On July 25, 2006, amidst the tumultuous backdrop of the Israel-Lebanon conflict, the then US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, articulated a vision for transformation during her visit to Jerusalem. She posited that the ongoing war was a harbinger of a “new Middle East,” where democratic and liberal forces would reshape the geopolitical landscape. Nearly two decades since that proclamation, the trajectory of America’s quest for “change” has meandered through the Middle East to Afghanistan, onward to Iraq, and extended its reach toward China, Russia, and Eastern Europe. This odyssey of change has manifested in various forms: from the escalation of military presence in Eastern Europe to the imposition of embargoes on Russia and China, and from combating terrorism to forging alliances with entities like the Taliban. The pursuit of this transformative dream has unfolded in ways that have been, arguably, calamitous.
The conflict in Ukraine, spearheaded by Russia, along with the strategic maneuvers of Iran and Russia in Syria and Lebanon, and the potential for Chinese engagement in Taiwan, represent a collective stance against the tide of neo-colonial geopolitical shifts. These nations have opted for an alternative to the binary choice of capitulation or annihilation, rejecting the established norms of a geopolitical overhaul. This defiance has catalyzed a shift in power dynamics and bolstered resistance movements, diminishing traditional American hegemony, particularly in the Middle East and globally. Such developments signal the ineffectiveness of imposing transformative policies through warfare.
The interplay between warfare and strategic objectives is intricate, yet for the US, the Greater Middle East has become a canvas for change, wielded through the instruments of war. Within this framework, war is not an inevitable outcome but a lever for instigating political and territorial shifts, fostering the rise of new alliances, coalitions, and the redefinition of borders. A secondary aspect is an alteration in power dynamics; military engagements can recalibrate regional power balances, simultaneously undermining and empowering specific governments and factions. Additionally, conflicts can amplify ideological narratives, potentially fortifying democratic principles or religious extremism, contingent upon the stakeholders involved. Economically, the struggle for resource control and trade dominance is a central motive in warfare, with profound implications for the world’s economic topography. The quest for international dominance is another dimension, as external forces often incite conflicts to expand their regional sway. This propensity for war-making, facilitated by geographical detachment and lower direct costs, is further incentivized. Moreover, the Middle East’s colonial legacy and vital energy reserves play a significant role in post-war power realignment and interest sharing. In this context, the region’s warfare, particularly among Iran and Israel, Israel and Palestine, and the broader contest for dominance among global powers like the US, China, Russia, and Europe, invariably impacts global security, economic stability, and human welfare.
In a region where the Sykes-Picot Agreement clandestinely carved out national boundaries, the nexus of war and strategy has become a persistent affliction in the Middle East. The imprint of American foreign policy has shifted the resolution of regional disputes away from diplomatic avenues, serving instead as a stark reminder of the covertly imposed mandates of yesteryear. War, in this context, has emerged as a tool to unilaterally enforce outcomes. The conflict initiated by Israel, purportedly in alignment with the US objectives to reshape the Middle Eastern landscape, now threatens to escalate beyond its initial confines, potentially spiraling into a global confrontation.
The ongoing conflict in the Middle East is a continuation of clandestine agreements, reminiscent of the “Deal of the Century” and the “Great Middle East Peace Plan,” which sought to impose dominance through coercion and top-down pressure. These efforts have overlooked the fact that the region’s issues have persisted unresolved for over seventy years, and that unilateral approaches are futile. The recent devastation in Gaza and the looming threat of a significant conflict between Iran and Israel underscore a stark reality: the United States is no longer the custodian of global order and security it once was, but rather a participant in the very turmoil it seeks to quell. This moment may represent a critical juncture for Middle Eastern nations to break free from a dependency akin to Stockholm syndrome and recalibrate their foreign relations. The situation in Gaza could presage the future of other nations in the region unless there is a collective shift away from the paradigm of war as a means to engineer a new order through destabilization.
