America’s bumpy recent history in the Middle East

What the Arabic press is saying about America's role in the region

US president Barack Obama with the late Saudi ruler, King Abdullah, in Riyadh. Saul Loeb / AFP Photo

Four months before the end of United States president Barack Obama’s second term in office, observers and followers of American affairs are finding themselves reviewing Obama’s policies, particularly in the Middle East.

Writing in the pan-Arab daily newspaper Asharq Al Awsat, Egyptian columnist Emile Ameen wondered whether such a review stems from a “guilty conscience” as a result of the tragedies and disasters that have struck the region.

A few days back, CIA director John Brennan revealed in a shocking statement that US policy in the Middle East might have spawned from a misunderstanding of the region.

“The efforts have been concentrated on democratising the region whereas the western concept of democracy is totally foreign, both literally and figuratively, to several regions in the world,” he wrote.

“Such examination of conscience extends to retired army colonel and military historian Andrew J Bacevich.

“Mr Bacevich’s criticism is associated with the concept of ‘hard power’, an example of which is the militarisation of US relations with the Middle East over four decades. This led to a great loss for the US military – shown at its worst in the Iraq invasion – and to the spread of oppressive terrorist groups whose threat has extended beyond the region to the entire world.”

Ameen also said Mr Obama is being harshly lashed by Congress, with senator John McCain blaming the president’s “adventurous” administration for causing chaos and leaving a power vacuum in the Middle East that was filled by ISIL.

“Mr McCain believes that his country couldn’t but lose its power in the Middle East after the countries of the region lost their confidence in Washington as an ally,” he added.

Former US negotiator and ambassador Dennis Ross saw it coming, noted Ameen. Mr Ross saw that Mr Obama had left a huge void in the Middle East and it was only normal for the Russian bear, which turned into an agile fox, to take a leap in the warm water and achieve the Russian dream.

Pascal Boniface voiced a similar view in The National’s Arabic-language sister paper, Aletihad: “A survey conducted in April 2016 by the Pew Research Centre found that 57 per cent of Americans feel that what their country needs right now is to focus first and foremost on resolving its internal issues and let the other nations solve their own problems.”

The writer said there was no doubt that the exorbitant economic, strategic and moral price of the catastrophic wars in Iraq and Afghanistan had much to do with such a stance.

“Taking into consideration the public sentiment as well as the strategic facts, president Obama adopted a foreign policy that has been described as ‘leading from behind’,” he wrote.

“This explains the lack of US foreign military intervention and particularly in Syria, where Bashar Al Assad has resorted to the use of chemical weapons.”

“The desire to export democracy by force has proven to be yet another failure that led the US to ultimately resort to torture and to open the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, while the best way to spread democracy is to lead by example and to show its positive sides.

“Only when the US forces are sent abroad to aid an ally under real threat will they be received as a saviour and not as an invader.”