In the past years there has been a plethora of multilateral interventions between countries. Many states and their allies have intervened in the Middle East, handling various sorts of political and economic issues. These states have intervened in these Middle East because intervening was to their benefit. However, there were also disadvantages to intervention since many states had different perspectives as to why they should intervene. For the most part, the United States and its allies have chosen to participate in multilateral interventions in order to promote foreign policy and security throughout the region. When it comes to multilateral intervention in the Middle East there are benefits for participating in intervention. These states …show more content…
Many countries in the Middle East are dependent on military technology, economic assistance and foreign troops necessary for protection from external and internal threats. Therefore, due to the United States foreign policy, they benefit by promoting norms. When the U.S and its allies intervene and protect these populations they are enforcing western norms. For example, in class we talk about world NGOs and how they intervene to change the behavior of states regarding the use of using landmines. These international NGO’s use education and coercion as a tool to influence these societies. Therefore, these norms can structure the way a system is run and promote a political system in their …show more content…
Many countries have a different perspective on what they want in their country and many countries do not like their government to be controlled by another nation. Therefore, this can lead to situations of miscommunication and confusion to get objectives done. Likewise, a disadvantage with multilateral interventions is that the conflict may get worse by intervening to stabilize a country. Another disadvantage is the domestic, political cost when intervening in another country. When intervening in one’s country, people die and the economic cost start to get high. Therefore, depending on the political situation for one’s country, the options for the government can be scarce. For example, due to the terrible results of the intervention in Iraq, the U.S. population has no stomach for another American intervention. Therefore, if the United States intervened without the support of the public, and because of this the public will not trust their government to intervene
Saddam’s government collapse in the US impacted the country of Iraq by creating a democratic government where the citizens have rights. Two years earlier Afghanistan was invaded by the us because their government was believed to be an aid to Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. Later the US defeated Afghanistan’s government, the Taliban and established a democratic government like in Iraq today. We can infer that the Middle East has complicated problem going on with the region, that not even the u.s. president can figure out. (Doc C) all in all the US has impacted the region of the Middle East and build a strong relationship with it over the past
The Middle East has historically rebuked Western influence during their process of establishing independence. When Britain and France left the Middle East after World War II, the region saw an unprecedented opportunity to establish independent and self-sufficient states free from the Western influence they had felt for hundreds of years. In an attempt to promote nationalistic independence, the states of the region immediately formed the League of Arab States in 1945. The League recognized and promoted the autonomy of its members and collaborated in regional opposition against the West until 1948 when Israel declared independence. Israel represented then and now an intrusive Western presence in the Arab world. The ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict typifies this cultural antagonism. The Cold War refocused attention to the Middle East as a site of economic and strategic importance for both sides, yet the two hegemons of the Cold War now needed to recognize the sovereignty of the Middle Eastern states. With their statehood and power cemented, the Middle Easte...
SUMMARY: The Syrian Civil War between the Syrian government, and the insurgents, as well as the Free Syrian Army has been escalating since early 2011. The United States, and our allies have faced difficulty in sending aid to Syria, and continue to deal with obstacles in sending even basic medications to Syrian civilians. However, the United States and its allies have also contributed to the lack of organization and the disparity in Syria by sending aid and artillery to individuals based only on political connection, and ignoring organization, local alliances, and without a true understanding of the reality of the Syrian localities to best protect the Syrian protestors. The question addressed in this memo will be defining the viable options to be pursued in Syria, how to pursue them, and assessing the most beneficial path of least resistance when offering aid, funds, and artillery to specific groups in the country. The recommendation will be that although the best alternative action item would be to choose a Syrian group with the least oppositional values comparative to the United States to fund, supply with arms, and train; that the United States should do nothing for the time being. Given the physical and financial risk involved with the Syrian Civil War, it would be prudent for the United States to simply observe how the war progresses over the next several months, as well as complete some research to truly understand the state of affairs in local areas of Syria to determine the extent to which the United States could identify a group to provide aid to, as well as the extent to which the United States involvement would be within Syria.
The relations between the U.S and the Middle East are strained at best. The troops deployed in the area face constant threat of attack by a militant group. These broken relations between the U.S and the Middle East started over 50 years ago, with the Iran Hostage Crisis. Root causes of the crisis were many. One was U.S greed over oil in Iran. The second, the coup in Iran organized and funded by the CIA. The U.S dependence on foreign oil is another cause of the problems. Lastly, should the U.S stop moving into other countries sovereign lands and trying to “Prevent the evil of communism”, the nation would not have so many problems around the world. This worry was even shown in Iran (Kinzer, 10). While often blamed on radicals, the strained relations between the U.S and the Middle East are a direct result of a poor US foreign policy.
The pro-Israel intervention represented the US foreign policy reaction when the violation to regional stability was committed by Israel. The cases discussed above were evaluated against the US reaction to Israel’s regional behaviour; in terms of whether the Israeli behaviour served or hampered US interest in maintaining regional stability and whether or not the US opposed Israel when it acted in ways that the United States deemed undesirable. It was concluded that, as a general rule, Washington was ready to intervene to address any violation to the status quo in the Middle East system except when this violation was committed by its regional surrogate. Israel had contributed directly in destabilizing the Middle East system (pushing the system out of its equilibrium point) in several cases, four of which have been discussed above. These crises, in spite of their negative effect on regional stability, witnessed minimal US reaction.
