Arab perceptions of US foreign policy toward the Arab world, particularly since the onset of the second, or Al-Aqsa intifada, are abysmal United States foreign policy is viewed by Arab populaces and Arab governments as biased against the Arabs and in favor of Israel From the Arab view, two lesser factors that contribute to Arab feelings that US policies are unjust include the long-term American presence in the Arabian (or Persian) Gulf and America giving only lip service to promoting democracy in the Middle East, Two dominant issues that incite Arab opinion against US foreign policy are America 5 dealings with Iraq over the past decade and America's handling of the Arab-Israeli conflict, This paper seeks to introduce and explain in detail Arab reactions to US foreign policy toward the Arab world, For his research, the author relied heavily on interviews he conducted and discussions he had during from his tour in Syria and on interviews conducted with subject matter experts in Washington, DC, Finally, the author relied on press reporting from the Arab world and from some US sources, The author believes that although Arab resentment over US policies is unlikely to become positive in the immediate future, certain proactive US initiatives can more favorably affect Arab opinion over the long term. To better promote its interests in the volatile Middle East, America must adopt an enhanced and integrative approach to fuse together the military, economic, diplomatic, and informational instruments of power.
A reprint of the historic report of the Advisory Group on Public Diplomacy for the Arab and Muslim World, this document was submitted to the US Congress in 2003 as a first step toward reforming America's dilapidated strategic communication infrastructure. The bipartisan Advisory Group, chaired by Ambassador Edward P. Djerejian, made a series of recommendations in this report that helped re-shape US public diplomacy.
Originally published in 2007, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, by John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen M. Walt of Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government, provoked both howls of outrage and cheers of gratitude for challenging what had been a taboo issue in America: the impact of the Israel lobby on U.S. foreign policy. A work of major importance, it remains as relevant today as it was in the immediate aftermath of the Israel-Lebanon war of 2006. Mearsheimer and Walt describe in clear and bold terms the remarkable level of material and diplomatic support that the United States provides to Israel and argues that this support cannot be fully explained on either strategic or moral grounds. This exceptional relationship is due largely to the political influence of a loose coalition of individuals and organizations that actively work to shape U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction. They provocatively contend that the lobby has a far-reaching impact on America's posture throughout the Middle East―in Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, and toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict―and the policies it has encouraged are in neither America's national interest nor Israel's long-term interest. The lobby's influence also affects America's relationship with important allies and increases dangers that all states face from global jihadist terror. The publication of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy led to a sea change in how the U.S-Israel relationship was discussed, and continues to be one of the most talked-about books in foreign policy.
Preface p. vii 1 Introduction: The Analytical Framework Raymond Hinnebusch p. 1 2 The Middle East Regional System Raymond Hinnebusch p. 29 3 The Impact of the International System on the Middle East B.A. Roberson p. 55 4 The Challenge of Security in the Post--Gulf War Middle East System Nadia El-Shazly and Raymond Hinnebusch p. 71 5 The Foreign Policy of Egypt Raymond Hinnebusch p. 91 6 The Foreign Policy of Israel Clive Jones p. 115 7 The Foreign Policy of Syria Raymond Hinnebusch p. 141 8 The Foreign Policy of Iraq Charles Tripp p. 167 9 The Foreign Policy of Saudi Arabia F. Gregory Gause III p. 193 10 The Foreign Policy of Libya Tim Niblock p. 213 11 The Foreign Policy of Tunisia Emma C. Murphy p. 235 12 The Foreign Policy of Yemen Fred Halliday p. 257 13 The Foreign Policy of Iran Anoushiravan Ehteshami p. 283 14 The Foreign Policy of Turkey Philip Robins p. 311 15 Conclusion: Patterns of Policy Anoushiravan Ehteshami and Raymond Hinnebusch p. 335 Glossary p. 351 Bibliography p. 355 The Contributors p. 365 Index p. 369 About the Book p. 381.
