Follow us on social

2018-04-13t134114z_937344659_rc14ae1a0db0_rtrmadp_3_israel-palestinians-protests-scaled

Why Americans should demand better US Middle East policy

Decades of war, U.S. sanctions, and a hypocritical approach to human rights has left the region seething. Is Biden listening?

Analysis | Middle East

The American people do not want to talk about the Middle East. Between spiking numbers of COVID-19, a teetering economy, and a democracy hanging in the balance, American attention is elsewhere. It makes sense, then, that the United States’ Middle East policy did not surface in presidential debates or town halls during the election and barely merits a mention in news coverage now.  

But like it or not, Joe Biden’s administration will forge cooperative relationships with regional leaders, cut diplomatic and military deals, and otherwise engage with the region. 

Behind the scenes, the policies that his administration pursues will have real consequences for security and stability of the Middle East — and by extension American security and stability.  Administrations of both parties have often been a source of destabilization and inequality in the region, whether through their roles in oil and gas extraction, their failed policies of regime change, or their support of repressive regimes

In turn, these policies have created great resentment against the United States. People across the region rightfully view the United States’ contradictory rhetoric about democracy and embrace of autocrats as hypocritical. The combination of instability and resentment has made American interests a target for anger, and it will continue to do so until our approach to the region changes dramatically.

Doubling down on these failed policies of the past will decrease the likelihood of substantial and meaningful collaboration on critical issues that we cannot solve without real buy-in from regional actors. These issues include transitioning from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, developing coping mechanisms for global warming, and preventing future pandemics and public health disasters like COVID-19.

The American people should insist on a few key components of a Middle East policy that would prioritize the people of the region ahead of their leaders and stop the United States’ destabilizing influence.

First, Americans need to support policies that help mitigate the disastrous effects of American armed invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition to the ongoing political instability and factionalism triggered by the invasions, the United States’ military actions have decimated local landscapes with horrific consequences.

In Iraq, the toxicity of American war debris continues to cause spikes in birth defects and cancer. Destroyed health systems have produced untreatable new forms of disease. The United States needs to fund and implement comprehensive programs to mitigate the destruction of local environments and public health.

Second, Americans should push their leaders to end economic sanctions. Economic sanctions, like those used against Iran, are thought to put pressure on a country’s leadership by depriving their citizens of money and imports. However, they rarely work as intended, and they punish the weakest members of society. 

In Iran, the Trump administration’s sanctions have only antagonized the Iranian government and had no demonstrable positive impact on the government’s foreign policy decisions. But they do deprive ordinary people of crucial medicines and medical supplies. Americans should insist on ending this ineffective and cruel policy.

Next, Americans should demand an end to the free flow of arm sales to regimes with big pockets and little interest in human dignity. Across the region, civilians suffer and die from weapons of war made by American companies. These arm sales allow repressive regimes to stymie their political opponents, suppress popular sentiment and engage in foreign wars of domination. The consequences of American arm sales further destabilize the region and increase the likelihood of armed conflict. The United State should also institute export controls over the sale of surveillance technology to regional dictators who use it to jail critics and squash their political opponents.

Finally, Americans should demand a policy of increased collaboration on civic and societal issues, instead of military alliances. Middle Eastern societies struggle with many of same issues that Americans face, such as police brutality, racism, women’s equality, widespread protests, socio-economic inequality, environmental threats, and the precarity of democracy, to name a few.

The Middle East will likely experience some of the most pernicious effects of a warming planet first, and collaborative relationships with civil society actors in the region could yield valuable lessons about how to handle climate change here at home. Working together with Middle Eastern countries, whether through policy makers or civic groups, could enable Americans to solve common problems faster and more effectively.

Americans cannot wish the Middle East away. Nor should they. The Middle East is an integral part of the interconnected global community, and its demographic importance will only grow as its disproportionately youthful population comes of age. 

What Americans can and should do, however, is demand that their leaders pursue policies in the region that emphasize fairness, the reduction of armed conflict and the promotion of stability. These policies are good for the Middle East and even better for the United States.


Palestinian demonstrators burn a banner showing a representation of an Israeli flag Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Defence Minister Avigdor Lieberman, U.S. President Donald Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman during a protest demanding the right to return to their homeland, at the Israel-Gaza border, in the southern Gaza Strip, April 13, 2018. REUTERS/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa
Analysis | Middle East
Benjamin Netanyahu
Top Image Credit: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends the U.S. Independence Day reception, known as the annual "Fourth of July" celebration, hosted by Newsmax, in Jerusalem August 13, 2025. REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun/Pool (ReutersConnect)

Netanyahu’s ‘total victory’ rhetoric takes an extreme turn

Middle East

As Israel’s war on Gaza escalates with IDF troops now moving to take over Gaza City, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been deploying more extreme language than usual to describe his plans for “total” victory over Hamas. He has eschewed ceasefire talks, and is instead leaning into his expansive vision for a “Greater Israel,” which not only includes an Israeli takeover of Gaza but of neighboring territories too.

His public remarks and media appearances over the last week have caused some to observe that the prime minister may be taking his approach, which is already heavily influenced by the hardline right wing in his cabinet, to an even more maximalist level.

keep readingShow less
Houthis Yemen
Top image credit: Houthi supporters shout slogans and hold up weapons during a protest against the US and Israel, in Sana a, Yemen, 15 August 2025. IMAGO/ Sanaa Yemen via REUTERS

Why Israel won't beat the Houthis

Middle East

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz threatened to "cut the hands" of Israel's enemies, but his specific target — Yemen's Houthi movement (Ansarullah) — has not only survived months of IDF and U.S. military pressure, but has also grown stronger with each confrontation.

The latest Israeli strike on Heyzaz power plant near Sanaa, Yemen’s capital, exemplifies this strategic failure: a symbolic attack on civilian infrastructure that inflicts severe hardship on Yemen's civilian population while doing nothing to degrade Houthi military capabilities.

keep readingShow less
Putin Trump
Top image credit: President Donald Trump meets with Russian president Vladimir Putin in the Billy Mitchell Room at Joint Base Elmendorf Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska, Friday, August 15, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Did the Alaska Summit usher in a new ice age?

Global Crises

The Trump-Putin Alaska summit was about far more than Ukraine. Since long before the meeting in Anchorage, the Arctic has been recognized as a setting for U.S.-Russia cooperation.

Now, with the historic presidential summit in the unexpected location of Alaska, the Arctic has been confirmed as one of the key areas for the normalization of the bilateral relationship.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.