[ad_1]
The Arab world is awaiting, as usual, the results of the US elections, which will take place in three weeks, in the hope that it will make a difference in the policies carried out by the strongest, richest and most able country. of the world, with regard to its many, varied and profound questions and problems.
As usual, the outcome of these elections, whether in favor of a second term for Donald Trump, the Republican candidate, or in favor of Joe Biden, the Democratic presidential candidate, will unfortunately not make a big difference. difference, in that it won’t make much of a difference to US foreign policy in practice. And that the difference will only be in the tone, or in the diplomatic behavior, from a brutal and direct policy to a soft and roundabout policy.
What may be assumed to be understood here is that the foreign policy of the United States of America is characterized by continuity, since it is the institutions, lobbies and decision-making centers that make this policy, with a lesser role for the president, and this applies to issues of the Middle East, particularly issues of Palestine, Syria and the Iranian presence in the region. The interests of the United States as a country are represented, while the president (and his party) has more leeway to formulate national policies and decisions, that is, where the direct interests of the American voters, which prioritize internal affairs and their living conditions (taxes, health, education, work, infrastructure) are represented.
Thus, we can notice that Trump’s policies did not differ much from those of his predecessor Obama, especially in Palestinian and Syrian affairs, I mean in practice, while Barack Obama was more gentle and understanding, but only in theory. . In fact, the policy followed by President Obama has disappointed many regimes and political movements, especially with regard to the silence on the Syrian regime and indifference to the tragedy of the Syrians, and the pressure on Israel regarding the rights of the Palestinians. and the confrontation with Iranian influence in the Arab region. However, this disappointment and the resulting trauma depend on a brief and partial reading of American politics, as if it were an ordinary country and not a superpower, or as if it functioned according to the the desires and interests of a particular party, or as if its motive was based on certain political, moral or ideological constants.
The story is illustrated by the fact that many of us think of politics with our emotions, desires, interests and mentality, that is, they don’t think about it from the point of view of other countries, that is, of their vision of themselves and their interests, and this is true of the policy pursued by the Obama administration, whether we like it or not.
On the other hand, it is because they believe that the Arab countries have enough to put pressure on the United States to push them to adopt policies compatible with Arab interests, on this or that issue, when it is not ‘is not the case, because the United States is the ones who have the cards of pressure and power, especially since its experience confirms that whatever it does, the countries concerned cannot and will not be able to deviate from their will and their dependence on them, especially in the economic, technological and security fields, which explains the difficulty of political separation from them.
The United States acts in accordance with its understanding of its interests as a superpower. They no longer care who controls the region, or Russia, Turkey, Israel or Iran, as long as it preserves their position and protects their interests.
In addition to this and that, some believe that US policy is determined based on the same standards that take place in the Arab world, where the president is the one who decides everything, in terms of policies and options.
There is no doubt that the Obama administration’s Middle East policy is very disappointing, as it handed Iraq over to Iran, after its withdrawal, and appeared to help it maximize its influence, from Yemen to Lebanon, via Iraq and Syria; It is on the one hand. On the other hand, this administration refrained from taking measures to stop the deterioration of the situation in Syria, rather it allowed the regime to continue killing and destroying it, then forcing it on Russia. In addition to these two, he distanced himself from any pressure on Israel that would lead to fair rights for Palestinians, and even swallowed all his speeches about a settlement freeze.
But what needs to be understood here, too, is that the United States behaves this way based on its understanding of its interests as a superpower that no longer cares about who directly controls this region (nor Russia, Turkey, Israel, or Iran), as long as this preserves its position and safeguards its interests, It does not affect its security, in particular with the shift of its interests to Southeast Asia, and its growing dependence on its oil and gas reserves.
Perhaps this explains the fact that the US administration during the Trump era observed everyone’s dilemma – Russia, Iran and Turkey – and worked to address them. exhausting them, exhausting them and hitting them together, and it’s not a turning back, but playing and punishing and not dealing with a conflict or a crisis, but rather as an investment in them. With her awareness of her ability to control and her possession of the force cards, she decides when and when.
Nevertheless, we should note two important and dangerous paths: the first is the devastation of the Arab East and the fracture of its societies, in particular Iraq and Syria. The second is to ensure Israel’s security and stability for decades, and the United States is not innocent of either this or that, with our governments responsible for everything that happens to us and around it. we.
Therefore, those who are waiting for something new, from a practical standpoint, will not find it, no matter who resides in the American White House, for the next four years, be it Trump or Biden.
Source link
