The supercilious idea of the United States that, by toppling Saddam Hussein, can rapidly democratize Iraq and unleash a democratic tsunami in the Middle East, has metamorphosed into an apocalypse that swept the core nations of the region. Chaos and destruction became the “manifest destiny” of these peoples and democracy became a dangerous fantasy. The United States' record of building democracy after invading other countries is mixed at best and the Bush administration’s commitment to state-building efforts in Iraq is doubtful. The United States have failed at developing democracy in the Middle East – which has led to increased instability and anarchy – because U.S. foreign policy has misunderstood the formula for building democracy in the region. The United States is just the latest Western nation to fail in the Middle East. The repercussions of a miscalculated intervention in Iraq were likely to complicate the spread of democracy in the Middle East rather than to promote it. Instead of developing democratic governments in the region the US intervention paved the way for the emergence of more oppressive radical groups that hijacked the reins of power from the legitimate governments and anguished peoples’ lives through acts of terror and bullying. The new paradox that Bush’s neoconservative government created in Iraq and the Middle East has turned a lofty project of democratization into a disaster of destruction. While ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) has seized core leadership positions in Syria, Iraq and other places, it is putting in practice the larger tripartite plan of the disintegration of the Middle East. In the process of establishing the Islamic Caliphate, ISIL is sowing the seeds of its own destruction as the U.S. contemplates increased military action in the Middle East, specifically authorization of military force in Syria. However, if the US desires to preserve American preferential treatment in the region it should reconsider the policies that created so much anarchy.
Table of Contents
Introduction
The American Lofty Project for the Middle East
The Neoconservatives’ View
Neoconservatives Plan for the Region’s Future
Another Conspiracy Theory? Does it Matter?
Failure of Democratization
How Does ISIL feature in all this?
Selling Unrest
US Record on Interventions Abroad
The Mirage of the Arab Spring
Conclusion
Objectives & Core Themes
This work examines the evolution of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, arguing that the transition from a stated goal of democracy promotion to the current war against ISIL reflects an imperial agenda rather than a genuine effort to foster democratic governance. The research explores how U.S. interventions have destabilized the region, creating power vacuums that extremist groups have exploited to further their own agendas, ultimately serving broader geopolitical interests that prioritize energy dominance and regional control over democratic stability.
- The role of neoconservative ideology in shaping U.S. Middle Eastern interventions.
- The strategic relationship between U.S. policy and the destabilization of Iraq and Syria.
- The use of "constructive chaos" as a tool for regional re-molding.
- The critical failure of democratization efforts in the face of corporatist and imperial objectives.
Excerpt from the Book
The American Lofty Project for the Middle East
The strategic and influential geopolitical location of the Middle East as a core component of the broader Western imperial cupidity yields more room for recurrent meddling in the affairs of the region. This huge region, historically caught up in volatile hatreds and situated within a powerful competing area, has been vulnerable to major conflicts: both as wars among nation-states and, more likely, as lingering ethnic and religious violence. Western actors such as the US and Britain have taken advantage of some opportunity to impose their will and political agendas on the people and their systems. Iraq is just one of many examples of the Anglo-American strategy of “divide and conquer” that swept the entire region following the 9/11 attacks and even long time before.
The areas extending from the Gulf of Guinea to the Caspian Sea going through the Persian Gulf have endless riches in hydrocarbons and had been the focus of competing interests for big powers. Zginiew Brzezinski and Bernard Lewis defined these areas as an “arc of crisis” because of the persistent attempts of neocolonial and imperial powers to put their hands on that wealth. Control of these areas have always constituted one of the major goals of these powers and required a redefinition of borders, States and political regimes using different tactics from World War I to the present. Recent attempts at this aim led George W. Bush to put the adequate approach by baptizing it a “remodeling of the Greater Middle East.”
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Outlines the historical context of U.S. involvement in the Middle East, positing that U.S. interventions have paradoxically created the very instability and radical groups they claim to fight.
The American Lofty Project for the Middle East: Discusses the geopolitical importance of the region to Western imperial interests, specifically focusing on energy dominance and the strategy of divide and conquer.
The Neoconservatives’ View: Analyzes the idealist and interventionist foreign policy stance of neoconservatives, emphasizing their belief in regime change as a necessary step for democratization and regional stability.
Neoconservatives Plan for the Region’s Future: Explores the long-standing goal of breaking the Middle East into smaller, more manageable ethnic or sectarian units to enhance Western and Israeli security.
Another Conspiracy Theory? Does it Matter?: Investigates the debate over whether the civil war in Iraq was an unintended consequence or a calculated result of U.S. and Israeli strategic planning.
Failure of Democratization: Examines the disastrous results of attempts to impose liberal democratic institutions through military occupation, noting how these efforts facilitated destruction rather than reform.
How Does ISIL feature in all this?: Investigates the alleged covert links between U.S. intelligence, regional allies, and the rise of the Islamic State as a tool for furthering specific geopolitical agendas.
Selling Unrest: Reviews how the U.S. has manipulated fundamentalist movements and funded instability to pursue corporate and imperial objectives across the region.
US Record on Interventions Abroad: Contextualizes current Middle East crises within the broader historical record of U.S. military interventions, arguing that such actions typically fail to build stable nations.
The Mirage of the Arab Spring: Analyzes why the promise of the Arab Spring movements failed to deliver democratic outcomes due to external interference and the priorities of Western powers.
Conclusion: Summarizes that "exporting democracy" served only as a convenient alibi for interventions aimed at securing resources and maintaining long-term influence, leaving a legacy of destruction.
Keywords
American foreign policy, neoconservatives, Middle East, democracy promotion, ISIL, imperialism, democratization, regime change, sectarian conflict, geopolitical strategy, energy dominance, Iraq war, Arab Spring, constructive chaos, instability.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core argument of this publication?
The book argues that the U.S. government's stated mission to promote democracy in the Middle East has been a cover for imperial objectives focused on resource control and regional hegemony, ultimately fostering chaos rather than stability.
What are the central themes discussed in the work?
Key themes include the influence of neoconservative ideology, the strategic use of sectarian division to balkanize states, the role of U.S. military interventions, and the intimate relationship between geopolitical interests and the rise of radical groups like ISIL.
What primary goal drove the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq?
According to the author, the invasion was driven by the desire to establish a democratic "beacon" that would lead to a larger regional transformation, while simultaneously securing oil interests and maintaining American hegemony.
Which scientific or analytical method is applied in this research?
The work utilizes a geopolitical and historical analytical approach, synthesizing existing literature, policy documentation, and expert analysis to critique the outcomes and stated motives of U.S. foreign policy.
What does the main body of the work cover?
The main body systematically analyzes the intellectual roots of neoconservative policy, the planning behind regional destabilization, the failure of democratization efforts, and how groups like ISIL have been utilized as tools within these broader strategic frameworks.
Which keywords best characterize the research?
The research is best characterized by terms such as American foreign policy, neoconservatives, Middle East, democracy promotion, ISIL, imperialism, and geopolitical strategy.
What is the author's stance on the rise of ISIL?
The author argues that ISIL emerged from the destabilization caused by U.S. interventions and suggests that the U.S. and its allies have essentially utilized the group's existence to justify a continued military presence and to pursue further regime change in the region.
How does the work interpret the "Arab Spring"?
The author interprets the Arab Spring not as a successful democratic revolution, but as a movement that was derailed or subverted by both local authoritarian regimes and the conflicting agendas of external imperial powers.
- Citation du texte
- Abdelkrim Dekhakhena (Auteur), 2017, The New Project for the Middle East. From US Democracy Promotion to ISIL Destruction, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/448265
