scholarly journals Mapping the Obama administration's response to the Arab Spring

2012 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria do Céu de Pinho Ferreira Pinto

When the Arab Spring broke out, the United States was in a quandary over how to handle the crisis in its attempt to balance its moral obligations and ideals without undercutting its strategic interests and those of its close allies. Flaws in US diplomatic approach have contributed to one of the most serious foreign policy crisis for a US administration to date with consequential upheaval and erosion of the US-built balance of power. The reactions and policy responses of the Obama administration highlight the difficulties in grasping with the new reality in the Middle East and in enunciating a policy platform that could combine American interests and values.

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 19-32
Author(s):  
Khalid Hashim Mohammed

The Obama administration repeated that its promise to withdraw from Iraq on time was one of its most important achievements in the first presidential term. In fact, this withdrawal was within a broader and broader context that began to emerge in Obama's second term: withdrawal from the Middle East, In the so-called Asia "Rebalance", but the growing international chaos and the explosion of many crises in the face of the US administration such as the Syrian crisis and Iraq, especially after the so-called Arab Spring revolutions, cast a shadow over the region, and turning Iraq from the success story of the Obama administration and a benchmark for its achievements in foreign policy, a story Failure and a standard of confusion in foreign policy, and critics of the Obama administration, the American withdrawal "arbitrary" created a vacuum in Iraq filled by the opponents of the United States and lose control, or at least affect the course of the arena, both at the level of local players or regional.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Elfan Kaukab

Spring 2011 was a historic year in the Middle East and was momentum for the rise of people power to overthrow the long-reigning authoritarian regime. This event is known as The Arab Spring. However, on the way, the Arab dream did not come easy. This book tries to capture the opportunities and challenges of democratization in Arab countries after the Arab Spring. There are three countries, namely Tunisia, Egypt, and Syria, which are the focus of this book's study. The interests of the United States (US) emerged as the trigger for democratization efforts. The US does not hesitate to hinder democratization in a country with leaders who are not pro-Western. It is not surprising that democratization in Arab countries is only seen as a US political project to safeguard its national interests. From this book, we can reflect on the situation in Indonesia. Does that also happen?


2022 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 131-161
Author(s):  
G. G. Kosach

The paper examines the evolution of Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy in the context of wider changes in the Middle East and in the Arab world triggered by the Arab Spring. The author argues that during this decade the Kingdom’s foreign policy has witnessed a fundamental transformation: the very essence of the Saudi foreign policy course has changed signifi cantly as the political es-tablishment has substantially revised its approaches to the country’s role in the region and in the world. Before 2011, Saudi Arabia — the land of the ‘Two Holy Mosques’ — positioned itself as a representative of the international Muslim community and in pursuing its foreign policy relied primarily on the religious authority and fi nancial capabilities. However, according to Saudi Arabia’s leaders, the Arab Spring has plunged the region into chaos and has bolstered the infl uence of various extremist groups and movements, which required a signifi cant adjustment of traditional political approaches. Saudi Arabia, more explicit than ever before, has declared itself as a nation state, as a regional leader possessing its own interests beyond the abstract ‘Muslim Ummah’. However, the author stresses that these new political ambitions do not imply a complete break with the previous practice. For example, the containment of Iran not only remains the cornerstone of Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy, but has become even more severe. The paper shows that it is this opposition to Iran, which is now justifi ed on the basis of protecting the national interests, that predetermines the nature and the specifi c content of contemporary Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy including interaction with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), approaches towards the solution of the Israeli-Palestinian confl ict, combating terrorism, and relations with the United States. In that regard, the transformation of Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy has, on the one hand, opened up new opportunities for strengthening the Kingdom’s interaction with Israel, but, at the same time, has increased tensions within the framework of strategic partnership with the United States. The author concludes that currently Saudi Arabia is facing a challenge of diversifying its foreign policy in order to increase its international profi le and political subjectivity.


2018 ◽  
pp. 3-22
Author(s):  
Mediel Hove ◽  

This article examines the origins of the ‘Islamic State’ or the Islamic State of Iraq and Sham or Levant (ISIS) in light of the contemporary political and security challenges posed by its diffusion of Islamic radicalism. The Arab Spring in 2011 ignited instability in Syria providing an operational base for the terrorist group to pursue its once abandoned Islamic state idea. Its growth and expansion has hitherto proved to be a threat not only to the Middle East but to international security given its thrust on world domination. It concludes that the United States of America’s activities in the Middle East were largely responsible for the rise of the Islamic State.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-173
Author(s):  
Leandro Wolpert dos Santos

