| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Arabia | |
| Why the gulf looks to America | |
| 2004-01-29 | |
| This article speaks for itself. .... A recent debate held in Abu Dhabi on the future challenges to the Gulf pointed up a striking divergence between the new European security thinking adopted in Brussels in December and the realities in the region. While the European Security Strategy, drawn up by the European Union’s foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, makes much fuss over an engaged and active European role in the region, the strategic formulas actually discussed in the region almost exclusively hinged upon American security guarantees. Why this discrepancy? Some of it probably has to do with the internal European debate, which is too bureaucratized and cluttered with interests that distort more than clarify the reality on the ground. To this effect, European efforts to put forth a common security and foreign policy has become an exercise in balancing interests of individual EU member states rather than a comprehensive debate on security challenges and needs. It is striking how force-averse the Solana security document is, when, in fact, the Gulf states are desperate to include military guarantees from allies (read America) into their security combinations. They realize that on their own they are defenseless against regional nuclear powers like India and Pakistan, notwithstanding increases in defense spending. Not to mention Iran. Tehran’s efforts to acquire nuclear weapons have sent shock waves through a region that traditionally mistrusts Iran. Undoubtedly, a nuclear Iran would disrupt the balance of power on the Gulf peninsula while posing a serious challenge to the security of the region’s natural resources. One possible response to this threat would be for Saudi Arabia to develop its own weapons of mass destruction. But this is a Pandora’s box no Gulf state wants to open. Instead, the emphasis has been on getting American security guarantees. The leaders of the Gulf region want American troops to stay. Where is Europe in this picture? Not present, and for an obvious reason. As a community, it does not have the capacity or the will to deploy and sustain troops outside Europe for prolonged periods of time. At the same time, its political leverage - for all it’s worth - is a poor substitute for hard power. The next obvious challenge to the security structure of the Gulf is the future of Iraq. Whether Iraq stays in one piece, disintegrates into three or is held together by a loose federal structure matters to the stability and territorial integrity of states like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, but also to the states of the lower Gulf. Here again, it is American power that is relevant, not European. In fact, the role of the latter - primarily because of French and German opposition prior to the war - has been totally marginalized in this debate. Finally, Europe’s role as a security player in the Gulf region hinges on its ability to exert real influence over the Israel-Palestine conflict. Again, Europe is limited. While the Old Continent tends to cater to Palestinian interests, its ability to play a mover in the Middle East peace process is limited - mainly because Israel doesn’t take Europe seriously. Leaders of the Gulf know this. Limited and at times controversial engagement by the Bush administration aside, America is far better positioned to bring the conflict to a close. The problem is obvious: Europe is not serious about the use of force in an area where force is still necessary. As such, 21st century America is a much more credible and appropriate security partner to the Gulf region than 21st century Europe. If this reality also translates to other security theaters, Europe is obviously missing the point. Europe’s overwhelming commitment and emphasis on international laws and rules is noble, but unrealistic.
