Our Privacy Statement & Cookie Policy

By continuing to browse our site you agree to our use of cookies, revised Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.

I agree

Why 'the rest' are rejecting the West

Fawaz Gerges

 , Updated 17:56, 02-Feb-2024
Displaced Palestinians take shelter near the border fence with Egypt in Rafah, January 24, 2024. /CFP
Displaced Palestinians take shelter near the border fence with Egypt in Rafah, January 24, 2024. /CFP

Displaced Palestinians take shelter near the border fence with Egypt in Rafah, January 24, 2024. /CFP

Editor's note: Fawaz Gerges is Professor of International Relations at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), and author of the forthcoming book What Really Went Wrong: The West and the Failure of Democracy in the Middle East (Yale University Press, 2024).

As the war in Gaza enters its fourth month, many in the Middle East and across the Global South have been struck both by the ferocity of Israel's military campaign and by the Western governments' unwavering support for it. To them, this is as much U.S. President Joe Biden's war as it is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's, and the continuing indifference to the scale of the devastation has reaffirmed how cheap Arab lives appear to be to Western leaders.

For those who lived through the Cold War and witnessed how Western powers dealt with post-colonial states and their peoples, recent events are all too familiar. The United States and other Western countries, mainly the United Kingdom, have for nearly a century pursued an interventionist, militaristic, and anti-democratic foreign policy that largely ignores the interests of the peoples in the Middle East. If anything, Western decisions have been driven historically by the desire to roll back communism and secure the dominance of liberal capitalism.

In pursuit of these twin aims, the U.S. offered Middle Eastern leaders a zero-sum choice: either join in Western-led regional defense alliances and open your economy to global capital, or be considered a foe. In the name of maintaining stability and securing an uninterrupted flow of cheap oil, Western powers struck devil's pacts with Middle Eastern autocrats and actively contributed to the demise of incipient democratic movements.

Notably, in the early 1950s, when the liberal democrat Mohammad Mossadegh became prime minister of Iran and nationalized the country's oil, the CIA and MI6 orchestrated a coup and got him dismissed in 1953 through a decree by the U.S.-backed Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, who was himself overthrown in dramatic events 26 years later, becoming in turn the last monarch of Iran. That self-interested intervention in the 1950s arrested Iran's democratic development and set the stage for the 1979 Islamic Revolution, which ushered in the theocratic regime that rules to this day.

Similarly, in the 1950s, Gamal Abdel Nasser, a charismatic leader who was positively disposed toward the U.S., became president of Egypt and decided that it was not in his country's interest to join a Western-led defense pact. Seeking to humiliate him and force his ouster, America and Britain rescinded support for the massive Aswan High Dam project on the Nile River. What resulted was the Suez Crisis of 1956, which almost caused a world war. In the end, the most popular leader of the most populous Arab state became a bitter enemy of the West.

While the U.S.-led West has certainly taken a heavy-handed approach in other regions as well, Western officials have long rationalized their neo-imperial mission in the Middle East by claiming that the combination of Islam and Arab culture is incompatible with democracy. The implication is that brutal strongmen are essential to the stability that the West so values.

The lesson for those strongmen has been unambiguous: repression and human-rights abuses will be ignored as long as America's orders are followed. For the people of the region, the lesson has been no less plain: their lives and rights mean little in the West's calculus – notwithstanding all its lofty rhetoric about democracy and the rule of law. The invasion and decades-long occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq made that abundantly clear.

Palestinians collect their belongings from their damaged house after an Israeli airstrike in Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, January 27, 2024. /CFP
Palestinians collect their belongings from their damaged house after an Israeli airstrike in Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, January 27, 2024. /CFP

Palestinians collect their belongings from their damaged house after an Israeli airstrike in Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, January 27, 2024. /CFP

Barack Obama was the first U.S. president to hint at a different approach. Speaking at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in 2014, he decried America's perpetual wartime footing and tendency to shoot first and ask questions later. America's costliest mistakes in the region had come not from restraint, he argued, but from the "willingness to rush into military adventures without thinking through the consequences – without building international support and legitimacy for … action; without leveling with the American people about the sacrifices required."

Sadly, Obama's sober perspective appears to be lost on Biden, who belongs to the Cold War generation of American leadership. Until last October, Biden had devoted little time or attention to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He readily accepted the untenable status quo of perpetual Palestinian suffering, and focused instead on trying to expand the Abraham Accords. Those agreements, brokered by the Donald Trump administration, sought to normalize Israel's relations with some Arab countries in exchange for security assistance and protection, thereby ending the region's commitment to the Palestinian statehood.

Since Hamas's brutal attack on October 7, 2023 – which exposed the folly of Biden and Netanyahu's approach – there has been neither restraint nor an effort to think through the consequences of the current war. Instead, Biden and his European allies have wholeheartedly endorsed Israel's all-out assault on Gaza. Even as the civilian death toll has risen at an unprecedented pace, the humanitarian crisis grows more acute by the day, and governments around the world have called for a ceasefire, Biden has shown no willingness to intervene to stop the bloodshed.

Meanwhile, skirmishes on the Israel-Lebanon border and U.S.-led airstrikes on Houthi positions in Yemen and on Iranian-backed militias in Iraq suggest that the conflict may yet escalate further. America and Britain are gradually being sucked into the region yet again, though with eyes wide open this time. Biden claimed to represent a clean break from Trump, but there is no daylight between them when it comes to the Middle East. There and in much of the Global South, Biden will be remembered as just another American president who devalued Arab lives, preaching "democracy" while supporting repression and violence.

Biden may soon regret his wholehearted embrace of Netanyahu in recent months. Netanyahu, an expert at manipulating the American political process, recently rebuffed Biden's support for establishing a Palestinian state, insisting that Israel must have security control "over all the territory west of the Jordan (River)." That pronouncement was timed to the start of the U.S. presidential campaign, in which Trump is his preferred candidate.

Even if Biden ultimately secures a second term, the tragic irony is that the Middle East is less stable today than at any point in its modern history. The West's strategy has been a colossal failure, and this legacy will burden our world for a very long time.

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2024.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on Twitter to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.) 

Search Trends