O objetivo deste artigo consiste em retratar um dos principais debates intelectuais que produziu cisões no pensamento diplomático brasileiro a partir dos anos 90, especialmente durante os governos Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2002) e Lula da Silva (2003-2010), a saber: o tipo de relacionamento a ser estabelecido com os Estados Unidos. Para tanto, mostraremos de que forma este debate se manifestou, as correntes de pensamento por ele engendradas no interior do Itamaraty, o conjunto de crenças e percepções que sustentaram tais correntes no período em estudo bem como as estratégias de política externa delas oriundas. Os resultados da pesquisa apontam que, neste período, duas tendências se mostraram dominantes no Itamaraty, embora em momentos distintos. A primeira, que damos o nome de acomodacionista, teria predominado durante a administração Cardoso e defendia uma posição de maior aproximação aos EUA, no marco de uma estratégia de acomodação à ordem internacional liderada pela potência hegemônica. A segunda corrente, que chamamos de revisionista, teria ganho proeminência na administração Lula, e preconizava maior autonomia frente à potência hegemônica, com quem o relacionamento brasileiro devia se sustentar na igualdade irrestrita, dentro de uma lógica de equilíbrio de poder. Essa posição de distância relativa frente os EUA se enquadrava em uma estratégia de “multipolarização” ou desconcentração do poder mundial e de revisionismo da ordem internacional vigente. O desenvolvimento da pesquisa ancorou-se fundamentalmente na investigação de discursos, entrevistas, depoimentos, livros e artigos das principais autoridades a frente do Itamaraty (chanceleres e embaixadores) no período em estudo. Palavras-chave: Pensamento Diplomático; Política Externa Brasileira; Estados Unidos.     Abstract: The objective of this article is to portray one of the main intellectual debates that produced divisions in Brazilian diplomatic thought starting in the 1990s, especially during the Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2002) and Lula da Silva (2003-2010) governments, namely: the kind of relationship to be established with the United States. To do so, we will show how this debate manifested itself, the currents of thought generated by it within the Itamaraty, the set of beliefs and perceptions that underpinned these currents in the period under study as well as the foreign policy strategies that came from them. The results of the research indicate that, during this period, two tendencies were dominant in Itamaraty, although at different moments. The first, which we call the accommodationist, would have predominated during the Cardoso administration and advocated a position of greater approximation to the United States, within the framework of a strategy of accommodation to the international order led by the hegemonic power. The second current of thought, which we call revisionist, would have gained prominence in the Lula administration, and advocated greater autonomy against the hegemonic power, with whom the Brazilian relationship should be based on unrestricted equality, within a balance of power logic. This relative distance from the US was part of a strategy of "multi-polarization" or deconcentration of world power and revisionism of the current international order. The development of the research was fundamentally based on the investigation of speeches, interviews, testimonies, books and articles of the main authorities in front of the Itamaraty (chancellors and ambassadors) during the period of study. Keywords: Diplomatic Thought; Brazilian Foreign Policy; United States.     Recebido em: agosto/2017 Aprovado em: abril/2018.


2020 ◽  
pp. 181-205
Author(s):  
Francine R. Frankel

The US policy of collective security against the Soviet Union led to the pursuit of the Middle East Defense Organization, which was undermined by Nehru’s success in persuading Egypt to follow his example of remaining nonaligned. Nehru failed, however, to prevent the 1954 Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement between the United States and Pakistan, which tilted the balance of power in the subcontinent away from India—although Mountbatten weighed in to provide advanced British aircraft and averted an incipient deal between New Delhi and Moscow. Subsequently, Nehru was confirmed in his belief that the United States was determined to build up Pakistan and build- down India.


2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 387-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. K. Pasha

The signing of Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) between Iran and the P5 + 1 countries (i.e., China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) heralds a new US foreign policy approach in the Middle East. Amidst growing signs of declining geopolitical influence in the region, the United States chose to end its three-decade-old tension with Iran. This has alarmed its traditional regional allies and partners, especially Israel and Saudi Arabia. While Israel had advocated a “military option” to stop Iranian nuclear ambitions and took the matters to the US Congress, Saudi Arabia preferred a less confrontationist approach due to its dependence upon the United States for security. Its reactions and the recent foreign policy choices underscore its anxiety over growing Iranian influence as well as its “interventionist” policy stoking instability in many Gulf and Arab states. In foreseeable future, both Saudi Arabia and Iran would have work for rapprochement and be content with their spheres of influence and continue depending on the United States to maintain stability and balance of power in the region.


2012 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 158-163
Author(s):  
Daniel Hummel

The revolutions that started in Tunisia and spread to other countries in the Middle East have been dubbed the “Arab Spring.” Many countries in theMiddle East have been under the thumb of an oppressive dictator. After several decades of this oppression, the people in these countries have resistedthe continuance of this rule.As the smoke clears, the task of rebuilding and reforming the institutionsof government is the most important task ahead for those who demandedchange. The most important aspect of this change is the country’s constitution. The constitution of these countries must play the same role as the constitution in the United States. These constitutions must embody the change the reformers desire and be as inclusive as possible to be legitimate.One of the concerns of some international observers is the rise of theprominence of Islamic conservative parties. Another concern is the inclusionin the articles of the proposed new constitutions of these countriesarticles that declare Islam and Islamic law as the foundation of the constitutions ...


