Introduction
The US foreign policy between 2000 and 2010 was characterized by changes from Clinton’s intention to engage with the world to Bush’s decision to obtain freedom by confronting the world. The idea of enduring national interests by underlining military power provoked changes in various countries, including the Middle East. A research question to be answered in this project is about the impact of national interests defined by the US foreign policy at the beginning of the 2000s on the Middle East. Theoretical and practical steps will be taken to develop a sufficient answer. First, the theory of realism in international relations will be used to demonstrate how the needs and attempts of one country might affect the whole region. Second, the current situation will be compared with the events between 2000 and 2010 by defining evidence about major security, energy, stability, and oil issues. The controversies about the importance of American impact on the Middle East progress cannot be ignored because of the impossibility of making a common conclusion about the true intentions of the involved nations.
Theory and Definitions
The promotion of international relations is a critical aspect of the modern world and politics because of the necessity to understand the factors affecting interactions and changes between states. Political leaders develop their strategies and make significant decisions following specific theoretical principles to prove the correctness of the chosen plan. Realism has become one of the core theories in international relationships after the Second World War, underlining the worth of national interests and current problems.
National Interest
During the last several decades, the concept of national interests has become a key factor in understanding and developing international relations. It is impossible to give one specific definition to this issue because national interests include particular goals and national ambitions promoted by the government at a particular period. Therefore, the identification of the national interest is usually predetermined by current events, available resources, and claims a nation prefers to establish. Some countries focus on preserving their lands and security, not at the expense of their relationships with other nations. At the beginning of the 2000s, the Middle East was interested in declining international influence, resolving national conflicts, and protecting its natural resources. The US, in its turn, wanted to access rich oil resources and predict the terror coming from some Middle Eastern nations. All these national interests defined the policies and steps taken by the US government between 2000 and 2010.
Realism
Understanding national interests is critical for promoting realism as a meaningful theory in international relations. According to this theory, governments must maintain their security and strengthen their influence over other nations. In the modern world, the typologies of realism include traditional or structural realism, promoted by Kenneth Waltz, and offensive realism, introduced by John Mearsheimer (Price-Smith, 2015). Scholars believe that US national interests are predetermined by the desire to gain “the balance of relative power between sovereign states, within the overarching context of competitive anarchy that forces all states to seek survival” (Price-Smith, 2015, p. 78). Unfortunately, using such explanations makes it hard to find clear reasons for the American decision to invade Iraq in 2003. Realism focuses on national power, and the differences between the United States and the Middle East in terms of power and international support, especially after the 9/11 attacks, were impossible to ignore. Thus, realist beliefs in self-interests perfectly prove American selfish behaviors and the necessity to underline national needs over the needs of other nations.
Literature Review
Today, the United States continues proving the necessity of following its national interests defined since the beginning of the 2000s. During the last 20 years, America has undergone the ruling of five different leaders whose ideas revealed new possibilities for the country. Compared to Clinton, who focused on developing new technology to ensure the nuclear proliferation and economic prosperity through globalization, Biden aims to restore national dignity and alliances (Cox, 2022). The contributions of presidents Bush, Obama, and Trump played an important role because their ideas changed the views of American citizens about real power and the fragile security of the country. Focusing on the current research question, attention should be paid to how Biden, as the US president between 2000 and 2010, developed foreign policy programs concerning the Middle East.
Current Situation
The necessity to support the Middle East peace settlement was one of the goals at the beginning of the 2000s. After Clinton left office, Bush, similar to Biden, was interested in determining the impact of China and Russia on the global arena and strengthening the national background and defense system (Leffler, 2011). The revolution of military affairs was expected to maintain democratic peace in the Middle East, but the events of 9/11 changed most of the plans (Leffler, 2011). In a short period, the national interests were reconsidered to prepare “a nation in a war against a dangerous foe” and “flexed its muscles and launched its deadly response to the initial attack” (Cox, 2022, p. 57). The response to 9/11 was based on the necessity to initiate the war on terror and start with al Qaeda and other nations that supported terroristic ideas, including Iran and Iraq. The current situation allowed the US administration to penetrate the regions using solid reasons and clear intentions.
Impact on the US Foreign Policy
The decision to fight against international terror was beneficial for the US government in several ways. First, it explained the attention to the Middle East and its natural resources for humanitarian purposes. Although US administrations did not officially recognize their desire to penetrate the region for their specific interest in oil resources, they got a chance to implement new policies after the 9/11 attacks (Gendzier, 2003). Counter-terrorism campaigns in the Middle East were mostly approved by the world, even if they affected the development of the Arab–Israeli peace process (Gause III). Second, defending the United States and the American people was the main national interest based on real needs and obligations. A threat from radical Islamic ideology could not be ignored in the country, and the protection of Israel became a good reason for American troops to examine the land. Finally, the foreign policy chosen by Bush created a strong basis for a new president, Obama, to continue supporting the Middle East after 2010.
