The Alliance between Fundamentalist Christians and the Pro-Israel Lobby: Christian Zionism in US Middle East Policy

2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-187
Author(s):  
Donald E. Wagner
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Political Influence ◽  
Conservative Movement ◽  
International Media ◽  
Christian Zionism ◽  
The Us ◽  
Run Up ◽  
Middle East Policy ◽  
Near Future ◽  
Political Scene

It is a common assumption in the international media that the fundamentalist Christian Right suddenly appeared on the US political scene following the 11 September 2001 tragedy, and that it became a major force in shaping US policy in the Middle East. While it is true that fundamentalist Christians have exercised considerable influence during the George W. Bush administration, their ascendance is neither new nor surprising. The movement has demonstrated political influence in the US and England intermittently for more than a hundred years, particularly in the formation of Middle East policy. This article focuses on the unique theology and historical development of Christian Zionism, noting its essential beliefs, its emergence in England during the nineteenth century, and how it grew to gain prominence in the US. The alliance of the pro-Israel lobby, the neo-conservative movement, and several Christian Zionist organizations in the US represents a formidable source of support for the more maximalist views of Israel's Likud Party. In the run-up to the 2004 US presidential elections this alliance could potentially thwart any progress on an Israeli–Palestinian peace plan in the near future. Moreover, Likud ideology is increasingly evident in US Middle East policy as a result of this alliance.

scholarly journals UNITED STATES: A REVIEW OF THE US MIDDLE EAST POLICY FROM HARRY TRUMAN TO BILL CLINTON

2021 ◽  
pp. 45-65
Author(s):  
Kardo RACHED ◽  
Salam ABDULRAHMAN
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Middle East ◽  
National Interest ◽  
Bill Clinton ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
American President ◽  
The Us ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
Middle East Policy

Since the Second World War, the Middle East has been mentioned in connection with the national interest of America manifested by US presidents. This paper looks at the US foreign policy in the Middle East from Truman to Clinton on the premise that the US foreign policy has contributed to creating a breeding ground for dissatisfaction toward the US In this context, the paper focuses on the doctrines in use from the time of President Truman to Clinton. Thus, every American president has a doctrine, and this doctrine tells what political line the president follows regarding domestic and foreign policies. Keywords: Middle-East, Israel, US national interest, Soviet Union, Natural resources, ideologies.

Clusters of history: US involvement in the Palestine question

Race & Class ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilan Pappe
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Christian Right ◽  
Oil Industry ◽  
State Department ◽  
Historical Record ◽  
The State ◽  
The Us ◽  
Middle East Policy

US involvement in Palestine, which has been long and complex, has generated a massive historical record that needs to be understood in order to locate not only some of the origins of today’s tragic situation but also to chart possible paths to change. The power of AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobby, on US Middle East policy is well known; its background and relationship to the US fundamentalist Christian Right, less so. Starting from the nineteenth century, this article traces key elements and interests involved in the making of US policy, including AIPAC, the oil industry and the ‘Arabists’ of the State Department.

scholarly journals Transformation of British Policy in the Middle East

2020 ◽  
pp. 45-51
Author(s):  
Oleg Okhoshin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Economic Consequences ◽  
Political Systems ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
East Region ◽  
Peaceful Settlement ◽  
The Us ◽  
Migration Crisis ◽  
The Arab Spring ◽  
Middle East Policy

The Middle East region is of particular importance to the United Kingdom, because control over it ensures international and energy security, reduces the threat of a migration crisis and meets the country’s geopolitical objectives, which are reflected in the concept of «Global Britain». B. Johnson’s government in the Middle East policy faced the problems of peaceful settlement of ethno-confessional contradictions and the socio-economic consequences of the «Arab Spring» and the terrorist activities of ISIS. Under these conditions, British diplomacy has developed a strategy that includes maneuvering between the foreign policy interests of the US and the EU in the Middle East and adapting to the transformation of regional socio-political systems

scholarly journals American Strategy of "Sufficient Presence" in the Middle East

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 236-251
Author(s):  
I. V. Ryzhov ◽  
M. Yu. Borodina ◽  
T. V. Baranova
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
Threat Assessment ◽  
Weapons Of Mass Destruction ◽  
Nuclear Program ◽  
Syrian Crisis ◽  
The Us ◽  
Middle East Policy ◽  
Trump Administration

Abstract: After D. Trump came to power it started developing a new US Middle East policy, based on the regional threat assessment, such as the unstable political situation in a number of regional countries, radical regimes, terrorism, especially ISIS. In addition, the most important task for the Trump administration was to try to regain lost US influence in the region, which resulted in the so-called "strategy of sufficient presence" and in the support of regional allies, "centers of power" such as Israel.A distinctive feature of D. Trump's policy in the region can be considered a change in rhetoric regarding the Iranian nuclear program up to the introduction of new economic sanctions. Moreover, the American approach to the settlement of the Syrian crisis is connected with the prevention of the growing influence of Iran and Russia in the region.American-Turkish relations also underwent significant changes, which were very tense until 2017. The states managed to find common ground on a number of issues of international politics. However, the situation is still significantly complicated by American support for the Kurds in their quest for autonomy.Trump's ratings at home are falling, and therefore there is a possibility that Trump will lose the upcoming presidential elections to his opponent D. Biden. However, trying to predict the prospects of the US Middle East policy in the event of D. Biden's victory, the authors came to the conclusion that it will not undergo significant changes, except for the nuclear deal with Iran. The key tasks of American foreign policy will remain the fight against terrorism, countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the search for likeminded states in the region.