This electronic version has been made available under a Creative Commons (BY-NC-ND) open access license. This text aims to fill a gap in the field of Middle Eastern political studies by combining international relations theory with concrete case studies. It begins with an overview of the rules and features of the Middle East regional system—the arena in which the local states, including Egypt, Turkey, Iran, Israel and the Arab states of Syria, Jordan and Iraq, operate. The book goes on to analyse foreign-policy-making in key states, illustrating how systemic determinants constrain this policy-making, and how these constraints are dealt with in distinctive ways depending on the particular domestic features of the individual states. Finally, it goes on to look at the outcomes of state policies by examining several major conflicts including the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Gulf War, and the system of regional alignment. The study assesses the impact of international penetration in the region, including the historic reasons behind the formation of the regional state system. It also analyses the continued role of external great powers, such as the United States and the former Soviet Union, and explains the process by which the region has become incorporated into the global capitalist market.
This study examines the role that public attitudes have played over the last generation in the making of United States foreign policy. It focuses on four prominent foreign interventions: the Vietnam War, the Nicaraguan Contra funding controversy, the Persian Gulf War, and the Bosnia crisis.
Whether democracy promotion should play a role in US foreign policy continues to be a subject of considerable debate, perhaps nowhere more than with regard to the Arab World. But looking beyond the "whether," what explains why, where, and how the United States promotes democracy? What caused the shift from the Obama administration's support of the Arab Spring protests in 2011 to its retreat from democracy promotion only two years later? What explains the Trump administration's focus on relationships with autocrats?In the context of these questions, Mieczyslaw Boduszynski explores the tensions between interests and ideals in US foreign policy and the possibilities and limits of US democracy promotion in a region where Washington has often supported autocracy over freedom.
The U.S. role in the world refers to the overall character, purpose, or direction of U.S. participation in international affairs and the country's overall relationship to the rest of the world. The U.S. role in the world can be viewed as establishing the overall context or framework for U.S. policymakers for developing, implementing, and measuring the success of U.S. policies and actions on specific international issues, and for foreign countries or other observers for interpreting and understanding U.S. actions on the world stage. While descriptions of the U.S. role in the world since the end of World War II vary in their specifics, it can be described in general terms as consisting of four key elements: global leadership; defense and promotion of the liberal international order; defense and promotion of freedom, democracy, and human rights; and prevention of the emergence of regional hegemons in Eurasia. The issue for Congress is whether the U.S. role in the world is changing, and if so, what implications this might have for the United States and the world. A change in the U.S. role could have significant and even profound effects on U.S. security, freedom, and prosperity. It could significantly affect U.S. policy in areas such as relations with allies and other countries, defense plans and programs, trade and international finance, foreign assistance, and human rights. Some observers, particularly critics of the Trump Administration, argue that under the Trump Administration, the United States is substantially changing the U.S. role in the world. Other observers, particularly supporters of the Trump Administration, while acknowledging that the Trump Administration has changed U.S. foreign policy in a number of areas compared to policies pursued by the Obama Administration, argue that under the Trump Administration, there has been less change and more continuity regarding the U.S. role in the world. Some observers who assess that the United States under the Trump Administration is substantially changing the U.S. role in the world-particularly critics of the Trump Administration, and also some who were critical of the Obama Administration-view the implications of that change as undesirable. They view the change as an unnecessary retreat from U.S. global leadership and a gratuitous discarding of long-held U.S. values, and judge it to be an unforced error of immense proportions-a needless and self-defeating squandering of something of great value to the United States that the United States had worked to build and maintain for 70 years. Other observers who assess that there has been a change in the U.S. role in the world in recent years-particularly supporters of the Trump Administration, but also some observers who were arguing even prior to the Trump Administration in favor of a more restrained U.S. role in the world-view the change in the U.S. role, or at least certain aspects of it, as helpful for responding to changed U.S. and global circumstances and for defending U.S. interests. Congress's decisions regarding the U.S role in the world could have significant implications for numerous policies, plans, programs, and budgets, and for the role of Congress relative to that of the executive branch in U.S. foreign policymaking.
"Analyzes key aspects of the 2011 Mideast turmoil, such as Arab public opinion; socioeconomic and demographic conditions; the role of social media; influence of Islamists; the impact of political changes on the Arab-Israeli peace process; and ramifications for the United States and the rest of the world. Also provides country-by-country analysis of Middle East political evolution"--Provided by publisher.
