Hurdles for new president

As much as it has been entertaining and exciting to follow the US election, it is time to shed some light on what lies ahead for the coming president, in terms of foreign policy in the Middle East. Whoever wins the White House will inherit ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

He will also be faced with a stalled peace process between Palestinians and Israelis that if nothing, has taken a few steps backwards during the Bush presidency. Then there is Iran, which is being sold in the US as a threat to each and every American's security due to its nuclear aspirations.

Moreover, at a time when there is a growing uneasiness among some of the US's closest allies on the reliability and accountability of US involvement abroad, we are faced with a less popular America and the new president must invest time in rebranding his nation.

Let's get one thing clear: the 44th president comes after the worst US presidency in living memory, on both the domestic and international fronts. In many ways, the war in Iraq has acted as a major distraction for the US and its "mission" in Afghanistan, which was to capture Al Qaida leader Osama Bin Laden. In launching the war in Iraq, the US forces became tied up in an Arab country and Afghanistan deteriorated into grave problems of insurgency.

The reality is today, US troops are exhausted following long shifts of combat duty and supplies of weapons and helicopters are being exhausted seven years after they were put to use. President George W. Bush has already secured a troops' transfer from Iraq to Afghanistan, hoping that a surge there will improve matters.

But General David Petraeus, who was the chief architect of the surge in Iraq, seems nervous on whether or not the Iraq model can be applied in Afghanistan. There's also the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) which is being placed on hold until the election results are announced. Both, Americans and Iraqis are waiting to see which direction the US government is going to take.

Engagement

Afghanistan is far more complex than what Bush and Co. took it for and the next president must seriously consider engaging elements of the Taliban in talks. We are already seeing this being proposed by certain individuals in the US government.

When it comes to resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the challenges for the new president are not indifferent from those before previous incumbents. Here, Obama could make a difference as he has emphasised diplomacy and dialogue and hinted at addressing the conflict early in his term.

Having said that, Obama is a "typical" Democrat. That is, his share of double standards on Palestine is expected since Democrats have historically come across as genuine supporters of peace (think Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton) but rarely ever delivered solid results. When it comes to the conflict, the potential for great change is always there but it quickly recoils to avoid risking political inconvenience.

What is needed is a more flexible and rational leader, a more honest man. With that in mind, optimism will be hard to detect.

Another key issue will be how the new president will approach Syria. The recent US special forces' attack inside Syria might have been a goodbye gift from Bush and vice-president Dick Cheney, but it comes across as just that; marking the end of an era. That is, of course, assuming we will have a Democrat presidency. There is speculation that the US will change its tune towards Syria out of sheer convenience and necessity. Given the situation in Iraq, the US will need larger support from the war-torn country's neighbours.

One thing both candidates have in common is that they are incessant on getting this message out there: they are not George W. Bush. Both are able to separate themselves from Bush's flawed decisions and military means to resolve differences. Of course, what they sell during their campaign might be different from actual policies they plan to adopt. Their choices for cabinet members will be significant as it will shape their foreign policy.

More or less, the next US president faces the prospect of America becoming mired in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and even Pakistan. All this as the US economy teeters toward its worst situation since 1929. What's needed more than ever is a pragmatic approach to the Middle East because the alternative would be a continuation (and deterioration) of the past eight years.