DOCSLIB.ORG

The “Obama Doctrine” in the Middle East

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The “Obama Doctrine” in the Middle East A joint publication from the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding, POLICY BRIEF the Duke Islamic Studies Center, and ISLAMiCommentary OCTOBER 2012 THE “OBAMA DOCTRINE” IN THE MIDDLE EAST Fawaz A. Gerges, ISPU Fellow Presidential doctrines have been used to articulate nations: “Recall that earlier generations faced down America’s foreign policy and worldview since the fascism and communism not just with missiles and presidency of James Monroe. However, only a few tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. doctrines have succeeded at outlining a strategic vision They understood that our power alone cannot protect of the United States’ role in international affairs. The us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please.”2 He Truman Doctrine (1947) and Eisenhower Doctrine (1957) starkly contrasted his foreign policy vision of realism, centered on curtailing the spread of Communism and pragmatism, and restraint with that of President George expanding America’s global influence during the Cold W. Bush. America longed for normalcy, military de- War. In the post–Cold War era, presidential doctrines escalation, and above all a refocus on the home front encapsulated new strategies to meet the challenges rather than on the behaviour of dictators in distant lands. of an unfamiliar, unipolar world and have increasingly As challenges in the Middle East heat up in the wake dealt with the greater Middle East as a strategic space. of the Arab Spring, the recent anti-Islam video, a pending While his predecessors have articulated foreign war with Iran, shifting tides in Syria and Afghanistan, policy doctrines that address specific ideologies or and the recent ground-swell of protest and violence geographies, when asked to describe the “Obama following the assassination of US Ambassador to Libya doctrine,” the President has chosen not to respond Chris Stevens, it is a good time to assess Obama’s directly, but explained that the United States must act foreign policy towards the Middle East. with other countries. “[Mine is] an American leadership Has Obama’s realism been successful in overcoming that recognizes the rise of countries like China, India the bitter inheritance of America’s relationship with the and Brazil. It’s a U.S. leadership that recognizes our Middle East? Has his lack of a grand strategy complicated limits in terms of resources and capacity.”1 America’s interests in the region? Does Obama’s refusal After the eight tumultuous years of the Bush to declare a doctrine reflect an awareness of the complex administration, which left the United States on the verge and ever changing international system and America’s of financial ruin, Barack Obama has sought to chart a relative decline? In the absence of an officially declared new course in American foreign policy that would rely Obama doctrine, can such a doctrine be constructed by not on abstract moral values, or brute military strength, analysts through an examination of his policies during but on real relationships and shared interests with other his first term? OCTOBER 2012 POLICY BRIEF ABOUT THE AUTHOR Urged to action by an anxious, justice-seeking public, he charted a foreign policy course designed to eliminate FAWAZ GERGES threats stemming from state or non-state actors that ISPU Fellow challenged America’s preeminent role on the international stage. His doctrine thus supported the liberal use of force to affect social and political change abroad, and marked a clear break from American foreign policy in the twentieth Fawaz Gerges is a Fellow at ISPU and a Professor century. It supplied the ideological foundation for the US of International Relations at the London School “global war on terror,” particularly the worldwide hunt for of Economics and Political Science and director al Qaeda, the invasion of Afghanistan and the war in Iraq. of the Middle East Centre. Gerges has taught To defeat a new kind of enemy, undeterred by the threat at Oxford, Harvard, and Columbia, and was a of prosecution and unrestricted by practical humanitarian research scholar at Princeton and chairholder constraints, the United States would go on the offensive (the Christian A. Johnson Chair in Middle and wage all-out war against real and imagined foes.3 But Eastern Studies and International Affairs) at the Bush administration did not speak with one voice, and Sarah Lawrence College, New York. Gerges as it planned for the battles abroad, it also planned for has been the recipient of MacArthur, Fullbright the battles within the Beltway.4 In response to the 9/11 and Carnegie Fellowships. Gerges is author attacks, traditional realists argued that “police action” of two recently acclaimed books: Journey of against terrorist organizations should be taken while the Jihadist: Inside Muslim Militancy (Harcourt strategic relationships with friendly, dictatorial regimes Press, 2007), and The Far Enemy: Why Jihad should be improved. Neoconservatives countered that Went Global (Cambridge University Press, 2005). America should not “appease terror” by negotiating with He received an M.Sc. from the London School despots, because that would reward bad behaviour.5 of Economics and Political Science and a Ph.D. In their view, the events of September 11 affirmed that from Oxford University. His most recent books are America had become vulnerable to such attacks because The Rise and Fall of Al-Qaeda (Oxford University it had failed to make full use of its unrivalled unipolar Press: 2011) and Obama’s Middle East: The End status after the collapse of the Soviet Union.6 of America’s Moment (Palgrave MacMillan: 2012). Bush relied on the unilateral expression of overwhelming force to protect the American homeland, consolidate US hegemony worldwide, and