Tell me again how we’ve lost credibility in the world .... | |
| Posted by:rkb |
| #31 "Lucky: Oh My God... you still don't know where the WMDs are?. We all saw it on TV." Yes we did Faisel, we all did. Good point! |
| Posted by: Lucky 2004-1-29 10:52:20 PM |
| #30 Details! Dcreeper (if that's your real name) details! Don't worry us with details! |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-1-29 5:40:10 PM |
| #29 since no one bothered to shoot the arming comment down.. saddam was armed primarily by russia, the amount of arms support from the usa was less than 15%, look it up for once, use that neat brand new tool called google... how can you even feel comfy making your claim when the iraqis fought american soldiers primarily with *gasp* russian equiptment ? seriously.. are you just making shit up? |
| Posted by: Dcreeper 2004-1-29 5:16:11 PM |
| #28 Frodo destroyed the ring but the Trolls escaped Mordor. I also think Faisel is pretending to be Arabic. He probably hoped someone would make some racist slur because anyone that doesn't think lock-step as he does must be racist. From the Gates of Mordor everything is black and white isn't it Faisel. |
| Posted by: ruprecht 2004-1-29 5:03:52 PM |
| #27 Told ya he was entertaining.Isn't Mu-rat hanging around today. |
| Posted by: Raptor 2004-1-29 4:41:10 PM |
| #26 Sgt.D. Gotta go back... inseam 23 not 32. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-1-29 4:25:58 PM |
| #25 Faisel, I just got a break from work and I see that you are upset. Was the vest not ready? |
| Posted by: Sgt.DT 2004-1-29 4:00:11 PM |
| #24 I just noticed Faisal is back. Someone at his Junior High School must have left the computer lab unlocked. But Rantburghers, it really is unfair to debate with Faisal because in a battle of wits the poor dolt is completely unarmed. |
| Posted by: Gasse Katze 2004-1-29 2:51:35 PM |
| #23 Fred, at the end of a troll-infested can you declare a kill on each trollish miscreant. The award can be for whomever gets the best headshot in against the targetted asswipe. If I win, I plan to put stickers on the wall of my cubicle in a tribute to fighter pilots of the past. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2004-1-29 1:51:39 PM |
| #22 Note, actually I meant 4 assholes are outta commission - I forgot to include Hussein's putred spawn Uday & Qusay. Yes, I'm glad they're dead & no I don't feel the least bit bad. 500 rounds of 5.56mm ball ammo can't be wrong - the ugly American rears his ugly head again :) |
| Posted by: Jarhead 2004-1-29 1:51:36 PM |
| #21 JFM, LOL. Shiver me timbers and batten down the hatches me laddies! This is some classic stuff. Trolls - they're not just for breakfast anymore ;) Seriously, I'm not the biggest W fan, namely - immigration bill pissed me off, medicare bill (I get to pay more, yippee) pissed me off. I don't give a fuck about Mars, and re-newing that lie of an assault weapons ban also pisses me off. However, W was the right one for the job to deal w/assholes in the mid-east. Imagine if the gore-bot was calling the shots - nothing would have happened & every second rate jihadi would be trying to take a bite outta our ass. The far left (I'm a GDI BTW) can't seem to fathom cause/effect good/evil or any other perfectly simple concept. Get off the self-loathing we deserved it bandwagon pussies - that shit's wearing thin. I know we haven't found Bin Laden or WMDs. Who fucking cares (most of us in the mil don't). Two assholes are outta commission, the world's better off and in the big picture, the region will be better off. BTW - I don't really give a shit about the Israeli/Palestinian problem either. Call me insensitive but I have no irons in that fire, (not Jewish or Arab) I just don't want to have to go there or send my boy there to put their house in order. I do feel horrible whenever children (from either side) get hurt or murdered, because no one's looking out for them and they deserve better. Oh and on more thing while I'm ranting on my favorite site - fuck the UN. |
| Posted by: Jarhead 2004-1-29 1:39:05 PM |
| #20 Rwandanrefugee Can you tell us he word for Tutsi woman in Kynyarwanda? |
| Posted by: JFM 2004-1-29 1:34:31 PM |
| #19 I thought the IHT was owned by the dead tree Gray Lady? Why is this at least the 3rd article I've read which makes sense? |
| Posted by: Anonymous2U 2004-1-29 1:30:49 PM |
| #18 Yes, we created Saddam, and supplied him, too! That's why we were attacked by Abrams tanks and M-16s or whatever they're using now. oh, wait, Kalishnikov doesn't really sound American, does it? |
| Posted by: Anonymous2U 2004-1-29 1:26:53 PM |
