The Paradox at the Heart of U.S. Engagement in the Middle East

The Paradox at the Heart of U.S. Engagement in the Middle East
U.S. soldiers sit in a C-17 aircraft at Sather Air Base in Baghdad as they begin their journey home after a year in Iraq, Nov. 30, 2010 (AP photo by Maya Alleruzzo).

If Washington is as committed as ever to its historical role as security guarantor in the Middle East, why do U.S. officials feel compelled to constantly reassure their regional partners that the U.S. isn’t pulling back from the region?

The question speaks to the disconnect between Washington’s strategic interests in the Middle East and the priorities of its regional partners. It also reflects the difficulty U.S. policymakers face in seeking to exert influence in a region beset by poor governance and a multiplicity of state, nonstate and hybrid actors. 

But it also reflects a paradox at the heart of U.S. engagement with the region. Notwithstanding the protests of some U.S. officials, Washington is downgrading the Middle East as a priority of U.S. foreign policy. In practice, that means a decrease in high-level attention and allocation of diplomatic and other resources in the short term, and a relegation of the region from the category of core U.S. strategic interests in the long term.

Keep reading for free

Already a subscriber? Log in here .

Get instant access to the rest of this article by creating a free account below. You'll also get access to three articles of your choice each month and our free newsletter:
Subscribe for an All-Access subscription to World Politics Review
  • Immediate and instant access to the full searchable library of tens of thousands of articles.
  • Daily articles with original analysis, written by leading topic experts, delivered to you every weekday.
  • The Daily Review email, with our take on the day’s most important news, the latest WPR analysis, what’s on our radar, and more.