engineer social and political change in the Middle East. To eliminate transnational IN A SINGLE MORNING: terrorists like Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, THE BUSH DOCTRINE the former president’s neoconservative advisers called for toppling the tyrants who supported them. As Bush noted, The Bush Doctrine presented certainty and confidence “[T]he best hope for peace in our world is the expansion amid the chaos of September 11. It targeted the Middle of freedom in the entire world.”7 Therefore, the full force of East, where frustration with and opposition to US foreign the most powerful nation would be deployed to institute policy had been rampant since the onset of the Cold War. a new “balance of power that favors freedom.”8 Bush believed that the US should maintain “primacy” on Bush believed that his “Freedom Agenda” would the global stage and eliminate any and all future threats. reinforce fragile democracies, support democratic ISPU The “Obama Doctrine” in the Middle East OCTOBER 2012 POLICY BRIEF dissidents in countries suffering from oppressive rule, that the Obama administration’s foreign policy approach and promote human rights.9 In Bush’s words, the strategy is fundamentally reactive and defeatist. One conservative “was idealistic in that freedom is a universal gift from critic, Niall Ferguson, accused the President of presenting Almighty God. It was realistic because freedom is the one foreign policy in his speeches, and another in his most practical way to protect our country in the long actions.13 The air is also thick with liberal disappointment run.”10 Unfortunately for Bush and the region, his decision regarding Obama’s unwillingness to give closure to Bush’s to link the Iraq invasion and the cause of universal human 9/11 wars and scars, including closing the US military freedom had the opposite effect.11 The administration of prison at Guantanamo Bay and swiftly bringing US troops Bush and his neocons, more than any other, deepened home from Afghanistan. Several others such as Robert the mistrust and animosity between America and Muslim Kagan and Zbigniew Brezinski also criticized Obama for peoples and societies.12 not having any clear plans. Given a choice between the realpolitik of his father’s Obama’s White House aides counter by saying that administration and the militant idealism expounded the left and right’s critiques overlook that the President on by the neoconservatives, Bush proved indecisive. is interested only in what works; he’s an anti-ideological On the one hand, he sought to break with traditional politician. They explain that Obama realizes that the realist theories of international politics, finding moral post Cold War world is complex and requires specific agnosticism out of touch with American values, and slow, approaches tailored to each situation, and argue that in patient implementation ill-suited to post–9/11 urgency. contrast to his predecessor, Obama stresses bureaucratic On the other hand, when eventually he encountered the efficiency, modesty and humility over ideology, and difficult practical reality of implementing his lofty ideals, assertion of America’s power and affirmation of its especially in Iraq, Bush at the end of his presidency exceptionalism.14 He does not consider his own foreign inevitably reverted back to a realist approach toward policy a doctrine, and is not averse to revisiting previous the Middle East. The Iraq case illustrates the pitfalls of decisions that he had made if political conditions and decision-making driven by an ideology and tunnel vision events on the ground change, and if he believes that shift that does not accommodate the beliefs and aspirations serves American national interests.15 of millions of people in the Middle East. During the Cold War era, realists viewed the Middle East through the prism RESETTING RELatiONSHIPS: of East-West struggle. After September 11 the neo-cons THE CAIRO SPEECH looked at the region through the prism of global terrorism. In both cases, the regionalist perspective was lost in the fog of an ideological struggle. As Obama embarked on his first year as President, he had to contend with the damage the Bush administration had OBAMA’S FOREIGN POLICY AGENDA: inflicted on the country’s relationship with Muslims globally.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Archived News
    Archived News 2007-2008 News articles from 2007-2008 Table of Contents Alumnae Cited for Accomplishments and Sage Salzer ’96................................................. 17 Service................................................................. 5 Porochista Khakpour ’00.................................. 18 Laura Hercher, Human Genetics Faculty............ 7 Marylou Berg ’92 ............................................. 18 Lorayne Carbon, Director of the Early Childhood Meema Spadola ’92.......................................... 18 Center.................................................................. 7 Warren Green ................................................... 18 Hunter Kaczorowski ’07..................................... 7 Debra Winger ................................................... 19 Sara Rudner, Director of the Graduate Program in Dance .............................................................. 7 Melvin Bukiet, Writing Faculty ....................... 19 Rahm Emanuel ’81 ............................................. 8 Anita Brown, Music Faculty ............................ 19 Mikal Shapiro...................................................... 8 Sara Rudner, Dance Faculty ............................. 19 Joan Gill Blank ’49 ............................................. 8 Victoria Hofmo ’81 .......................................... 20 Wayne Sanders, Voice Faculty........................... 8 Students Arrive on Campus.............................. 21 Desi Shelton-Seck MFA ’04............................... 9 Norman
