Opinion | Why US foreign policy is leading to war in the Middle East

By Tom Fowdy

The Middle East increasingly teeters on the brink of a much more catastrophic conflict. Not only are the US and its allies aiming to confront the Houthis in Yemen, but in addition, Israel's Mossad unit is accused of numerous high prolife attacks and assassinations in Lebanon and Iran, as is the norm for them. All of this in turn, is a product of Israel's relentless campaign of destruction in Gaza and all the civilian casualties that have come with it, but more to the point as is frequently highlighted, this is only enabled by Washington's unconditional backing of Israel under even the most extreme circumstances.

America's Middle East policy has always been callous towards the inhabitants to the region and without any humanity, but its current vision, in this geopolitical landscape, means it poses more risks than ever before and runs the potential of unparalleled escalation, creating a new cycle of conflict which will ultimately prove unwinnable. Since the Donald Trump administration came into office in 2018, American foreign policy has switched from direct "interventionism" in the Middle East and counter-terrorism, towards geopolitical competition between states.

In doing so, the US understands itself to be in a competition for hegemony against states who are deemed to be rivals, and seeks to reaffirm a system of "unipolarity" (unchallenged dominance) over it. This most prominently includes China and Russia, but also in addition, Iran. In doing so, US foreign policy has set itself towards a logic of "absolute gains" and "no compromise" in dealing with its competitors, with the US aiming to maximize its power footprint and not make any strategic concessions for the sake of peace, of which is deemed to weaken their hegemonic hold.

The result of this policy is that while the US no longer engages in "direct" wars, but rather seeks to provoke "proxy conflicts" in various regions of the world by forcing the hand of a competitor entity by attempting to contain or military encircle them, framing them as the aggressor, and then subsequently backing a state against them which it then supplies military aid, intelligence, and assistance to. Most prominently, the US is doing this currently with Ukraine against Russia, but also desires to do the same with Taiwan and China, but then as a third dynamic, is now using Israel with the view of trying to cripple Iran, or any other resistance, in the Middle East, and is happy in any case whatever the cost may be.

This goes in line with an all-out containment campaign and a series of proxy conflicts waged against Iran. This move first involved withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) or "Iran deal" and imposing crippling sanctions, aiming to bring the state down. This has been unsuccessful. Secondly, the US has then sought to orchestrate an "us against them" conflict by exploiting regional differences with Tehran in order to exert geopolitical influence through its security relationships, and therefore continue to hegemonize the region and benefit the Military-Industrial Complex, all while attempting to use the Abraham Accords to promote normalisation of Israel, breaking Arab solidarity by "buying off" states bilaterally, with the end goal of "lock stepping" its political and diplomatic order in the Middle East and crushing all resistance. This not only allows the US to benefit from the status quo, but also divert resources to its prioritized "Indo-Pacific".

It was these circumstances, especially in relation to Palestine, which led to the outbreak of the Israeli-Gaza war, in particular, because the US was persuading Arab states to abandon the cause of Palestine, normalizing Israel, yet also rewarding bad behavior without any actual incentives or moves towards peace on their behalf. In deciding to back this conflict unconditionally and not press for peace, the US is sowing the seeds of a wider war as it has provoked a response from other groups that it deems to be "Pro-Iran" such as the Houthis and Hezbollah, Syria, as well as Shi'ite groups in Iraq. It is also calculated that the Arab states will not exert much pressure on Israel or come to Palestine's behalf, despite how their populations may feel about these events.

Not only does this risk wider war across the region, but it will also lead to a greater backlash against America's role in the Middle East and challenge the legitimacy of Arab governments who are too reconciliatory towards Israel, there is zero chance in any circumstances that the US can remove or crush the various resistance movements, as they learned in a 20 year campaign against the Taliban. For the US to have backed this conflict so indiscriminately is not strategically beneficial, but a huge miscalculation which will only promote the role of Russia and China in the region as third parties that states can hedge against and therefore resist the unipolar system Washington seeks to restore. Thus, this becomes a question of how much political will, capital and money is the US, on Israel's behalf, prepared to throw in in order to try and defend the political order it has created? And is it likewise prepared to sacrifice its treasured "Indo-Pacific" to go all out in this should things not to go plan?

The author is a well-seasoned writer and analyst with a large portfolio related to China topics, especially in the field of politics, international relations and more. He graduated with an Msc. in Chinese Studies from Oxford University in 2018.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.

Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:

Opinion | The struggle for the Gulf of Aden

Opinion | John Pilger and the consolidation of the Western narrative

Opinion | 2023 was a year of reckoning

Opinion | Deck the halls with media sensationalism, the subject of Christmas in China