The Good, the Bad and the Worst
An Assessment of the U.S relations and policies in the Middle East
Gold and silver where the elements of wealth during the peak of mercantilism as the sole policy back then was the 3G’s policy (God, Gold and Glory) in the reign of the British and French Empires. Oil, however, climbed to the top of the chart of the most strategic commodities starting the early years of industrialization passing by the Second World War, when the U.S. became by far the largest oil consuming nation; consuming oil at abundant rates to support their troops overseas and to maintain the high rate of consumerism of the American lifestyle in the homeland. Soon oil grabbed the attention of the top industrialist nations as the most critical element of their survival as super industrial economies to ensure their growing manufacturing base is supported by adequate oil supplies. Having almost two thirds of the oil reserve in the world, the Middle East became the center of attention for all industrial nations, some of which had more strategic plans than others. Both, Britain and the United States realized that their wealth and survival as super powers is so much correlated with their level of control and development of the Middle East oil-rich countries. However, the feasibility of running the Arabian states both politically and economically faded in the 20th century, since maintaining their administration was too expensive for the United Kingdom, and gradually started granting the Arabian states their independence. However, both empires and others established strong base of relations with the Arabs, which was reflected in the design of the region, the establishment and support of the reigning Arab families and balancing good economic ties with them. Today is a result of these early design and management policies of the Western empires to the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait and smaller Gulf states where in the center of the US strategies to secure their life line of oil. The US controversial strategies in Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran have turned out differently; the US strategy in Saudi Arabia may be considered a success story –so far-, in Iran, a failure, while in Iraq is work in progress, despite that so far is rather a failure than success. United States has kept strong relations with Saudi Arabia since 1933, making Saudi one of the major allies in the Middle East region. Though there were some fluctuations in their relationship such as the oil embargo by Saudi Arabia during the Youm Kapour War (6th of October war) and the 9/11 terrorist attacks on US soil which was faultily related to Saudi Arabia as the funder of these attacks. However, the US-Saudi relations were generally in the right direction and mutually beneficial; Saudi Arabia supplies the US with the needed oil and the US supplies Saudi Arabia with everything else, including weapons and training for the Saudi militants. Moreover, USA has sidelined Saudi Arabia from its democracy enforcement and its “fight against terrorism” in the Middle East, though Saudi Arabia has no religious freedom and no democracy what so ever, unlike Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan which are constantly harassed either by political standoffs or US military deployment on their soil. But in return the US has a permanent base on Saudi soil with over 5000 troops preforming what is called operation “Southern watch”. Though this American base has caused quite the rattle amongst Saudi citizens as they showed their acceptance of this trespassing on their holy lands, it was still accepted by the Saudi government. But as whole, the US-Saudi relations are successful enough; it’s an example of how the US government managed to secure and maintain a strong ally in the region until now, through a rather balanced and mutually beneficial relationship.. However, though the United States has managed to successfully win Saudi Arabia on its side, it failed to win Iraq and Iran as it took a...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document