    [Show full text]
  • The Bush Doctrine and the Use of Force: Reflections on Rule Construction and Application, 9 Loy
    Loyola University Chicago International Law Review Volume 9 Article 5 Issue 1 Fall/Winter 2011 2011 The uB sh Doctrine and the Use of Force: Reflections on Rule Construction and Application Paul F. Diehl University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Shyam Kulkarni University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Adam Irish University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Follow this and additional works at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/lucilr Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Paul F. Diehl , Shyam Kulkarni & Adam Irish The Bush Doctrine and the Use of Force: Reflections on Rule Construction and Application, 9 Loy. U. Chi. Int'l L. Rev. 71 (2011). Available at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/lucilr/vol9/iss1/5 This Feature Article is brought to you for free and open access by LAW eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola University Chicago International Law Review by an authorized administrator of LAW eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE BUSH DOCTRINE AND THE USE OF FORCE: REFLECTIONS ON RULE CONSTRUCTION AND APPLICATION Paul F. Diehl, Shyam Kulkarni, and Adam Irisht Abstract. .................................................. 71 I. Introduction. ......................................... 72 II. The Basic Elements of the Bush Doctrine .................... 73 III. Normative System v. Operating System Rules ................. 76 IV. Key Elements of a Prospective Bush Doctrine ................. 78 A. Authorization ..................................... 78 1. What is the Threat Threshold That Triggers the Doctrine? . 78 2. Who is Allowed to Authorize Action? . 83 3. Must This Be a Last Resort Option? . 89 B. Execution. ........................................ 91 1. Must the Act Be Exercised Multilaterally or Is Unilateral Action Permitted? . .. 91 2.
    [Show full text]
  • AN ANALYSIS of POST-COLD WAR CONCEPTS in AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY: CONTINUITY OR CHANGE? by Ana Maria Venegas a Thesis Submitted
    AN ANALYSIS OF POST-COLD WAR CONCEPTS IN AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY: CONTINUITY OR CHANGE? by Ana Maria Venegas A thesis submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Global Security Studies Baltimore, Maryland December 2014 © 2014 Ana Maria Venegas All Rights Reserved Abstract This thesis investigates post-Cold War concepts in US foreign policy. At the end of the Cold War, prominent political scientists and commentators argued, for various reasons, that the strategic environment was so dramatically different that the United States would no longer be able to engage the world as it had in the past. In an attempt to understand the ramifications of the evolution of the strategic environment, this thesis asked the question: Have the three post-Cold War presidents, William J. Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack H. Obama, continued to engage the world in ways consistent with previous administrations or have the broken from traditional concepts in American foreign policy? To answer this question, declaratory foreign policy as articulated in national security strategy documents and key foreign policy engagements were analyzed and compared to nine traditional concepts in American foreign policy identified by prominent historians and political scientists. The post-Cold War administrations continued to develop foreign policy consistent with the concepts identified by historians and political scientists suggesting a measure of consistency in the way the United States engages the world. Additionally, each president developed foreign policy that exhibited unique characteristics inconsistent with the traditional concepts. These policies were characterized by the importance placed on multilateral consensus; an emphasis on multilateral agreements and alliances to foster a stable international order; and the reliance on international organizations to address regional and global issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Review Essays
    Review Essays The Mechanics of Empire by John Hillen John Hillen ([email protected]) is a trustee of the Foreign Policy Research Institute and director of its Program on National Security. He is a contributing editor at National Review. Walter Russell Mead, Power, Terror, Peace, and War: America’s Grand Strategy in a World at Risk (New York: Knopf, 2004) $19.95 Niall Ferguson, Colossus: The Price of America’s Empire (New York: Penguin, 2004) $25.95 Robert Cooper, The Breaking of Nations: Order and Chaos in the 21st Century (New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2003) $18.95 Francis Fukuyama, State-Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st Century (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2004) $21 James Dobbins, et al., America’s Role in Nation-Building: From Germany to Iraq (Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND, 2003) $35 Just as it took a few years after World War II for the nature of the Cold War and the strategy of containment to become evident,1 so too the reality of the Bush doctrine and the practicalities of waging a war on terrorism and promoting democratization and globalization are only now becoming clearer. As active as the United States has been over the past three years, the operating tenets and mechanics of a durable grand strategy have yet to come. The books under consideration here address that dilemma. They all explicitly accept what has come to be the general principle of American grand strategy: that the surest way to attain lasting security is for the United States to enlarge the community of nations and other groups that generally ascribe to liberal political and economic values.