... another state with the mindset of hopefully improving the overall atmosphere. Although intervention will always be in question, whether or not intervention is just an excuse to invade, with the creation of this resolution and the topic in discussion, most likely intervention will result it positive outcomes. One of the biggest contribution to successful interventions is the intention the state has going in. If the intention is to hopefully resolve conflicts and to intervene peacefully, meaning an unlikely possibility of military enforcement, intervention will be successful.
In no field other than politics does the justification for action often come from a noteworthy event and the true cause stays hidden behind the headlines. The United States’ transformation from a new state to a global superpower has been a methodical journey molded by international conditions (the global terrain for statecraft), the role of institutions and their programmed actions, and ultimately, the interests of actors (the protection of participants in making policy’s items and i...
So, as you can see, there are advantages and disadvantages to being Isolationist or Interventionist. We can do a lot of good for the world by stepping in, however it is often at a great cost to ourselves. And our country can be seen as a great protector or a greater destroyer. Being only Isolationist or Interventionist would mean we are weak or too controlling. All we can do is try to find a medium and decide when is the right time for action.
The Middle Eastern has developed a lot of economic success with the authoritarianism government they’ve established. To some people, if they are economically stable, they’re willing to endure the hardships of being lead under a dictator. Countries like Bahrain and Saudi Arabia are flourishing in the oil business, which keeps them wealthy and involved in international relations. To the citizens of the Middle East, this makes their country look powerful because even with the Western’s opposing ideologies, they’re still working with the Middle East. This is sending the wrong message because even though the western countries have to cooperate and show political support with the Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and other Middle Eastern countries. Situations like these give the citizens a positive outlook of how their country is being conducted and support their governme...
..., since it reinforce the perception of the surrounding states to be dealing with a country characterized by a high level of resolution and risk-taking attitude, despite its inability to confront other major power military.
Iraq’s non-cooperation with inspection agencies by obstructing the inspection from 1997 to 2002 resulted in massive international pressure and strengthening the USA’s doubts on Iraq. The apprehension between the USA and Iraq can be considered decisive, since the USA alleged Iraq as a threat to global stability.... ... middle of paper ... ... Most of the regional actors discarded the U.S. policy towards Iraq with varying intensity as they feared insecurity after Iraq’s disintegration (Reuters, 2003). Jordan decided not to endanger its rewarding ties with Washington. Another key actor at this level is the Baathi party in Iraq which was based on tribal division, domestic oppression and economic enticement.
“Stability Operations in Strategic Perspective: A Skeptical View”, an article written by Dr. Colin S. Gray (2006), debates against United State’s military involvement in postwar stability operations. In Mateja Peter’s (2015) article, “Between Doctrine and Practice: The UN Peacekeeping Dilemma”, he outlines the methods used by the United Nations (UN) enforcement peacekeeping efforts that are contradictory to the usual UN precepts. Peter (2015) states that stability operations include the “enforcement of political solutions through support of a government’s statebuilding ambitions and its attempts to extend state authority in the midst of conflict and in enforcement of military victories through the offensive use of force” (p. 351). Many would argue that peacekeeping and stability operations in Afghanistan and Iraq benefit the regions they possess both socially, economically, and politically. Dr. Grey’s opinion is less generous; he argues that stability operations like the ones outlined in the QDR are an irrational approach to conflict that arises in the Middle East after war.
Maroon 5 is a famous pop rock music band that is known all over the world. They have released 5 albums thus far and are currently finishing up on their 6th album. My favorite album from them is the 5th album, “V” because of its upbeat tempos, unique melodies, and catchy rhythms. This album's genre is considered as pop music, pop rock, electro, and electro pop. “V,” is a catchy upbeat tempo music which makes you want to get up and start dancing and groove to it’s catchy riffs.
The discovery of oil in Middle East in the late nineteenth century added a critical dimension to the region as major outside state powers employed military force to protect their newly acquired interests in the Middle East. The United States efforts to secure the flow of oil have led to their ever-increasing involvement in the Middle East’s political affairs and ongoing power struggles. By the end of the twentieth century, safeguarding the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf had become one of the most important functions of the U.S. military. The close relationship between the United States and the Saudi royal family was formed in the final months of World War II, when U.S. leaders sought to ensure preferential access to Saudi’s petroleum. The U.S. link with Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region has demonstrated to be greatly beneficial to both parties, yet it has also led to ever deepening U.S. involvement in regional politics.
There are three main arguments concerning the discussion over the amount of power regimes have in the international system. The neo-realist argument is the first one where regimes are not merely considered as inadequate, but sometimes deceptive. This perspective is regarded as conventional structural. Keohane and Stein support the second argument, which states that regimes have certain worth, but only under particular conditions. Finally, the Grotian argument perceives regimes as an essential, secondary phenomenon feature of human nature. The connection of international and domestic stakeholders, through benefits, influence, standards, societies, and knowledge lead to the likely development of regimes.