| #17 I doubt Faisal is an Arab, in fact I doubt he can tell the Arabic words for 1, 2, 3. I think it is your average San Francisco gay hippie with too much time in his hands and too much money earned by daddy of course. |
| Posted by: JFM 2004-1-29 1:21:16 PM |
| #16 --Finally, Europe’s role as a security player in the Gulf region hinges on its ability to exert real influence over the Israel-Palestine conflict. Again, Europe is limited. While the Old Continent tends to cater to Palestinian interests, its ability to play a mover in the Middle East peace process is limited - mainly because Israel doesn’t take Europe seriously. Leaders of the Gulf know this.-- Europe could cut off the money, for starters. That would be a big help. |
| Posted by: Anonymous2U 2004-1-29 1:20:23 PM |
| #15 RwandanRefugee - Saddam was not created by the US. He came to power through his own ruthlessness. Once he was in power and the bastards in Iran gave us a black eye he became a good tool for the US. It is very easy to sit back 25 years later and say it was a bad idea. No president (dem or rep) could of supported iran against iraq during the 80's. Exlain to me how Bin Laden was created by the US? Yes we supported the mujadeen against the soviets..but we did not create obl. If you want to place blame then look to the Sods and Paks. And then good ole Clinton for ignoring this during the 90's. Learn your history before making absurd statements - enough said. |
| Posted by: Dan 2004-1-29 1:12:35 PM |
| #14 faisal - you are an idiot full of hot air. 1. OBL is in pakistan and the us had to give the paks a chance to handle it. They havn't and you will soon major american commitments along the afgan/pak borders. 1. If good ole saddam did not have wmd then he should of come clean and not keep up the pretense that he did. He played a game of strategic ambiguity in regards to wmd and lost. As long as his neigbors believed he had them he had the upper hand. I personally believe they where moved to syria (but that is my personal opinion). Just because kay or whoever cannot find actual weapons meand didly. The nature of these weapons means they can be destroyed/hidden very easliy. Saddam was an enemy of the US and could of eventually taken his wrath out. But my children will not have to worry about iraq's saddam. And we are in a good strategic position to carry on the War on Terror! With all the enemies the US has in the middle east we had to take the initiative. And we did, we placed are troops right in the middle of these bastards and the tone emanating from iran/sryia had changed from this time last year.They know their under the american microscope. To say that Bush is immoral is just you blowing smoke (probably out of your ass). Mr. Bush is doing what the american people want - they want their interests looked after (latest gallop shows 67% of american believe Bush is doing the right thing). The only problem here is that when America looks after her own some in the world get stomped on - oh well. If you play with fire expect fire in return. Where you from? What moral leader do call yours? I just thank god we have Bush and not a clinton crony. Your an idiot - hope you vist Gitmo soon! |
| Posted by: Dan 2004-1-29 1:07:36 PM |
| #13 Hmm. Faisal, I didn't tell you not to rant, after all, this is RANTburg:) As for not "having an arguement", I learned some tme ago that reasonable disourse and discussion of facts makes no difference to those with your political Now pass me my rattle and pacifier! |
| Posted by: Hyper 2004-1-29 12:49:44 PM |
| #12 RwandanRefugee, please keep spouting thoroughly debunked lies. That's what's called a 'self-defeating argument'. Are you really a refugee from Rwanda? I doubt it. If you are and you hate the West so much, then by all means go back to your genocidal brethren in Rwanda. As for Faisal, try making an argument and many here will debunk your lies. Until then, FOAD. |
| Posted by: AllahHateMe 2004-1-29 12:49:02 PM |
| #11 Lucky: Oh My God... you still don't know where the WMDs are?. We all saw it on TV. They were hidden under Saddam Hussein's Molar teeth. Didn't you see the footage of the doc checking Saddam?. Osama is hidden my ass. I'm sure the yankees will get him out from somewhere like magic before the GWB the weasel gets re-elected (God forbid) |
| Posted by: Faisal 2004-1-29 12:48:13 PM |
| #10 It's nice to see the trolls out. 'Means spring should be here soon. What disturbs me about the article, however, is the mention of "21st century America" as being more credible and reliable than Europe. This outlook can change completely one year from today if, God forbid, we see Kerry or Dean giving his inaugural speech. I'm wary when I read sweeping statements like this because "21st century America" has the potential to change personality 25 times--it *will* change at least 12 times! |
