DR. WALID PHARES
The Obama administration, in its first and second terms, has
committed strategic mistakes in the Middle East which will undermine
U.S. national and security interests for many years, even under
subsequent administrations after 2016.
The damage done is severe, and a remedy seems out of reach unless
earth shattering changes are applied to Washington's foreign
policy-either under the incumbent's administration or the next. The
common core of U.S. strategic mistakes has been the perception of
partners in the region since day one of the post-Bush presidency. While
Bush's narrative on backing pro-democracy forces was right on track,
the bureaucracy's actions betrayed the White House's global aim. By the
time the Obama administration installed itself on Pennsylvania Avenue
in 2009, little had been accomplished by the Bush bureaucrats in
regards to identifying these pro-democracy forces and supporting them.
When the current administration replaced Bush, however, civil society
groups in the Middle East were systematically abandoned-aid to their
liberal forces was cut off and engagement with the radicals became
priority. The mistakes of the Bush bureaucracy became the official
policy of the Obama administration.
Washington's "new beginnings" in the region moved American Mideast
policy in a backward direction on two major tracks. The first
derailment was to partner with the Muslim Brotherhood, not the secular
NGOs, in an attempt to define the future of Arab Sunni countries. The
second was to engage the Iranian regime, not its opposition, in attempt
to define future relations with the Shia sphere of the region. These
were strategic policy decisions planned years before the Arab Spring,
not a pragmatic search for solutions as upheavals began. Choosing the
Islamists over the Muslim moderates and reformers has been an
academically suggested strategy adapted to potential interests-even
though it represents an approach contrary to historically successful
pathways. In June 2009, President Obama sent a letter to Iran's
Supreme Leader asking for "engagement." This move, coupled with Obama's
abandonment of the civil revolt in Iran that same month, sent a
comforting message to the ruling Khomeinists: The United States is
retreating from containment and will not support regime change in Iran.
That undeniably emboldened Tehran to go on the offensive in the region
after less than a decade of status quo.
The nuclear program was boldly defended despite American and UN
economic sanctions; Iranian penetration of Iraq deepened; support to
Hezbollah escalated with a presidential visit to Lebanon by
Ahmedinijad; and aggressive backing of pro-Iranian elements in Arabia
was sustained. The Arab Spring revealed more assertive Iranian behavior
as Pasdaran and Hezbollah militias were dispatched to Syria in support
of the struggling Assad regime. Across the region, the Ayatollahs
increased their support to regimes and organizations bent on crushing
civil society uprisings and also clamped down on their own
oppositions-both inside the country and abroad. Tehran used
Washington's unending search for dialogue with the Ayatollahs as an
opportunity to attack the exiled Iranian community inside Iraq, one of
the best cards in the international community's hands to pressure the
Iranian regime. The tragedy of dismantling Camp Ashraf ran parallel to a
systematic persecution of Iranian dissidents who rose in 2009 against
the mullahs. U.S. retreat from Iran's containment led to an
unparalleled bleeding of the political opposition, the only long term
hope for a real change in Iran.
The Obama administration's abandonment of Iran's people was made
complete through Washington's dangerous deal with Tehran. After months
of secret negotiations and immediately after abandoning the Syrian
opposition to vie for themselves against Iranian-backed Assad forces
towards the end of the summer, the U.S. administration announced an
interim nuclear agreement with Iran. To the astonishment of Iran's
opposition, not to mention Arab moderate governments, European
countries including France, and a majority in Congress, the Obama
administration began easing sanctions on Iran in return for a promise
by the Khomeinist regime that it would lower its uranium production to
an internationally acceptable level. Without any significant leverage
on Tehran, having sidelined the Iranian opposition, the White House has
no guarantees that Iran's regime is backing off from nuclear strategic
weaponry. Worse, Washington started almost immediately to transfer
billions of dollars from "frozen accounts" back to the Iran regime's
coffers.
From an initial conceptual strategic mistake, the Obama
administration moved to implement the most dangerous component of the
new policy: Not only ending economic and political pressure, but
sending financial support to a terror regime still on the offensive in
the region. The hundreds of millions of dollars already received by the
Ayatollahs can be, and actually most likely are being, recycled
through the Pasdaran into subversive operations against the country's
liberal opposition, the Iranian exiles, Arab governments and U.S.
interests worldwide. The "deal" will go down in history as one of the
worst political acts in the West, second only to the signing of a piece
of paper in Munich that claimed to be a deal to save the Peace.
History has already taught the world, at a very high price, the
consequences of dealing with devils.
Dr Walid Phares is an advisor to the US Congress on Counter Terrorism, and the author of ten books including
Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies against America and
The Coming Revolution: Struggle for Freedom in the Middle East.
Dr Phares appears on national, international and Arab media. He
teaches at several universities and briefs US Government agencies on
Terrorism and the Middle East.
Read more:
Family Security Matters http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/the-iran-deal-washingtons-gravest-mistake-in-foreign-policy?f=must_reads#ixzz2v09vOQiu
Under Creative Commons License:
Attribution
No comments:
Post a Comment