American Role in the Middle East: HIST 2300 Research Paper

This research paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the American role in the Middle East, examining the historical context, strategic interests, and policy implementations that have shaped the US presence in the region. The paper explores the complexities of the US-Middle East relationship, including the impact of the Cold War, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the fight against terrorism. It critically assesses the benefits and drawbacks of American involvement, such as preventing nuclear proliferation, ensuring oil flow, and promoting democracy, while also addressing issues like anti-Americanism and the challenges posed by regional actors. The author proposes policy implications, suggesting a new paradigm for regional alliances and stronger support for democratic movements to improve America's standing and foster stability in the Middle East. The paper concludes by emphasizing the importance of a constructive and active American approach in international relations to achieve more useful outcomes.

STUDENT NAME
INSTITUTIONAL AFFILIATION(S)
INTRODUCTION TO THE
MIDDLE EAST

AMERICAN ROLE IN THE MIDDLE EAST 1
American Role in The Middle East
Introduction
America has long been indulged with the Middle East (ME) and its participation has
only increased since the Cold War. A glance at current realties in the ME reveals that
Palestinians are still homeless and hunts for sovereign independence; no light is seen by them
despite constant international condemnation has been made regarding Israeli's lethal
operations and reprisals against Intifada or Palestinian uprisings since 1987 (Tristam, 2019).
Although the strains and acrimony in the ME and American relationships are on display, the
US policymakers reasonably wary by making dramatic alterations to US policies in ME
world, particularly in the era of instability and disorder. This research paper hence proposes
to examine and interpret facts associated with America and ME relationship and what role it
plays in fighting terrorism through policy implementation. Provided few loopholes seen in
existing policies, this essay will provide few implications which need to be added to ensure
that Americans role in ME is not escalated rather accepted in a democratic sense.
Critical discussion
America acts as a sole foreign-regional hegemonic influence due to its military
prominence in ME, guaranteeing the presence of pro-Western commands in the area. The role
America posits in the ME can be divided into five spheres: preventing nuclear proliferation,
ensuring free oil flow, fighting terrorism, promoting democracy and maintaining Israeli
security. Iran is one of the Islamic states and Al-Qaida poses threats to the interest of Iran. It
can be argued that the threat they represent is most of the times overrepresented as compared
to US interests in the region who stand still even at the risk of disruption. Issues occurring
due to the allies over there, in fact, has become a major concern due to which Arab springs
besides civil wars that have brought many disruptions in the forefront ( Byman & Moller,

AMERICAN ROLE IN THE MIDDLE EAST 2
2016). America's approach to managing issues has generated several benefits such as
disrupting and deterring forces along with reassuring allies successfully. But then, the internal
problems contribute to arise anti-Americanism. This implies US policy to protect its interest
by weakening Islamic states and reenergize its support by promoting peace among
Palestinians and Israel.
Former President Obama’s strategic and innovative thinking demonstrating
disengagement was questioned amid social activists in Arab uprising. Countries like Egypt,
Yemen and Tunisia became allies of the US in the ME especially Mubarak's Egypt as Israel's
pillar for security since 1979 Saleh’s Yemen and Camp David Agreements to fight against
Al-Qaeda in Arabian Peninsula (Daigle, 2017). In general, Obama chose not to commit with
continuity of old regimes or open doors to collaborate with revolutionary armies rather
condemned using violence in every case and decided to stick to a wait-and-see approach.
However, the regional actors became suspicious of America and questioned whether being a
security provider means the US is providing security to the powers only for safeguarding
territorial integrity only. Lack of additional support interpreted by policy decisions made by
the US harmed their continuity in the ME region status quo (Quero & Dessì, 2019). Looking
at the issue from a different angle, it can be said that when the US comprehended that Pax
American did not mean to prevent domestic uprising to succeed, the autocratic in the region
supposed that Washington will help then in a more decisive way. They resisted that political
change can give more room to anti-status quo, revolutionary forces and anti-Pax Americans
to get deep-rooted in strategic upholds in ME.
Ever since American troops were withdrawn from ME, US presidents have proposed
to reconsider US commitments with them. While Obama spoke for rebalancing, present US
president, Trump purports to refocus upon greater powers to compete. The presence of the
American military in ME has been consistent fairly. Despite the intention laid by

