Does the Mideast Miss Its Dictators?

It can be difficult to recall, while scanning a map of today's Middle East and its myriad conflicts and crises, that the region for a number of years enjoyed a stretch of relative stability. And while some observers are now predicting the unraveling of that old order, others are looking back nostalgically at the old way of doings things, which suddenly does not look so bad.

"As the refugees continue to stream across the Mediterranean and southeastern Europe, it's worth remembering that for many years stability was considered the problem," writes The Week's Michael Brendan Dougherty. And although the often contemptible pillars and proxies the United States helped preserve in countries such as Egypt, Iraq, and elsewhere made for less than desirable allies, they were, argues Dougherty, far superior to the alternative, and a far more practical source of U.S. support:

"Fourteen years ago, we looked at decades of Middle Eastern ‘stability' purchased through dirty deals and felt disgusted. Now that we've had 14 years of idealism about revolutionary change, combined with romanticism about the democratic forces on the ground, are we any happier? Bush and others said that the West could not sustain the old order even if it desired to do so, that it was inherently unstable. But it turns out we can't guide the process of destruction and reformation to our desired ends either."

Dougherty is correct to note the damage that has been done by more than a decade of impetuous intervention in the greater Middle East, but such nostalgia for the halcyon days of strongmen misses the mark. The price of such "stability," while perhaps better than the present state of affairs, still came at a high cost, in both real dollars -- in the sum of billions a year -- as well as U.S. prestige among Arabs in the region.

Indeed, the inability to foster richer relationships with not only regimes, but actual people across the Middle East has created policy headaches for the United States, and the war against the Islamic State group has only further exposed this dearth in reliable Mideast partners. While the U.S. has a range of designations and arrangements in the region -- including one NATO ally, Turkey -- much of what the United States engages in across the Middle East could best be described as "gentlemen's agreements": security-oriented deals that grant the White House a certain amount of unilateral flexibility to provide financial aid, and the sale of weapons, to governments that meet a strategic need.

This isn't all that uncommon, especially considering that the traditional method of treaty-making, in a Constitutional sense, has mostly gone the way of the Dodo. But there are good reasons to push for deeper ties with the actual people of the Middle East, chiefly among them the fact that it is the people of the Middle East who will do most of the fighting and dying in the war against radical jihadist groups like ISIS.

And while Americans appear unable to agree on practically anything foreign policy-related these days, polls consistently show approval of global burden sharing. Americans, moreover, are even happy to see traditional allies in Europe and Asia exert themselves in their respective regions, if for no other reason but to serve as a check against countries such as Russia and China.

The United States, of course, enjoys rather deep ties with these countries that go back decades, and that have been ensconced in mutual defense treaties. Washington has balked at the notion of establishing similar ties with governments in the Gulf, and rightly so: The United States would be loath to bind itself to an intervention in the Middle East, quite possibly against Iran, and any such agreements would likely face a great deal of scrutiny in the U.S. Congress.

So who is America's Japan or Great Britain in the Middle East? We're likely decades removed from the answer to that question, as rapidly changing realities dictate the short-term policy decisions made today. Stability will trump all other ideals for the foreseeable future.

Around the Region

The Gulf's rite of passage. Mideast analyst Rami Khouri argues that the war in Yemen, far from meeting any obvious strategic needs, is in truth serving as a proving ground for Gulf power in the region:

"For the Saudis and Emiratis in particular, this is also about their identity, their place in the region and the world, and their ability to come together when they feel threatened. It is about achieving maturity in the arena of statehood."

How the deal helps Khamenei. A must-read report this week by Reuters reveals how Setad, a shadowy conglomerate with links to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, is well-positioned to benefit from this year's nuclear agreement with world powers:

"With stakes in nearly every sector of Iran's economy, Setad built its empire on the systematic seizure of thousands of properties belonging to religious minorities, business people, and Iranians living abroad, according to a 2013 Reuters investigation, which estimated the network's holdings at about $95 billion.

"Iranians who said their family properties were seized by Setad described in interviews in 2013 how men showed up and threatened to use violence if the owners didn't leave the premises at once."

This financial empire, moreover, gives Iran's supreme leader the ability to circumvent the at times Byzantine layers of government in Iran. "[T]hrough Setad, Khamenei has access to resources that allow him to bypass rivals and other branches of government," reports Reuters.

Russia boxes Turkey in. Semih Idiz explains how Russia's push into Syria complicates Ankara's agenda in the country:

"Turkey says it wants a centrally administered Syria run by a democratically elected government. It is no secret, however, that what President Recep Tayyip Erdogan ideally wants is a government based on Syrian demographics, which translates into a Sunni-majority administration. Russia, not to mention Iran, is determined to prevent this and is pushing for a political settlement that involves negotiations with Assad or his representatives. Meanwhile, the West appears to be of two minds about Assad."

Feedback

Questions, comments, or complaints? Feel free to send us an email, or reach out on Twitter @kevinbsullivan.