Xinhua
U.S. Arab world policy sees consistent threads emerge
by Matthew Rusling
WASHINGTON, April 26 (Xinhua) -- As the Arab world reels from unrest, the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama has been charged with having a vague and, at times ad hoc, policy toward tumult in the region.
Indeed, the U.S. president called for Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi -- a historical U.S. nemesis -- to step down while launching airstrikes against his forces. At the same time, however, Obama called for the resignation of now former Egyptian President and longtime U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak. While the White House has outlined no overarching doctrine, a few themes are emerging.
David Pollock, senior fellow at the Washington Institute, noted three trends: First, the Obama administration opposes the use of force of a government against its own citizens. Second, Obama supports dialogue between governments and opposition groups. Finally, the United States will apply these principles to countries that are friendly to Washington, as well as to those that are not.
Still, many observers have questioned what makes Libya -- in the eyes of the Obama administration -- different from any other nation that has attacked protesters, and many have asked why Obama would choose to intervene in one conflict and not others.
In a White House press briefing on Monday, spokesman Jay Carney said there are a number of differences between the situation in Libya and other instances of governments attacking protesters in their countries.
Carney said Libya was "a unique situation" in the sense that the Libyan government "was moving against its own people in a coordinated military fashion" and there was "an international consensus to act."
The spokesman did not mention opposition or concerns expressed by a number of countries over the Western-led airstrikes in Libya.
Michael O'Hanlon, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said there are other cohesive threads in what many have blasted as a jumbled heap of loosely connected and reactive policies. The administration aims to support the process of reform in the region, but to do so pragmatically and gradually, he said.
Monarchies, such as Morocco, are special cases: Within constitutional monarchies there exists the possibility of delegating more power over time to an elected government under a constitutional monarchy framework. So Obama is unlikely to call for leaders of such countries to step down.
Obama has also said that each country in the region is different, and some analysts said the administration is acting out of practicality, arguing that no one-size-fits-all solution exists.
SLIMMING DOWN
Aside from questions about how to respond to the recent unrest, there remain questions over U.S. military plans, as nearly 50,000 U.S. troops are still in Iraq and around 100,000 in Afghanistan.
The Obama administration is trying to slim down its military commitment to the region with a two part strategy. First, Washington wants to stem the influence of Iran by leaving a footprint in Iraq and Kuwait of around 20,000 to 25,000 U.S. troops. A degree of Iranian influence is tolerable, from the U.S. point of view, as long as it does not exceed a certain limit, said Vice President of Analysis Peter Zeihan, of global intelligence company Stratfor.
The second part of the equation is Turkey. If Iran took over Iraq, Turkey would have yet another foe on its borders along with nemesis Syria. Turkey feels cornered, which will prompt a Turkish emergence with U.S. support, in a bid to contain Iranian power in Mesopotamia, he said.
FEAR OF RADICAL ISLAM
In spite of Obama's stated support for some Democratic movements in the Arab world, fear of Islamic extremism is impeding U.S. efforts in Libya, said Wayne White, former deputy director of the U.S. State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research's Office of Analysis for the Near East and South Asia.
"We are literally obsessed with that in the wake of 9/11," he said. "I think it's being taken out of proportion in light of what probably exists on the ground."
"I suspect that (there is) partly a fear of what the rebels represent, and that has hobbled our efforts to engage because we are reluctant to do more before we know what the opposition represents."
While it remains unknown how far the United States will go in supporting Libya's rebels, the White House announced on Wednesday that it okayed 25 million U.S. dollars in non-lethal aid -- such as communications equipment -- to rebels. On Monday U.S. Armed Services Committee Chairman Sen. John McCain called for the United States to ramp up support for the rebels, including immediate military aid and more direct U.S. involvement.
Meanwhile, in nearby Egypt, much discussion in the United States centered around the Muslim Brotherhood -- an Islamist organization that ranks as Egypt's most influential dissident group.
While the organization is likely to play a major role in Egypt, it is far different from Al-Qaeda, White said.
Zeihan said that as a whole, the Obama administration would like to see moderately democratic regimes that are obsessed with their own internal issues. But one major U.S. concern is that some countries that have never had democracy could vote in a government less amenable to Washington than the previous one.
Right now most regional leaders are strongmen, but they nonetheless keep internal dissidence in check so it cannot turn into international terrorism, according to the U.S. view, he said.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-04/27/c_13847218.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment