Strains as U.S. policy ignores ground reality

American Secretary of Defence William Cohen is on his last tour of the Middle East before he leaves office in January next year. His whirlwind tour of the region, which he has been undertaking twice a year, is taking him to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, Egypt, Jordan and Israel. Yesterday he visited UAE and held consultation with the top leadership on bilateral and regional issues.

As Cohen prepares to wrap up his assignment, he must be aware of the changes that have taken place in the region since he first took over office in 1996.  Events of these last four years have created new intra-regional dynamics which, for a change, have not been shaped by American policy. These dynamics pose fresh challenges for America, and Cohen's trip will surely give him an idea of what his successor will be up against.

Cohen has brought an upbeat message with him to the region. This message is that American policy towards the region will not change regardless of who ultimately becomes the president of the United States.  According to Cohen and his officials, this policy revolves around three "C's": Commitment, Containment, and Continuity.

Message of reassurance

For Middle East leaders, this is supposed to be a message of reassurance. It is a message which takes its inspiration from the Gulf War and the regional insecurity which ensued in its wake.

The three "C's" referred to by American policymakers symbolise the relationship which developed between the United States and Gulf countries when Saddam Hussain took the less-than-wise step of invading Kuwait.

This marked the beginning of a new chapter in U.S.-Gulf ties, in which the former took on the role of mother hen. In other words, America assumed a more domineering position in the region, stationed a heavy military presence armed with heavy weapons, and volunteered to become the sole guarantor of the Gulf's security.

The three "C's" translated into a commitment to the security of the region, containment of Iraq and Iran, and continuity of these policies. America also adopted its three-tiered Gulf security policy, whose results are debatable. The first tier was bolstering the defence capabilities of individual countries; second, beefing up collective security of Gulf countries; and third, enhancing the capability of America to safeguard the region from threats. This led to billions of dollars worth of arms being sold to Gulf states, packaged along with military advice from America.

Things changing

But things change, as they always do. Slowly but surely this post-Gulf War equation underwent a subtle transformation, which is unfolding even now. Fresh circumstances have introduced new elements into the relationship, and into the regional landscape. The three "C's" too may need alteration to keep up with these changes.

Iraq presents the first element of these changes. Cohen has had to face questions on the growing unpopularity of UN sanctions on Iraq and the regular bombing by American and British aircraft. Although he maintains that U.S. policy has not changed and UN sanctions still retain their credibility, he knows as well as everybody else that international support for these sanctions has eroded to a very significant degree.

The air embargo imposed on Iraq is all but finished as country after country (including UN Security Council members Russia and France) has violated it with impunity. The suffering of Iraq's civilian population has had a powerful impact on the majority of nations, and emboldened by actions of France and Russia, they have spoken out against the continuing battering of Iraq.

The recently held trade fair in Baghdad was attended by senior officials from a very large number of countries, illustrating the rapid end to international isolation imposed on Iraq after the Gulf War.

Within the region too Baghdad is slowly being welcomed back into the fold, and last week's OIC summit saw active efforts by a number of countries to bring about a rapprochement between Iraq and Kuwait.

Iraq has come a long way from 1990; despite America's best efforts. 'Containment' of Iraq is therefore not likely to evoke the kind of response in the region that it used to till a few years ago. This has been buttressed by Israel's savagery against Palestinians and America's deliberate refusal to differentiate between the aggressor and the victim.

A wave of revulsion has swept across the entire Muslim world, and especially among the Arab masses. At the OIC summit, a majority of countries, including most of the important ones, demanded a severing of ties with Israel.

America was not amused. During a background briefing at the U.S. Department of Defence on the Cohen visit to the Middle East, a senior American defence official was asked about the OIC statement inviting members to break ties with Israel. His answer: "(W)hen we looked at the OIC summit statement, there were a lot of things in it that we did not like. That was one of them. We didn't find that was a very constructive or a very good approach to our efforts to change the situation on the ground..."

American catalyst

If Iraq has created the first visible divide between America and its Gulf allies, its blind support for Israel has widened this divide. These two major factors have added to a growing list of less visible issues which are straining ties. Foremost among these is the presence of American troops in the region. With the shadow of Gulf War shortening rapidly, American forces in the Gulf have acquired a controversial nature among the local people.

Their presence, which was welcomed in the early nineties, is now generating resentment among a large section of the population. The fear of terrorism, which haunts everyone, has an uncomfortable link with this American military presence.

In recent months, the price of oil has introduced another irritant in the relationship between America and the Gulf countries. In his speech at an energy conference currently underway in Saudi Arabia, U.S. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson blamed Opec for the high oil price. "Our view is there is a supply problem," he said. But UAE's Minister for Petroleum and Mineral Resources Obeid bin Saif Al Nasiri was quick to respond. He said climatic changes and excessive taxation were responsible for the steep oil price. The blame game is likely to persist in the near future.

Cohen's official pronouncements will not reflect these issues, but he must already be grappling with them. So far the official line remains the three "C's" but the next U.S. administration will have to take into account the changing scenario.

In this respect, it is interesting to note that Cohen's visit to the region has coincided with a similar tour by the Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov who recently stated in Jordan that he would discuss with officials in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia confidence building measures to mend fences between Iraq and the Gulf Arab states.

Russian role

This is exactly the opposite of what Cohen has been preaching. Russia is gradually becoming more involved in the region and presenting itself as an antidote to America. Moscow enjoys good relations with almost all major players including America's 'outlaws' like Iraq, Syria and Iraq. It is also taking keen interest in the Middle East peace process. This growing Russian profile could become a major factor for American p