Case Study and Evidence
National interest changes are regular in many countries, and the United States is no exception. Each year introduces new conditions for leaders, and it is a national decision to use the offered chance or not. The US administration had to protect citizens against terroristic attacks and predict the losses like those of the Twin Towers, the first international damage since the beginning of the 19th century (Cox, 2022). Analysis revealed the importance of addressing the history, the Cold War outcomes, and a possibility of a new war that could challenge national security. According to Cox (2022), the defeat of Soviet communism was a significant victory for the United States, leaving the latter without a purpose. The attack offered a new goal to deal with jihad, a dangerous enemy for many nations. Other pieces of evidence that explain the national interests of the United States within the chosen period included declining oil deposits in the country, a rise of new technologies, and a threat of energy insecurity (Price-Smith, 2015). Stabilizing resources, maintaining security and stability, and offering new foreign policy programs provoked a new stage in the US-Middle East relationships.
Discussion
The main characteristics of realism theory include state-centricity, national security, power control, and recognizing the nation as a rational actor in international relations. Between 2000 and 2010, the US government continued revealing new sources of power, and the Middle East was the region where extra oil resources could be found and used. The reality of national interests defined the US foreign policy and maintained the presence of Americans in the Middle East.
Importance of Evidence
The chosen evidence is relevant for explaining the US foreign policy in the Middle East. First, American democratic and peace-making interests were well-received by locals as it was an opportunity to protect Israel’s sovereignty, oppose dictatorship, and reduce human rights abuses (Al Sarhan, 2017). Second, the US administration wanted to solve the real problem of energy insecurity by reaching oil resources (Price-Smith, 2015). The Middle Eastern governments saw it as a chance to establish fair and beneficial international trade relationships. Finally, the US could use a new region for maintaining its military bases, and the Gulf states were interested in friendly regimes to defeat terrorism (Al Sarhan, 2017). Both nations had enough reasons to favor new US foreign policy trends.
Security Issues
One of the main national interests of the US government after 9/11 was the promotion of security. For a long period, Israel had been suffering from Hamas attacks and feeling insecure because of poor military forces and a lack of successful experience (Al Sarhan, 2017). The US aimed to defeat terror in the Middle East for international purposes and establish peace. At the same time, according to the realism theory, it should not be ignored that its success in response to terrorism became a good example of American power for other nations. As a result, international partners and opponents could see the country’s ability and reduce the intention to hurt the nation.
Energy
There were many ways for the United States to become the most powerful nation in the world, and getting access to new energy resources was a required step. In the early 2000s, many countries experienced a kind of oil scarcity and developed energy pessimism (Price-Smith, 2015). The removal of Saddam Hussein allowed the United States to succeed in military engagement in the Middle East and stabilize its role in the energy market (Gendzier, 2003). Many independent stakeholders got a chance to improve the energy extraction industry under favorable conditions in the new region. American attention to the Gulf region in terms of energy production increased international interest.
Stability
There were several reasons for the Middle East not to resist the US foreign policy in the 2000s. Since Clinton’s administration, the United States has wanted to promote democratic freedoms and equality nationally and internationally (Cox, 2022). Post-communist Russia had already managed the outcomes of the Soviet Union’s dissolution, but the United States was unsure if its norms and beliefs were appropriate for international communities. Thus, the attempt to gain control over the Middle East, offer social and economic stability, impose democratic standards, and protect human freedoms helped the United States evaluate its possibilities and the level of influence.
Oil Worth for the Foreign Policy
The US successfully developed its foreign policy in the early 2000s, and the contributions of each president were effective for the nations involved. American organizations got regular access to oil reserves in the Middle East, which enhanced national stability, security, and energy supply. The Middle East was ready to share its natural resources because of their evident excess and expected the US foreign policy to help the region deal with terroristic hegemony (Gendzier, 2003). Oil has become a unique resource for the United States to strengthen its economic and military impact worldwide. More people got well-paid jobs, Americans could use cheap energy, and the government ensured national security and stability.
Conclusion
Identifying national interests and applying realism as the international relations theory are the necessary steps to answer the question about the influence of the US foreign policy in the Middle East. Following the chosen principles, it is normal for a country to focus on its national needs and formulate new international steps. Some aspects of American interest in the Middle Eastern, like unstable social relationships and terroristic threats, were evident between 2000 and 2010. However, although the US government did not indicate the desire to gain access to the Gulf’s natural resources as a part of its foreign policy, the world was aware of that intention and observed how confident the country reached its goal.
Reference List
Al Sarhan, A. S. (2017) ‘United States foreign policy and the Middle East’, Open Journal of Political Science, 7(4), pp. 454-472.
Cox, M. (2022) Agonies of empire: American power from Clinton to Biden. Bristol: Bristol University Press.
Gause III, F.G. (2019) ‘Should we stay or should we go? The United States and the Middle East’, Survival, 61(5), pp. 7-24.
Gendzier, I. (2003) ‘Oil, Iraq and US foreign policy in the Middle East’, Situation Analysis, 2, pp. 18-28.
Leffler, M. P. (2011) ‘9/11 in retrospect: George W. Bush’s grand strategy, reconsidered’, Foreign Affairs, 90(5), pp. 33-44.
Price-Smith, A. T. (2015) Oil, illiberalism, and war: an analysis of energy and US foreign policy. London: MIT Press.