AMERICAN ROLE IN THE MIDDLE EAST 3
administrations to focus on greater military powers of American troops through the 2018
National Défense Strategy, the America role in the ME remains constant and permanent.
Indeed, what has changed with time is the amount of civilian support as compared to previous
administrations who accompanied such military interferences. It can be said that Trump's
administration has made several vacancies for civilian positions that remain unfilled for a
long time, slashing the support programs, and focussing more on a higher level of personal
relationships at the expense of wider alliances (Benaim & Hanna, 2019). Therefore, Fawcett
(2018) argues that despite a rich history of involvement of America in ME, Western powers
neither collectively or singly have been able to succeed in implementing a new set of
territorial policies. Putting succinctly, the American’s role cannot be acclaimed by either
interventionism or retrenchment but pose more like an illiberal hegemony or diplomatic
stewardship churning military superiority.
After recognizing persistent issues between the ME and America, few policy
implications can be suggested due to two major reasons: placing Israeli and the US priorities
ahead of local people needs which have propped oppressive regimes and increase of
unfriendly parties like Islamic due to democratic process. This requires America to develop a
new paradigm in which regional allies are developed by prioritizing American interests which
overlap ME populations and are opposed by autocratic regimes. By signing a mutually
beneficial policy, America will be able to repair its lost value in the region besides improving
new prospects for upcoming years through Arab-America collaboration ( Allison, Burns,
Hegazy, Nye, & Walt, 2011). Secondly, America can emphasize stronger support which can
fuel democratic movement and aspirations by ME people without supporting any political or
specific candidate. If anyone is seen as an ally of the US, it must be Executive officers of
states only during electoral scenarios. The public must be approached to commit working
with elected and peaceful parties, including Muslim brotherhood. However, their policies

AMERICAN ROLE IN THE MIDDLE EAST 4
may not be aligned with US policies though few points can be included to reflect
modernization. And lastly, transferring a few military forces to civil society wellbeing
( Byman & Moller, 2016). A consistent policy reflecting such initiatives will strongly
downsize existing criticisms across ME along will supporting ally regimes.
Conclusion
The above paper argued that America nurtured double-level indecision among ME,
regional actors. On one hand, the strategic disengagement from ME region made US
intervention unpredictable in some stances however it adhered to former responsibilities
mentioned in the intervention while in other cases, it opted to disengage completely by not
taking part or working lesser that what ME populations have anticipated. Some terms
revealed America's discretion towards taking active participation, the amendments made in
policies increased uncertainties which show fluctuated terms as compared to ones stated
during reinforcement. Overall, in the light of negotiations made in international relations and
politics, America role can prove more useful if they use their powers in a constructive way
which implies US policymakers develop a strategic doctrine which can establish stability and
make American more active than diplomatic.

AMERICAN ROLE IN THE MIDDLE EAST 5
References
Allison, G., Burns, N., Hegazy, A., Nye, J. S., & Walt, S. M. (2011). What Role Should the
U.S. Play in Middle East? Retrieved from
https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/what-role-should-us-play-middle-east
Byman, D., & Moller, S. B. (2016). The United States and the Middle East: Interests, Risks,
and Costs. Sustainable Security: Rethinking American National Security Strategy.
Benaim, D., & Hanna, M. W. (2019). The Enduring American Presence in the Middle East.
Retrieved from https://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/Enduring%20American
%20Presence%20in%20the%20Middle%20East.pdf
Daigle, C. (2017). The American War for the Greater Middle East. International Journal of
Middle East Studies, 49, 757–765.
Fawcett, L. (2018). Virtual issue: The Middle East in International Affairs. International
Affairs, 1-11.
Quero, J., & Dessì, A. (2019). Unpredictability in US foreign policy and the regional order in
the Middle East: reacting vis-à-vis a volatile external security-provider. British
Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 1-21.
Tristam, P. (2019). U.S. Policy in the Middle East: 1945 to 2008. Retrieved from
https://www.thoughtco.com/us-and-middle-east-since-1945-2353681