    [Show full text]
  • A Dysfunctional Triangle an Analysis of America's Relations with Israel
    SIT Graduate Institute/SIT Study Abroad SIT Digital Collections Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection SIT Study Abroad Spring 2015 A Dysfunctional Triangle An analysis of America’s relations with Israel and their impact on the current nuclear accord with Iran Andrew Falacci SIT Study Abroad Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/isp_collection Part of the American Politics Commons, International Relations Commons, Military and Veterans Studies Commons, Near and Middle Eastern Studies Commons, Peace and Conflict Studies Commons, and the Politics and Social Change Commons Recommended Citation Falacci, Andrew, "A Dysfunctional Triangle An analysis of America’s relations with Israel and their impact on the current nuclear accord with Iran" (2015). Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection. 2111. https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/isp_collection/2111 This Unpublished Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the SIT Study Abroad at SIT Digital Collections. It has been accepted for inclusion in Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection by an authorized administrator of SIT Digital Collections. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Falacci A Dysfunctional Triangle An analysis of America’s relations with Israel and their impact on the current nuclear accord with Iran Andrew Falacci Geneva, Spring 2015 School of International Training -Sending School- The George Washington University, Washington D.C 1 Falacci Acknowledgements: Robert Frost talked about looking towards “the path less traveled”, where all the difference would be made. I have lived the young part of my life staying true to such advice, but I also hold dearly the realization that there are special people in my life who have, in some way or another, guided me towards that “path less traveled.” I want to take the time to thank my family for pushing me and raising me to be the person I am today.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Future of the Middle East
    Transcript The Political Future of the Middle East Paul Danahar Author, The New Middle East: The World After the Arab Spring; Middle East Bureau Chief, BBC (2010-13) Chair: Professor Fawaz A Gerges Professor of Middle Eastern Politics and International Relations, London School of Economics 15 October 2013 The views expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of Chatham House, its staff, associates or Council. Chatham House is independent and owes no allegiance to any government or to any political body. It does not take institutional positions on policy issues. This document is issued on the understanding that if any extract is used, the author(s)/ speaker(s) and Chatham House should be credited, preferably with the date of the publication or details of the event. Where this document refers to or reports statements made by speakers at an event every effort has been made to provide a fair representation of their views and opinions, but the ultimate responsibility for accuracy lies with this document’s author(s). The published text of speeches and presentations may differ from delivery. Transcript: The Political Future of the Middle East Fawaz Gerges: I would like to welcome all of you to today’s event. My name is Fawaz Gerges and I teach the modern Middle East at the London School of Economics. It gives me a great pleasure to introduce today’s speaker, Mr Paul Danahar. Paul is with us today to speak about his new book, The New Middle East: The World After the Arab Spring.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Beginning
