Advertisement Close

America’s Jekyll And Hyde Foreign Policy In The Middle East

posted on: Mar 16, 2015

The world watched in fascination as Egyptians, Libyans, Syrians, Yemenis, Tunisians and Bahrainis took to the streets of their respective nations to denounce social injustice, poverty and tyrannical state institutions in 2011. Yet the Arab Spring movement has failed to translate those calls for change into democratic realities.

“If anything, the region has moved from authoritarianism to institutionalized-military despotism in four short years, all under the guise of the so-called ‘Free World,’ the United States of America,” Ahmed Mohamed Nasser Ahmed, a Yemeni political analyst and former member of Yemen’s National Issues and Transitional Justice Working Group at the National Dialogue Conference, told MintPress News.

Indeed, where has the U.S. stood as the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region rose to the barricades, demanding that the ruling class be held accountable to the people for their actions?

Although U.S. officials have been keen to proclaim and assert their devotion to democracy, foreign policies have betrayed such honorable intentions, ultimately revealing the reality of corporatism and capitalism ruling unchallenged as the new tyrants of Western democracies.

Western powers — led by the U.S. — campaigned for the ousting of Syrian President Bashar Assad on the basis that he had lost all popular legitimacy. As they rolled out sanctions and plans for military intervention in Syria, Bahraini King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa’s brutal crackdown on protesters was brushed under the political rug.

“If of course the burden of responsibility ultimately sits on the people, it is evident the U.S. and Western powers in general have worked against the Arab Spring, betraying the very democratic principles they claim to represent for the sake of corporate capitalism. Democracies don’t turn a profit the way dictatorships do! The flow of weapons alone stands as a testimony to Western democracies’ real oath of allegiance,” Ahmed told MintPress.

The United Kingdom, America’s staunchest ally, signed a military agreement with Bahrain in January. This agreement contains provisions for the establishment of a permanent British naval base on the island kingdom, courtesy of King Hamad. The “landmark” deal, as the British government dubbed it, also paved the way for a lucrative arm deals, whereby the Bahraini regime would acquire British-made military equipment.

“The agreement reaffirms the UK’s and Bahrain’s joint determination to maintain regional security and stability in the face of enduring and emerging regional challenges,” Michael Fallon, the British defense secretary, said before the House of Commons in December, as quoted by the Guardian.

Yet if the U.S. and its Western allies care not for democracy, as Ahmed suggests, then what goals are they pursuing? Looking at events in the MENA it has become painfully evident that under the impetus of Washington and its regional allies, political self-determination and freedom have been repressed, derailed and negated in places like Liby

“If anything, generating unrest appears to have been high on America’s agenda. Washington’s policies have led to the ongoing balkanization of the MENA and the rise of Islamic radicalism. Terror and despotism are the fruits of America’s policy,” former Bahraini MP Jawad Fairooz told MintPress.

 

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
Historically, the U.S. has attempted to generate change in foreign countries by exporting liberal democratic institutions through military occupation and reconstruction. Despite these efforts, the record of U.S.-led reconstruction has been mixed, at best. For every West Germany or Japan, there has been a Cuba, Haiti, Somalia or Vietnam.

Ever since the U.S. arose as a new world superpower on the back of World War II, Washington’s main ambition has been to export democracy to the world, often amid the thuds of military drums and almost always to catastrophic results, Christopher J. Coyne, a research fellow at the Mercatus Center, argues in his 2006 book, “After War: The Political Economy of Exporting Democracy.”

“Do efforts to export democracy help as much as they hurt? These are some of the most enduring questions of our time,” Coyne writes.

Source: www.mintpressnews.com