Strange But True: Headlines From the Middle East

Heather Hurlburt wrote for New York Magazine about recent headlines in the Middle East and what they say about current US foreign policy.

People have been talking for years about what the Middle East would look like if the United States took a more limited and purely self-interested role. Well, that time has come. Make no mistake, American interests and American lives remain deeply involved. Hundreds of U.S. troops are on the ground in Syria; thousands more nearby in bases in Qatar and Turkey. Washington is flying sorties against ISIS and other forces daily, and planning to contain and push back Iran is one of the Trump administration’s major security preoccupations.

But despite that, Washington has relatively few levers to affect what happens in Syria, not so much because of the limits of its military stance but because it has so little to offer on the diplomatic front. Not aid for rebuilding even post-ISIS Iraq, let alone any part of Syria. Not aid or placement for refugees. Not political leadership at peace talks. Not the ability to cut a deal with Russia or Iran, given the levels of domestic political rhetoric on both topics in Washington. As two analysts of the Israeli-Syrian conflict politely commented, Washington’s strategy in Syria remains “opaque.” When advocates of restraint in U.S. foreign policy called for limiting U.S. aims in the Middle East, none of them ever called for limits in thinking ahead about cause and effect. Yet here we are.