    VOLUME 40, NO. 3 ■ FALL 2009 WORLD Technology News and Commentary for Deaf and Hard of Hearing People A New Beginning NETWORKING RECOGNITION In the Nation’s Story begins on page 10 Capital PROGRAM ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED SERVICE ADDRESS ALSO INSIDE: 2009 TDI Awards See page 28 Dr. James Marsters See page 30 Permit No. 163 No. Permit Dulles, VA Dulles, 20910-3822 PAID Silver฀Spring,฀Maryland฀฀ U.S. Postage U.S. 8630฀Fenton฀Street฀•฀Suite฀604 Non-Profi t Org. t Non-Profi TDI TDI WORLD 1 TDI’S MISSION “TDI provides leadership in achieving equal access to telecommunications, media, and information technologies for deaf and hard of hearing people.” WORLD Volume 40, Number 3 FEATURE ARTICLES Summer 2009 Editor-in-Chief: Claude Stout Managing Editor: James House Advertising: Chad Metcalf Publication Production: Electronic Ink A New Beginning in the Nation’s Capitol .................................................................................................pg 10 TDI BOARD OF DIRECTORS NORTHEAST REGION 2009 TDI Awards ...........................................................................................................................................pg 28 Phil Jacob (NJ) [email protected] TDI Mourns the Passing of TTY Pioneer, Dr. James Marsters ............................................................pg 30 SOUTHEAST REGION Fred Weiner (MD), Vice President NEWS FLASH! (Senate Introduces Companion Bill to H.R. 3101) ......................................................pg 29 [email protected] MIDWEST REGION Stephanie
    [Show full text]
  • The Follies of Democracy Promotion Leaders, Both Allies and Foes and Allies Leaders, Both Establishment, Policy World Foreign World
    A HOOVER INSTITUTION ESSAY ON MIDDLE EAST STRATEGY ChaLLENGES The Follies of Democracy Promotion THE AMERICAN ADVENTURE IN EGYPT SAMUEL TADROS “If you want to put Obama in a bad mood, tell him he has to go to a Situation Room meeting about Egypt.” This striking statement by an administration official appeared in an article accompanying Jeffrey Goldberg’s “The Obama Doctrine” in The Atlantic.1 Analyzing the president’s worldview, David Frum described him as a man disappointed with the world. America’s military leaders and foreign policy establishment, world leaders, both allies and foes—no one escaped the president’s ire at a world that had failed to live up to his expectations. In the flurry of analysis focusing on larger questions, the comment about Egypt received no attention. Such disregard was unfortunate. In a long list of Barack Obama’s disappointments, Egypt ranked high. Order International the and Islamism It was after all in that country’s capital that Obama had given his famed speech in 2009, promising a new beginning with the Muslim world. Less than two years later, the Egyptian people were lavishly praised from the White House’s podium. “Egyptians have inspired us,” declared a jubilant Obama on February 11, 2011. “The people of Egypt have spoken, their voices have been heard, and Egypt will never be the same.” Little did the president realize how ridiculous his statements would soon appear to be. Obama may have grown disappointed with Egypt, but he was hardly the only one. Democratic and Republican policymakers alike, foreign policy wonks and newspaper editorial boards, and even regular Americans found the country’s turn of events astonishing.
    [Show full text]
  • U. S. Foreign Policy1 by Charles Hess
    H UMAN R IGHTS & H UMAN W ELFARE U. S. Foreign Policy1 by Charles Hess They hate our freedoms--our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other (George W. Bush, Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People, September 20, 2001). These values of freedom are right and true for every person, in every society—and the duty of protecting these values against their enemies is the common calling of freedom-loving people across the globe and across the ages (National Security Strategy, September 2002 http://www. whitehouse. gov/nsc/nss. html). The historical connection between U.S. foreign policy and human rights has been strong on occasion. The War on Terror has not diminished but rather intensified that relationship if public statements from President Bush and his administration are to be believed. Some argue that just as in the Cold War, the American way of life as a free and liberal people is at stake. They argue that the enemy now is not communism but the disgruntled few who would seek to impose fundamentalist values on societies the world over and destroy those who do not conform. Proposed approaches to neutralizing the problem of terrorism vary. While most would agree that protecting human rights in the face of terror is of elevated importance, concern for human rights holds a peculiar place in this debate. It is ostensibly what the U.S. is trying to protect, yet it is arguably one of the first ideals compromised in the fight.
