First Published: 2012-04-04

 

The Irrational US/Iran/Israel Dynamic

 

The continuing insistence by Washington that its foreign policy should operate according to a different set of rules than the rest of the world -- especially when Israel is concerned -- is a major reason why so many people and governments around the world look at American foreign policy with disdain and disrespect, says Rami G. Khouri.

 

Middle East Online

BEIRUT -- Why does most of the world continue to lose respect for the United States and its conduct of foreign policy? Two developments in the past week shed some light on this, and -- not surprisingly -- they both relate to Washington’s relations with Iran and Israel, an arena in which American rationality, fairness, consistency and integrity go out the window, and hysteria takes over the controls.

Last Friday President Barack Obama announced that his analysis of global oil trading led him to conclude that there were sufficient supplies of crude oil in the market for the United States to implement previously announced sanctions on countries that buy oil from Iran. If third countries do not reduce or stop their oil purchases and commercial dealings with the Central Bank of Iran, those countries would not be allowed to do any business with the United States.

Two rather extraordinary aspects of this decision deserve note. The first is the presumptuous American government attitude that Washington can decide on its own whether the global oil market is sufficiently robust to allow the United States to unilaterally issue orders to other sovereign countries about where they can or cannot buy oil. This American sense of global arrogance already extends to several other domains in which lawmakers in Washington -- most of whom are deeply ignorant of the world beyond their borders -- presumptuously issue reports and rankings about the status of human rights, religious freedoms, press freedoms, democracy or other such issues around the world.

The United States does not see itself as a leading power among equally sovereign states around the world; it sees itself as the definer and guarantor of global behavior, and the enforced of norms that it sets on its own. Most of the world rejects and resents this.

The second more problematic aspects of the oil sanctions and commercial trading decision is that the United States will now enforce a secondary boycott against countries that buy Iranian oil via transactions with the Iranian central bank. My problem with this is not that the United States should not impose such a secondary boycott, which all countries are free to use. My problem is that the United States explicitly and vehemently opposed such a secondary boycott when the Arab countries did exactly the same thing in relation to third country companies that invested in or appreciably assisted the Israeli economy, because of the active state of war between Arabs and Israelis. Washington rejected this rationale and said that the Arab boycott had to be opposed and busted.

Now the United States applies exactly the same principle, totally abandoning the values that it summoned when it opposed the Arab boycott of Israel. The continuing insistence by Washington that its foreign policy should operate according to a different set of rules than the rest of the world -- especially when Israel is concerned -- is a major reason why so many people and governments around the world look at American foreign policy with disdain and disrespect.

The second noteworthy development last week helps explain why this kind of behavior occurs. It was an opinion article in the Washington Post by Dennis Ross and David Makovsky, of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), entitled, “The US can meet Israel halfway on Iran.”

It laid out a series of reasons why and how the United States and Israel should closely coordinate their diplomacy, negotiations, sanctions, threats and potential military attack on Iran, noting that: “Because Israel is the only country that Iran has repeatedly threatened to ‘wipe off the map,’ it is reasonable for it to have some input into the objectives of diplomacy and the timetable for progress in negotiations. The more Israelis feel their views are being taken into account, the more inclined they will be to give diplomacy a chance to work before resorting to force. Israel should also understand that if diplomacy fails and force proves necessary, the context in which force is used will be critical.”

This is not surprising coming from WINEP, which is a highly effective pro-Israel think tank in Washington, D.C. that has exceptional influence among US officials, as do most other such institutions that broadly reflect the positions of the Israeli government and the pro-Israel lobby groups in the United States. What is surprising is the rather explicit call from the heart of Washington, D.C. for American policy on Iran to be so closely coordinated with Israeli views. Coordination is a normal tool for diplomatic action, but many people in the United States and around the world feel that the line between cooperation and coercion has been badly blurred in US-Israeli relations, as America’s Mideast policies seem increasingly subservient to Israeli concerns.

Dennis Ross was a central figure in American policies on Arab-Israeli and, more recently, Iranian issues -- policies that have totally failed in almost every respect. Is it perhaps due in part to the fact that American officials and lawmakers often confuse Israeli concerns with American interests? Are we seeing this principle in action again these days on policy towards Iran, where coordination and coercion seem especially confused?

Rami G. Khouri is Editor-at-large of The Daily Star, and Director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs at the American University of Beirut, in Beirut, Lebanon.

Copyright © 2012 Rami G. Khouri -- distributed by Agence Global

 

GCC states vow united stand against IS mosque bombings

Egypt government adopts anti-terror law

21 killed in clashes, strikes in Yemen's Aden

Ankara has no plans for imminent intervention in Syria

Iraq Christians train for jihad against IS

Rockets from Sinai strike Israel

Palestinians arrest 100 Hamas members in West Bank

Erdogan inaugurates public mosque in palace

Islamists form alliance in battle for Aleppo

Top Tunisian jihadist reportedly killed by US strike in Libya

Emir attends joint Shiite, Sunni prayers in Kuwait

Hamas denies involvement in Sinai attacks

4 Qaeda suspects killed in US drone attack in Yemen

'Series of errors' behind Air Algerie crash in Mali

Palestinians protest one year after teenager burned alive

Egypt vows to wipe out 'dens of terror'

Tunisia arrests eight in connection with beach massacre

Youth in Tunisia 'ripe for radicalisation'

UN sends mission to 'assess' South Sudan atrocities

Syria urges citizens to enlist

AQAP step up campaign to eradicate qat

British FM: 'No breakthrough yet' in Iran nuclear talks

UN imposes first sanctions on six South Sudan generals

Libya rival governments will not return to peace talks

Fighting rages in Yemen’s Aden

Kurds warn Turkey against any ‘aggression’ in Syria

Kuwait makes DNA tests mandatory after suicide bombing

Kuwait parliament approves deficit budget on oil slide

Pro-Erdogan candidate becomes new speaker of Turkey parliament

‘War’ in Sinai Peninsula as clashes with ISIS fighters rage on

All 38 victims of Tunisia beach massacre identified

36 killed in wave of IS attack on Egyptian soldiers

Iran vs. Israel gets cartoon treatment

IAEA chief to fly to Iran for nuclear talks

Saudi prince pledges fortune to charity

Syria Kurds regain full control of Tal Abyad

Palestinian PM to make 'temporary' cabinet reshuffle

20 civilians killed in rebel fire on Yemen's Aden

Iran nuclear talks go into extra time

Gulf states urged to follow Kuwait on maid rights

Yemen rebels free 1,200 prisoners

Negotiators extend deadline for Iran nuclear talks

‘Islamic State’ re-enters Syria border town of Tal Abyad

Defiant tourists stay in Tunisia

Deadly clashes rage on in eastern Libya