History is a story of great power rivalries. In our time, the competitors are the United States, Russia, and China. As I’ve previously argued, the United States must pursue its interests pragmatically in order to retain global supremacy. However, abstract ideas and goals rarely ever translate to results. Actions are needed to bridge our vision of the future with today’s realities—especially in the regions that seem the farthest from peace.
In Washington’s two-front competition with Russia and China, no region offers that opportunity like the Middle East. Hamas’s October 7th attack and Israel’s campaign in Gaza have reignited the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the global conscience, Bashar al-Assad’s fall has destabilized Syria, and Iran is closer to a nuclear weapon than ever before.
These problems might seem disconnected, but a common thread unites them: the specters of Russian and Chinese influence. Russia was the Assad regime’s primary benefactor and has only increased its support to Hamas since October 7th. China has also been economically active in the region, steadily forging partnerships with the Gulf States. Most important, however, is the link between China, Russia, and Iran. China receives nearly all of Iran’s oil, and the Russian and Iranian militaries have an extremely high level of cooperation. As such, American policy in the Middle East must focus on depriving Iran of the capacity to dictate regional dynamics, starving Russia and China of regional influence by extension.
Luckily, Putin and Xi are presently distracted: Russia is entangled in its ongoing war in Ukraine, while China is contending with a cooling economy and stiffening trade relations with the West. These distractions have opened a window of opportunity for the United States.
American involvement in the Middle East is neither a novel idea nor one particularly known for success. Many critics have argued that the United States, like Russia and China, is over-extended and in no state to influence affairs in the region. Instead, they say, America must dedicate its attention and resources to countering China in the Indo-Pacific. While this caution is warranted, I am not advocating for state-building or humanitarian intervention in every corner of the globe. In the Middle East more than anywhere else, the United States must be pragmatic in countering both Russian and Chinese influence where today’s struggles will determine tomorrow’s world order.
To this end, American policy in the Middle East must focus on three key priorities: continued support for Israel, maximum pressure on Iran, and stabilization of the Syrian and Lebanese governments. These three objectives both address the Iranian threat directly and, by extension, prevent further Russian and Chinese encroachment in the region.
First, the United States should continue to support Israel in its fight against the Iranian axis of resistance. This objective encompasses the decimation of Hezbollah in Lebanon, eradication of Hamas from Gaza and the West Bank, and end to Houthi shipping attacks in the Bab al-Mandab Strait. Israel has already made substantial progress on all three goals, but sustained American financial and diplomatic support will ensure Iran’s proxies are fully neutralized.
Second, the Trump administration must expand its maximum pressure campaign on Iran. When the Iran Nuclear Deal was signed in 2015, its numerous caveats prevented the agreement from providing lasting positive impacts. Most significantly, the deal did not address Iran’s ballistic missile program or its funding of terrorists and militias. In other words, while the agreement did effectively secure Iranian non-proliferation, it completely neglected Iran’s capacity to project power beyond its borders—something just as critical as its nuclear program.
Over the past few years, Iran has rapidly developed the infrastructure necessary to build a nuclear weapon. At this point, any attempt to revive the 2015 deal is futile. American focus must thus turn to starving the Iranian government of the resources needed to develop nuclear weapons. This means ruthlessly enforcing a new arms embargo, increasing sanctions on Iranian oil production, and coordinating with other nations, especially regional partners.
The final element of this strategy is stabilizing the new Lebanese and Syrian governments. While these governments might not be ideologically aligned with the United States, they’re far better than the alternative. American support is a practical necessity to prevent the re-emergence of Hezbollah and ISIS as formidable fighting forces.
This policy will not only prevent these groups from reestablishing regional dominance but also mitigate Iran’s position as puppet master of these organizations. Further, since Russia was an ally of the Assad regime, supporting the new Syrian government will go a long way towards blocking a Russian return in Syria, further weakening the Kremlin’s regional presence and global influence.
Today represents a rare moment of Russian and Chinese distraction and inability to materially influence Middle Eastern affairs. Putin has failed to protect Assad’s regime, and Xi cannot sustain his Belt and Road Initiative—Beijing’s primary vector of investing in and building relations with many Middle Eastern nations. As a result, the Middle East is ripe with opportunities for the United States to forge a new, pragmatic path. The question is: will we seize them?
Featured Image Source: US European Command
Comments are closed.