    [Show full text]
  • Trend Analysis the Israeli Unit 8200 an OSINT-Based Study CSS
    CSS CYBER DEFENSE PROJECT Trend Analysis The Israeli Unit 8200 An OSINT-based study Zürich, December 2019 Risk and Resilience Team Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich Trend analysis: The Israeli Unit 8200 – An OSINT-based study Author: Sean Cordey © 2019 Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zurich Contact: Center for Security Studies Haldeneggsteig 4 ETH Zurich CH-8092 Zurich Switzerland Tel.: +41-44-632 40 25 [email protected] www.css.ethz.ch Analysis prepared by: Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zurich ETH-CSS project management: Tim Prior, Head of the Risk and Resilience Research Group, Myriam Dunn Cavelty, Deputy Head for Research and Teaching; Andreas Wenger, Director of the CSS Disclaimer: The opinions presented in this study exclusively reflect the authors’ views. Please cite as: Cordey, S. (2019). Trend Analysis: The Israeli Unit 8200 – An OSINT-based study. Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich. 1 Trend analysis: The Israeli Unit 8200 – An OSINT-based study . Table of Contents 1 Introduction 4 2 Historical Background 5 2.1 Pre-independence intelligence units 5 2.2 Post-independence unit: former capabilities, missions, mandate and techniques 5 2.3 The Yom Kippur War and its consequences 6 3 Operational Background 8 3.1 Unit mandate, activities and capabilities 8 3.2 Attributed and alleged operations 8 3.3 International efforts and cooperation 9 4 Organizational and Cultural Background 10 4.1 Organizational structure 10 Structure and sub-units 10 Infrastructure 11 4.2 Selection and training process 12 Attractiveness and motivation 12 Screening process 12 Selection process 13 Training process 13 Service, reserve and alumni 14 4.3 Internal culture 14 5 Discussion and Analysis 16 5.1 Strengths 16 5.2 Weaknesses 17 6 Conclusion and Recommendations 18 7 Glossary 20 8 Abbreviations 20 9 Bibliography 21 2 Trend analysis: The Israeli Unit 8200 – An OSINT-based study selection tests comprise a psychometric test, rigorous Executive Summary interviews, and an education/skills test.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Foreign Policy Doctrines
    20 July 2015 Presidential Doctrines, the Use of Force and International Order Did the US’ military and legal reactions to the 9/11 attacks fundamentally transform its foreign and security policies? Joseph Siracusa doesn’t think so. He argues that the so-called Bush and Obama Doctrines have had more in common with previous presidential approaches than most people realize. By Joseph Siracusa for ISN In the ever-changing landscape of international relations, the extent to which the actions of the United States contribute to justice and order remains a source of contentious debate. Indeed, it is difficult to find a point in recent history when the United States and its foreign policy have been subject to such polarised and acrimonious reflection, both domestically and internationally. Notwithstanding recent ‘decline’ debates and the rise of emerging powers, the United States continues to hold a formidable advantage over its chief rivals in terms of formal power assets more than twenty-five years after the end of the Cold War. Few anticipated this situation; on the contrary, many assumed that, after a brief moment of unipolarity following the collapse of the Soviet Union, international affairs would soon regain a certain symmetry. Instead, US hegemony is still par for the course. In this context, because the foreign policy ‘doctrines’ of American presidents remain an important driver of the outlook of the United States, these doctrines continue to play a significant role in shaping international order. Though they have veered from isolationist to interventionist to expansionist over the years, these doctrines in fact exhibit a remarkable continuity – even in the post 9/11 era.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Islam in the Age of Democratization Middle East Today Series Editors: Mohammed Ayoob Fawaz A
    Political Islam in the Age of Democratization Middle East Today Series editors: Mohammed Ayoob Fawaz A. Gerges University Distinguished Professor Professor and Chair of Middle Eastern of International Relations Politics and International Relations Michigan State University Director of the Middle East Centre London School of Economics The Iranian Revolution of 1979 and the subsequent Gulf Wars, along with the overthrow of the Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, have dramatically altered the geopolitical landscape of the contemporary Middle East. This series puts forward a critical body of first-rate scholarship that reflects the current political and social realities of the region, focusing on original research about the Israeli–Palestine conflict; social movements, institutions, and the role played by nongovernmental organizations such as Hamas, Hezbollah, the Taliban, and the Muslim Brotherhood; Iran and Turkey as emerging preeminent powers in the region—the former an Islamic republic and the latter a democracy currently governed by a party with Islamic roots; the oil-producing countries in the Persian Gulf and their petrol economies; potential problems of nuclear proliferation in the region; and the challenges confronting the United States, Europe, and the United Nations in the greater Middle East. The focus of the series is on general topics such as social turmoil, war and revolution, occupation, radicalism, democracy, and Islam as a political force in the context of modern Middle East history. Ali Shari’ati and the Shaping of Political Islam in Iran Kingshuk Chatterjee Religion and the State in Turkish Universities: The Headscarf Ban Fatma Nevra Seggie Turkish Foreign Policy: Islam, Nationalism, and Globalization Hasan Kösebalaban Nonviolent Resistance in the Second Intifada: Activism and Advocacy Edited by Maia Carter Hallward and Julie M.
    [Show full text]