air strike is generally credited with putting Syria's nuclear program on hold. Libya, in stark contrast, has complied with the "world community," and what was her reward, "decimation":
"On December 19, 2003, Libya announced it would dismantle its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ballistic missile programs. Since then, U.S., British, and international officials have inspected and removed or destroyed key components of those programs, and Libya has provided valuable information, particularly about foreign suppliers. Libya’s WMD disarmament is a critical step towards reintegration into the world community.... " (Sharon A. Squassoni and Andrew Feickert (Specialists in National Defense Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division), CRS Report for Congress, Disarming Libya: Weapons of Mass Destruction, September 22, 2006).
Clinton's unsubstantiated preference of Syria over Libya is not an error in judgment, but rather something more sinister:
Frank Gaffney, a columnist at the Washington Times and unlike the media, recently made the obvious connection in an analysis titled “The Gadhafi Precedent.” Gaffney indicates that the hostilities initiated against Libya might soon be used to “justify and threaten the use of U.S. military forces against an American ally: Israel.” Actually, Gaffney was too restrained in his analysis. The coalition's assault on Libya was a test run or perhaps a dress rehearsal of the "Expedient for Jerusalem":
Palestinian preparations for the opportune moment to initiate anarchy in Israel are complete, pending Secretary Clinton's affirmation of the Gadhafi Precedent. However, the situations in Libya and Israel are respectively "unique". Secretary Clinton and her coalition are unaware "the LORD hath chosen" Israel (cf. Deuteronomy 14:2), and has "chosen Jerusalem" (cf. 2 Chronicles 6:6) and unto Abraham has promised: "... all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever" (Genesis 13:15).
Secretary Clinton and her coalition are also unaware the LORD doesn't settles His accounts on Friday, but has chosen one DAY in all eternity to judge the earth. Yet as that DAY draws ever nearer "the kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us" (Psalms 2:2-3). And as Secretary Clinton and her coalition covertly prepare ambush for Israel, the LORD bates the pit: "... I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people... and in that day will... make Jerusalem a burdensome stone... And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem" (Zechariah 12:2-3).
http://theisraelofgod.blogspot.....salem.html
SpiralArchitect| 5.16.11 @ 1:19PM
Syria nor Iran have been trying to start a new gold backed currency to trade for oil...like Iraq & Lybia - one of their leaders dead, the other has been ordered "removed". Strange, no?
Occam's Tool| 5.16.11 @ 12:35PM
This assumes that, after years of cocaine and high strength weed, that Obama has a brain to use outside of his teleprompter. I have yet to see that.
Fredrick Ward| 5.16.11 @ 4:29PM
"Indeed, if Assad falls, it's hard to imagine a regime worse than his."
You are a complete idiot, Jonathan. If you use the brain that God gave you it is simple to imagine a regime worse than the secular leader that is in Syria now. It is called an extreme Islamic government sponsored by the Muslim Brotherhood that you so clearly paint as victims. They are sponsors of terrorists, and Sharia Law. Happen to know anything about Sharia Law, Jonathan? You're so concerned about civil rights and democracy but you fail to see that these 'victims' of yours are none other than those who would do worse to our own interests than the current leader. Wake up, and educate yourself before posting such drivel.
Fredrick Ward| 5.16.11 @ 4:38PM
Oh, by the way...
"SHOULD THE UNITED STATES support democratic movements..." [in the middle east]
The only way this will happen is if we conquer the Middle East completely and settle it ourselves.