2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 442-475
Author(s):  
Peter R. Demant ◽  
Ariel Finguerut

The main purpose of this paper is to discuss the paradoxical consequences the so-called “Arab Spring”, from 2011 to 2014/15, which has led in various countries of the Arab world and beyond to different outcomes, but nowhere to stable democracy. We intend to discuss the outcomes of those political mobilizations and revolts, paying special attention to (a) the role of Islamist movements and (b) U.S reactions to the recent Mideast upheavals. We start with a general analysis and go to a few case studies (e.g. Egypt, Syria, and Turkey). In discussing the impact of Islamism, we attempt a classification of currents along two coordinates, one parameter contrasting Sunni and Shiite movements, the other laying out the continuum from pacific-modernist to violent jihadist. We defend that the dynamics of intra-Islamist tensions (such as Sunni jihadist against the Shiite Hizbullah-Syria-Iran axis) are no less crucial than the religious-secularist divide for understanding recent developments. Regarding US policies, we emphasize the dilemmas and contradictions within U.S government. We investigate the hypothesis that the US was caught largely unaware by the Arab Spring, and that its reactions suffered from the amorphousness of prior positions of the Obama administration, combined with leftovers from the Bush period. Internal contradictions of Obama’s Middle East doctrine coupled with a general isolationist trend have precluded the US from assuming more forceful policies, creating frustrations on all sides, and enflaming rather than dousing the fires of anti-Westernism in the Islamic world.Keywords: Arab Spring ; U.S policies ; Syria; jihadist.  Resumo: O principal objetivo deste artigo é discutir as consequências paradoxais da chamada "Primavera Árabe", que a partir de 2011 aos nossos dias produziu em vários países do mundo árabe diferentes resultados, mas em nenhum lugar chegou-se à democracia estável. Temos a intenção de discutir os resultados dessas mobilizações políticas e revoltas, com especial atenção para (a) o papel dos movimentos islâmicos e (b) as reações e posturas dos EUA ante os recentes levantes no Oriente Médio. De uma análise geral partiremos para estudos de caso (como Egito, Síria e Turquia). Ao discutir o impacto do islamismo, tentamos uma classificação das correntes ao longo de duas coordenadas, um deles contrastando movimentos sunitas e xiitas, e outro que define o continuum de pacifista - modernista para jihadista –violento. Postulamos que a dinâmica das tensões intra- islâmicos (como a de jihadistas sunitas contra o eixo Hezbollah -Síria- Irã xiita) não são menos importantes do que a divisão religiosa - secular para compreender os desdobramentos recentes. No que diz respeito aos EUA, destacamos os dilemas e contradições dentro do governo dos EUA. Nós investigamos a hipótese de que os EUA foi pego de surpresa em grande parte pela Primavera Árabe, e que as reações do governo Obama traduzem mais um recolhimento do que um novo engajamento.Palavras-chave: Primavera Árabe; Políticas dos EUA; Síria; jihadismo.   DOI: 10.20424/2237-7743/bjir.v4n3p442-475


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Melaty Anggraini

AbstrakPengayaan nuklir Iran menimbulkan sikap ancaman bagi Negara lainnya termasuk Amerika Serikat sebagai Negara super power, berakhirnya kerjasama antara AS dan Iran dalam pengembangan nuklir Iran dikarenakan revolusi Islam dan berganti periode kepemimpinan menimbulkan sikap defensive bagi Amerika Serikat apalagi dengan munculnya serangan terorisme 11 september, semakin meyakinkan AS untuk mengubah arah kebijakan politik luar negerinya berfokus ke wilayah Asia Timur. Menggunakan metode dan konsep hegemonic strategic dan power defense, penulis mencoba menganalisa kebijakan luar negeri Amerika Serikat di Timur Tengah khususnya pada kasus nuklir Iran, untuk menganalisa strategi kebijakan AS dalam menghadapi nuklir Iran Kata Kunci: Nuklir Iran, Amerika Serikat, Konsep Power Defense. ABSTRACT Iran Nuclear enrichment poses a threat to other countries including the United States as a Super Power Country, the end of cooperation Iran-US  Nuclear caused Islam revolution and position change of leadership period led to a defensive act from The United States, specifically emergency issue of 9/11 September. That’s made the US for changing Foreign Policy more focus in the Middle East. Using the hegemonic strategic method and concept power defense, the writer try to analyze US foreign Policy in the Middle East. Especially in Iran Nuclear, for evaluate what is strategic foreign policy US  for facing Iran Nuclear.Keywords: Iran Nuclear, US, Power Defense Concept.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document