The New US Middle East Policy and Energy Security Challenges

Abstract

The direct link between United States' energy security policy and its military policy in Persian Gulf can be traced back to formulation of Carter doctrine in late 19705 and subsequent creation of rapid deployment force (RDF)-ancestor to US central command (CENTCOM)-in early igSos.' The threat has evolved with strategic context-from a Soviet incursion into Gulf after invasion of Afghanistan, to an Iranian attack against Gulf monarchies after 1979, to regional security implications of Iraq-1 ran to threat posed by Saddam Hussein after end of with Iran-but objective has remained same: to sanctuarize petro-monarchies of Gulf, and especially Saudi Arabia, against any external threat; in other words, to prevent heart of world oil system from being caught up into regional political instability.FROM POLICEMAN TO POLITICAL ENGINEERTo use a term from political philosophy, US involvement in Persian Gulf under Carter doctrine amounted to applying a negative power: it was meant to prevent people from doing certain things more than it aimed at shaping region. The US has made it impossible for Iran and Iraq, successively, to threaten security of production and export facilities of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and United Arab Emirates, as well as sea-lanes of Gulf and Strait of Hormuz. But from late 1970s until 11 September 2001, US had never seriously tried to change regimes of Iran, Iraq, or Syria, to prevent Iraq and Iran from fighting, or to push for political reforms in monarchies of Gulf. The type of power that United States has applied in Middle East under Carter doctrine is that of a policeman, not that of a planner.After terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, Bush administration undertook a complete reorientation of US policy in Middle East. At core of new approach is idea that to win war on terrorism United States must take advantage of its unprecedented power to freedom-promote democracy and market economy-throughout world, and especially across Arab-Muslim world. The second aspect of Bush doctrine-as new policy has come to be called-is concept of preemptive war, which actually means preventive war: nature of threat confronting United States-a combination of transnational terrorist networks, evil regimes, failed states, and proliferation of unconventional weapons-requires that US be ready to act preventively. This second pillar of Bush doctrine contributes to its revolutionary character but is of less importance for purpose of this article than policy of democracy promotion in Middle East.The first comprehensive policy document presenting Bush doctrine was national security strategy of United States of America (NSS) released by White House in September 2002. was also conveyed to American people and to world in a series of speeches by President Bush in 2002 and 2003.2 The latest NSS document, published in March 2006, tones down doctrine of preemption-though it formally maintains it-but strongly reaffirms strategic commitment to advancement of liberty. In his introductory letter, Bush reaffirms that fighting and winning on terror and promoting freedom as alternative to tyranny and despair are two inseparable priorities of US foreign policy, and that the advance of liberty will make America more secure. The first sentence of NSS itself states: It is policy of United States to seek and support democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.1 The Bush doctrine has evoked an intense debate among foreign policy experts but, more than three years after launch of in Iraq, promotion of political freedom is still guiding principle of Bush administration's Middle East policy. …