| Posted by: Dar 2004-1-29 12:22:11 PM |
| #9 So Faisal, where do you think the WMD are? I get a kick out of grown ups like you. "GWB is a retard." Oh and where do you think bin laden is? RwandaRefugee, State your case. spell it out, name names, call a spade a spade, spit it out. |
| Posted by: Lucky 2004-1-29 12:14:40 PM |
| #8 The mullocracy in Iran have made threats against Israel about what they would do if they got nukes. The Iranians could just as well deal with others they did not like in the same way. Some of the gulf states get it. They have also seen what not dealing with Sammy got Kuwait, while all the "great powers" like Saudi stood by. Then in Gulf War I, the other Arab states would not finish Sammy off. I am encouraged by these Gulf states. Some of them want to live. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul in Teller, AK 2004-1-29 12:03:32 PM |
| #7 Sgt.DT ... if someone disagrees with you so he's a diehard jihadi. Grow up man. Be a mature person. Ditto for hyper. I've noted that you guys babble too much. When someone says something that you do not want to hear so there's the easy way: Troll is around, troll is here, wear an explosive vest blah blah. If you don't have an argument, so shut the f* up. I agree with BH. If saudis and iranian had nukes u never know what they could do impulsively. |
| Posted by: Faisal 2004-1-29 11:55:45 AM |
| #6 Bin Laden, Sadam Hussein - Creations of the US. Enough said. |
| Posted by: RwandanRefugee 2004-1-29 11:48:29 AM |
| #5 I LOVE the trolls! Thank you, Faisal, for all the laughs! You guys crack me up, what with the lack of brains and still-functioning orifices! Hahahahahahahaha (yes, I'm laughing AT you)... Thanks for taking a break from Democcratic Underground and coming on over to entertain the troops at RB! |
| Posted by: Hyper 2004-1-29 11:46:05 AM |
| #4 Hey Faisal, You've opened my eyes to the moral decrepitude of my president, George W Bush. From now on I'm going to look to the Arab world for leaders of true quality and morality. Hmmm... what about Saddam Hussein? No, the torture chambers, mass graves, and inscription on the back of his throne rule him out. Maybe Arafat? No, the evil campaign against Israel, and the turning of his own people's children into mindless, hate filled bomb-drones by the age of 6 rules him out. Maybe sheik Yassin? No, his urging of his young men to blow themselves up, and now the women as well, point to a lack of clear thinking. What about Bin Laden? He built hospitals and roads and helped drive back the soviets. sounds good except for his constant calls to destroy the western world, and the blood of thousands of innocent souls, all in the name of his religion. Sorry Faisal. I'll have to rethink my first statement. For the moment, there are no leaders of the Arab world who stand out as an example to follow. For the time being, I think I'll stick by my president. He's guided by life affirming Judeo-Christian values, but doesn't hold up a bible as a replacement for the constitution. And, when the cretins gave us a bloody nose, he didn't run away to fire rubber bands back at them. He punched right back and hard - the proper response to rabid dogs. Is he perfect? Hardly, but I prefer him over any examples the Arab world has to offer, or has ever had to offer for that matter. By the way, your unspeakably absurd suggestion that President Bush would detonate a dirty bomb to kill his own people just to win an election, very much speaks to what kind of leader you are used to, or perhaps prefer. |
| Posted by: Dripping Sarcasm 2004-1-29 11:45:15 AM |
| #3 Dearest Faisal, I think your explosive vest is ready at the tailor shop. Have a nice day. |
| Posted by: Sgt.DT 2004-1-29 11:40:24 AM |
| #2 Personally, the thought of Iran and Soddy having a nuclear war gets me hard. I mean, that is the definition of a win/win scenario. Problem is, neither one could resist taking shots at Israel. |
| Posted by: BH 2004-1-29 11:37:53 AM |
| #1 I think the topic should be 'Why the US looks towards the gulf'. Well GWB is a retard and ye all know it guys. Turn on Fox and listen to Kerry :-). Six months in 'afgaynistayn' and he was kicking Osama's ass. Well, haven't found him yet. Then he was off to find the Weopons of Mass destruction in 'bag-dad' till Powell and Kay burst the WMD bubble saying they did not believe Iraq had them. That was last week. I would'nt be surprised if he gets his goons to stage a dirty bomb somewhere before the elections. GBW... the great American Moral standard...GWB style... |
| Posted by: Faisal 2004-1-29 11:07:34 AM |