scholarly journals Christian zionism as a factor of US politics

2013 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 462-478
Author(s):  
Miroljub Jevtic
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Religious Beliefs ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
The State ◽  
Political Pressure ◽  
Christian Zionism ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Government ◽  
State Of Israel

One of the most important phenomena in US politics is Christian Zionism. The term Christian Zionism is related to unity of a large part of Protestant beliefs and the Zionists movement. The religious motives of US Protestants have coincided with the Jewish intention to go back to Palestine. In this way, Protestant religious motives could only be achieved by using political pressure on the US government. The goal of this pressure is to turn the foreign policy of Washington into a struggle for reconstruction and maintenance of the state of Israel. That is why many people wrongly believe that the US policy in Middle East is a product of the Jewish lobby. However, the US foreign policy in Middle East is a product of religious beliefs of Christian Zionists and the Jewish lobby is just using this fact for its own purposes.

scholarly journals The So-Called “Islamic Terrorism”: A Tale of the Ambiguous Terminology

Al-Albab ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Dwi Surya Atmaja
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Cultural Stereotypes ◽  
International Media ◽  
Network Connection ◽  
East Region ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Government ◽  
Islamic Terrorism ◽  
The Media ◽  
Terrorism Discourse

"What does the term "terrorism" mean." Why does the term “terrorism” often identified as Islam? "If terrorism is an ism that affects "terror" that it generates, while Islam which literally means "peace", then the two terms certainly mismatch! Such question and statement show Muslims’ concern over frequent phenomena of "terrorism" using Islamic religious symbols. The research undertaken proved that there are three explanations. First, a close tripartite network connection between “terrorism experts” and the circles of power policy holders who are also supported by senior journalists in the international media influence. Second, a long tradition of Orientalist studies in the study of the Middle East region and the study of religion in the Arab culture. Figures such as Bernard Lewis, Noah Feldman, Raphael Patai and other Middle East experts often sit with other experts in the field of terrorism (the first factor) and become main advisors and expert staff for the US government in the formulation of action to counter terror. It was the catalyst for the transmission of viewpoint which then decorated orientalist discourse of Islamic terrorism in the process of political policies. Third, a lot of Islamic terrorism discourse refers to the long tradition of cultural stereotypes and biased representations of the media that often portray Islam and Muslims as ‘the enemy’. The reason is that it reflects the perspective of socio-Western culture that fears and worries the other oriental parties which has been stereotyped since the imperial era. Many also argue that the dichotomy of the orientalist views are deliberately preserved as a form of new style imperialism

US partisanship will damage its Middle East standing

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Middle East ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
The United States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Regional Role ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Senate ◽  
Middle East Policy ◽  
The Eu

Significance Trump’s controversial Middle East policy decisions have met bipartisan criticism in the US Senate, but in the House of Representatives -- where the influence of the party grassroots is more keenly felt -- Republican congressmen have staunchly backed the president. There are growing partisan differences towards other countries, a notable shift from previous decades when party was not a clear indicator for preference. This may have a major impact on Washington’s future relationship with the Middle East. Impacts Foreign lobbying efforts in Washington will increasingly be targeted on a partisan basis. Russian foreign policy, not beholden to the vagaries of democracy, may become more influential in the Middle East. The EU could seek to play a stronger, independent regional role to replace the United States.

scholarly journals The Middle East Policy of America during the Cold War

2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 84
Author(s):  
Tülin Tuna
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Middle East ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Politics ◽  
The Us ◽  
Soviet Russia ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Middle East Policy

Abstract This article aims to explain the Middle East policy of America during the cold war. The structure of international politics has changed after World War II. Two new powers, the United States of America and the Soviet Russia, have dominated the world politics. In this period, the Middle East was of great importance for the United States economically, politically and strategically. The United States has been struggling to prevent a power threatening the interests of the West from controlling or dominating the Middle East. Especially in the period after 1945, it has been responsive to the Soviet Union’s developing control or influence over the region. In the present article, the importance of the Middle East for the United States is going to be emphasized first. Then, the doctrines called by the names of the US presidents and some conflicts and depressions experienced in this period are going to be discussed. Key Words: the Middle East policy of USA, the Cold War, Doctrines. 

scholarly journals IRAN-US RELATIONS AFTER THE DEATH OF QASSEM SOLEIMANI

Jurnal CMES ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 117
Author(s):  
Firmanda Taufiq ◽  
Ayu Maulida Alkholid
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Political Influence ◽  
The United States ◽  
Major Interest ◽  
The Us ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
The Cold War

<p>Iran-United States relations have up and down. Some sharp diplomatic statements made by the US president, Donald Trump, as well as the president of Iran, Ayatullah Khomeini. In fact, the sanctions that must be accepted by the US against Iran are embargo sanctions. This article aims to analyze how the future relations between Iran and the United States. Cooperation between the two countries has a history that dates back to the Cold War. Relations between these two countries based on a variety of interests, including economic, political, military, ideological, and security considerations . The theory used in this research is balance of power theory. The US has major interest in the Middle East and Iran is a rival of the US in achieving that interest. Nevertheless, many US foreign policies are caused tension between the two countries. Conversely, Iran has considerable economic importance, but the role of the Iran government elite also has a significant influence in the determination of their foreign policy. The findings in this study, despite challenges and complicated processes, the US and Iran are eternal rivals in the fusion of power and political influence in the Middle East, and relations between both will continue to fluctuate . </p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document