Michael Winiarski: the united states on a charm offensive in the Middle east

The question that more and more people are asking themselves is what the united states really wants in the Middle east? George W Bush wanted to bekriga and “democratize” the region. Barack Obama wanted to show their good intentions and reconcile with the arab world. Donald Trump says it wants to crush the member IS and stop Iran – at the same time as he pulls off the U.S. military from there.

In a situation where it is more unclear than ever what the united states intentions in the Middle east, foreign minister Mike Pompeo embarked on a journey to ten countries in the region. Jordan was the first stop and on Wednesday, he visited Iraq. Rundresan also includes saudi Arabia, the United arab emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt, Oman and Israel.

Link to the graphics

is expected to Pompeo in the next few days keep a policy speech in which he, among other things, takes away from the vision for the Middle east, the then-US president Barack Obama put forward in a speech addressed to the muslim world in June 2009.

Obama declared in his speech, symbolically enough, is also held in Cairo, his respect for islam, and he acknowledged that the arabs have historic reasons to distrust the united states.

Otherwise, it is most striking at a rereading of the soon ten-year-old's to Obama's agenda – apart from compassion for the muslim world – in basis is not so essentially different from the Trumps: the united states should not be an empire building världspolis trying to dictate how other communities should be governed.

to take distance from his predecessor, foreign policy failures, particularly the USA's attack on Iraq in 2003. It was “a stupid war”, unlike the US's intervention in Afghanistan, which he considered to be “necessary”.

Obama was felt that the united states had been too involved in the Middle east and therefore wanted to – in contrast to the Bush to intervene less, and instead let regional allies in the arab world to take an increased responsibility. Said and done: Obama discontinued most of the U.S. military effort in Iraq. Even the intervention in Afghanistan was stepped down considerably.

With the arab spring of 2011, with the new hope of democratic development, was thrown the situation. New challenges arose: Would the united states intervene to back up the US-friendly dictators like Hosni Mubarak in Egypt? Or help to topple US-hostile dictators like Muammar Qaddafi in Libya and Bashar al-Assad in Syria?

Barack Obama Photo: IBL

the unclear signals. The white house reacted in essentially passive in the face of the increasingly worse våldsutvecklingen. Soon the raging civil war in Libya, Syria and Yemen, which the united states eventually could not refrain from interfering in.

When Trump started his campaign, he went even further than Obama; the US has no reason to ow lives and money on other people's wars, all in accordance with its isolationist slogans “America First”.

Pompeo will in his speech in Cairo, according to what has leaked out, to criticize Obama's attempts to get a deal with Iran. It is a question where Trump and Obama are very far from each other.

takes place at the same time as Washington buzzes with conflicting signals about AMERICA's future role in the Middle east, especially in Syria.

Trump's stance on a swift withdrawal of U.S. 2.000 commandos from Syria led first to the minister of defence, James Mattis resigned in protest.

Then came the various “clarifications” from the employees in the administration that the retreat would not be so fast. National security advisor John Bolton claimed that the withdrawal is conditional and that the U.S. should combat the ICE until the member is completely nedkämpad. He also said that the U.S.'s kurdish allies to be protected and that Iran must first away from Syria. But during Bolton's visit in Ankara refused Turkey's president Recep Tayyip Erdogan meet him. Erdogan called the conditions unacceptable, with the argument that the kurdish forces in Syria are terrorists.

was not lessened by the fact that the Trump then declared that the US military is sure to be removed as soon as possible, completely in accordance with his original plan.

Trump's move has already had a number of consequences, in addition to Erdogan has announced that they soon evacuated the US-bases in north-eastern Syria will be taken over by Turkish forces, who shall also go to the attack on the kurdish YPG-joints.

There are also signs that the ICE has been given new life after Trump's announcement about the retreat. A british-kurdish patrol was shot at in the last of the ICE warriors in the east of Syria. A british officer said to the newspaper the Independent that the attack shows that is is far from defeated. He compared it to what happened in Afghanistan when the coalition announced that it was preparing a retreat; it gave the taliban an injection of new energy.

affected by the retreat. In a tweet explained Trump that “Iran can do what they want” in Syria. The statement shall swear to all that Pompeo and Bolton stands for – that Iran is the big terrorsponsorn which at any price must be held back.

on the other hand, few have mentioned is the big winner when the U.S. leaves the field: Russia. Moscow is the only player who has decent relations with all the remaining parties to the conflict: the Regime in Damascus, Turkey, Israel, Iran, saudi Arabia and the kurds, who control a quarter of Syria's territory. And those of US soon abandoned the kurds have faced the threat of Turkish intervention, had been forced to seek al-Assad's and Putin's patronage.

There is at least a consistent page in Trumps foreign policy; that most of the time he does favors Putin. In the Middle east means that Russia has taken over the USA's role as arbitrator.

Read more: US-led air strikes against IS in Syria – in spite of Trump's statements

Michael Winiarski: Other than in the past crying in the day ”US go home”