By David Anandarajoo
COMMENT Today marks nine years since the 911 attacks. In the US, West Asia policy, under Barack Obama, has been mainly, containment and reversing the political damage of the previous administration.
To some extent, he has made some progress. But US policy shifts are notoriously laggard.
And by the time Obama’s administration translates the new policies into practical day-to-day diplomacy, he runs the risk of introducing concepts that might have worked during George W Bush’s tenure…10 years ago!
But time, tide and West Asian politics waits for no one. Regional politics, key players, socio-economic and political tectonic plates have changed and are changing virtually daily.
And the pattern hasn’t changed for years with the US and its European allies perceiving the region as being static and torpid.
But West Asia evolves faster and far less predictably than the West can possibly picture.
Eventually, US and European governments do come to grips with their mistakes, but by the time their realizations occur, the policy adjustments end up being hopelessly dated and quite ineffective.
As Arab nationalist movements emerged and took power across West Asia, the US and Europe ignored the challenge they posed and wrongly treated them as Soviet-inspired satellites.
By the time the significance and popularity of these movements were fully appreciated, Europe's power had long since faded, and its reputation in the region was irreparably tarnished by the stain of neo-colonialism in the aftermath of the so called war on terrorism.
Likewise, the US only became fully aware of the jihadist threat in the upshot of 911, after Washington had fuelled its rise by backing Islamic groups in Afghanistan during the 1980s.
And the idea of a Palestinian state was only endorsed by Washington in 2000 -- just when, as a result of developments on the ground and in both the Israeli and the Palestinian polities, the achievement of a two-state solution was becoming increasingly elusive.
The West's tendency to adopt policies that have already outlived their local political shelf lives is repeating itself today.
Despite its attempt to rectify the Bush administration's missteps, the Obama administration is cramped by flawed assumptions about the region’s balance of power.
The US and Europe still see West Asia as a neatly divided cut between two camps: a moderate, pro-West camp that ought to be supported and a militant, pro-Iranian one that needs to be contained.
A false assumption that is as far as the East is from West.
David Anandarajoo is a veteran journalist who now teaches journalism.
COMMENT Today marks nine years since the 911 attacks. In the US, West Asia policy, under Barack Obama, has been mainly, containment and reversing the political damage of the previous administration.
To some extent, he has made some progress. But US policy shifts are notoriously laggard.
And by the time Obama’s administration translates the new policies into practical day-to-day diplomacy, he runs the risk of introducing concepts that might have worked during George W Bush’s tenure…10 years ago!
But time, tide and West Asian politics waits for no one. Regional politics, key players, socio-economic and political tectonic plates have changed and are changing virtually daily.
And the pattern hasn’t changed for years with the US and its European allies perceiving the region as being static and torpid.
But West Asia evolves faster and far less predictably than the West can possibly picture.
Eventually, US and European governments do come to grips with their mistakes, but by the time their realizations occur, the policy adjustments end up being hopelessly dated and quite ineffective.
As Arab nationalist movements emerged and took power across West Asia, the US and Europe ignored the challenge they posed and wrongly treated them as Soviet-inspired satellites.
By the time the significance and popularity of these movements were fully appreciated, Europe's power had long since faded, and its reputation in the region was irreparably tarnished by the stain of neo-colonialism in the aftermath of the so called war on terrorism.
Likewise, the US only became fully aware of the jihadist threat in the upshot of 911, after Washington had fuelled its rise by backing Islamic groups in Afghanistan during the 1980s.
And the idea of a Palestinian state was only endorsed by Washington in 2000 -- just when, as a result of developments on the ground and in both the Israeli and the Palestinian polities, the achievement of a two-state solution was becoming increasingly elusive.
The West's tendency to adopt policies that have already outlived their local political shelf lives is repeating itself today.
Despite its attempt to rectify the Bush administration's missteps, the Obama administration is cramped by flawed assumptions about the region’s balance of power.
The US and Europe still see West Asia as a neatly divided cut between two camps: a moderate, pro-West camp that ought to be supported and a militant, pro-Iranian one that needs to be contained.
A false assumption that is as far as the East is from West.
David Anandarajoo is a veteran journalist who now teaches journalism.
No comments:
Post a Comment