Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Expectations Build for Obama Mideast Policy Speech

Barack Obama’s planned address this week on Middle Eastern policy will be a harbinger of the administration’s future approach to the region.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Inter Press Service

With Jordan's King Abdullah and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu coming to Washington next week, anticipation of a major Middle East policy speech by President Barack Obama set for Thursday is growing rapidly.

A key question on analysts' minds is whether the deadlocked Israel-Palestinian peace process will be part of that speech, which comes on the eve of Netanyahu's visit.

"One cannot separate the Palestinian struggle against the Israeli occupation, sieges, and colonisation from the pro-democracy struggles against autocratic regimes sweeping the Arab world," Professor Stephen Zunes, an expert on U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East at the University of San Francisco, told IPS.

The resignation Friday of Obama's Special Middle East Envoy George Mitchell strengthens the view that the Israeli-Palestinian stalemate cannot be put off. Mitchell's effective resignation date of May 20, the same day Obama will meet with Netanyahu, puts even more focus on that deadlock, which has been further complicated by this month's Egyptian-mediated reconciliation agreement between the U.S.-backed Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas, which Washington considers a terrorist group.

King Abdullah is scheduled to visit on Tuesday.

Obama has also been facing growing pressure to clarify the United States' position on the upheavals throughout the Arab world.

Critics are saying that Obama simply has no strategy for how to respond to the Arab Spring.

"We need a broader strategic idea of how to proceed throughout the Middle East, but we obviously don't have one," former George W. Bush administration ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton said in a recent Fox News appearance.

Simultaneously, Obama is facing growing pressure from Arab governments and from domestic pro-peace groups to take some steps to revive talks between Israel and the Palestinians. And many of his advisers believe he needs to separate his response to the Arab Spring from a new strategy with the Israelis and Palestinians.

The time for these decisions is now, say many analysts, because of the political credit Obama has recently gained with the killing of Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

Benjamin J. Rhodes, one of Obama's deputy national security advisers, told the New York Times that the message will be that "Bin Laden is the past; what's happening in the region is the future."

Some experts believe Obama needs to address Israel-Palestine for that message to have credibility.

"The most important act for the Americans is to push for a fair and equitable settlement between Israel and the Palestinians, even as the west must redefine itself as the open-hearted friend of the new Arab societies emerging from the rubble of dictatorship," wrote Ahmed Rashid, an expert in Afghan and Pakistani politics for the Financial Times.

The prevailing feeling, however, is that Obama will not present a new plan on Israel and the Palestinians next week.

Citing "U.S. officials and Middle East hands," Laura Rozen, the senior foreign policy writer for Yahoo News, and longtime foreign policy writer for Politico, reported that "next week's parade of Middle East visitors and speeches won't be the time for Obama to issue a major new U.S. push for Israeli-Palestinian peace talks…That potential speech, on the U.S. vision for the basis of an Israeli- Palestinian peace settlement, is expected to be delayed until August, ahead of a Palestinian plan to seek a vote recognizing Palestinian statehood at the United Nations in September."

But that idea could have serious consequences for Obama's credibility in the Middle East.

"If Obama lauds the Arab spring in North Africa without alluding to the Arab winter in West Asia, he will have no credibility in either geography," Chas Freeman, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, told IPS. "If he fails to explain the failure of the botched peace process and the resignation of George Mitchell, he will simply confirm the diplomatic irrelevance of the United States as the U.N. General Assembly prepares to take the Israel-Palestine issue in September."

And that position will find some support in Washington.

"There's clearly a lot going on in the region, and there's a case to be made and some are making it, that now is not the time," said Jeremy Ben-Ami, director of the pro-peace lobbying group, J Street. "But we do believe that the only way to avoid U.N. action on a Palestinian state in a unilateral kind of way is for either the president or prime minister to put forward" a peace plan.

Ben-Ami's position could be satisfied by the expected unveiling of a new U.S. Mideast peace plan in August. But that will be very close to the September deadline of the U.N. vote on Palestinian statehood.

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Former Vice President Dick Cheney was a leading framer of the “global war on terror” and a staunch supporter of aggressive U.S. military action around the world.


Mike Pompeo, the Trump administration’s second secretary of state, is a long time foreign policy hawk and has led the public charge for an aggressive policy toward Iran.


Right Web readers will be familiar with Mr. Fleitz, the former CIA officer who once threatened to take “legal action” against Right Web for publicizing reports of controversies he was associated with in the George W. Bush administration. Fleitz recently left his job at the conspiracy-mongering Center for Security Policy to become chief of staff to John Bolton at the National Security Council.


Norm Coleman is chair of the Republican Jewish Coalition and a former senator from Minnesota known for his hawkish views on foreign policy.


Billionaire hedge fund mogul Paul Singer is known for his predatory business practices and support for neoconservative causes.


Keith Kellogg, national security adviser to Vice President Mike Pence, is a passionate supporter of Trump’s foreign policy.


Christians United for Israel (CUFI), the largest “pro-Israel” advocacy group in the United States, is known for its zealous Christian Zionism and its growing influence in the Republican Party.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The Trumpian new regional order in the Middle East is predicated on strongman rule, disregard for human rights, Sunni primacy over Iran and other Shia centers of power, continued military support for pro-American warring parties regardless of the unlawfulness of such wars, and Israeli hegemony.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

A comparison of U.S. nuclear diplomacy with Iran and the current version with North Korea puts the former in a good light and makes the latter look disappointing. Those with an interest in curbing the dangers of proliferating nuclear weapons should hope that the North Korea picture will improve with time. But whether it does or not, the process has put into perspective how badly mistaken was the Trump administration’s trashing of the Iran nuclear agreement.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Numerous high profile Trump administration officials maintain close ties with anti-Muslim conspiracy theorists. In today’s America, disparaging Islam is acceptable in ways that disparaging other religions is not. Given the continuing well-funded campaigns by the Islamophobes and continuing support from their enablers in the Trump administration, starting with the president himself, it seems unlikely that this trend will be reversed any time soon.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The Trump administration’s nuclear proliferation policy is now in meltdown, one which no threat of “steely resolve”—in Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s words—will easily contain. It is hemorrhaging in part because the administration has yet to forge a strategy that consistently and credibly signals a feasible bottom line that includes living with—rather than destroying—regimes it despises or fears. Political leaders on both sides of the aisle must call for a new model that has some reasonable hope of restraining America’s foes and bringing security to its Middle East allies.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Congressional midterm elections are just months away and another presidential election already looms. Who will be the political leader with the courage and presence of mind to declare: “Enough! Stop this madness!” Man or woman, straight or gay, black, brown, or white, that person will deserve the nation’s gratitude and the support of the electorate. Until that occurs, however, the American penchant for war will stretch on toward infinity.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

To bolster the president’s arguments for cutting back immigration, the administration recently released a fear-mongering report about future terrorist threats. Among the potential threats: a Sudanese national who, in 2016, “pleaded guilty to attempting to provide material support to ISIS”; an Uzbek who “posted a threat on an Uzbek-language website to kill President Obama in an act of martyrdom on behalf of ISIS”; a Syrian who, in a plea agreement, “admitted that he knew a member of ISIS and that while in Syria he participated in a battle against the Syrian regime, including shooting at others, in coordination with Al Nusrah,” an al-Qaeda offshoot.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The recent appointment of purveyors of anti-Muslim rhetoric to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom exposes the cynical approach Republicans have taken in promoting religious freedom.


RightWeb
share