Arab Spring or Middle East Firestorm?
By Larry Johnson on April 5, 2011 at 11:10 AM in Current Affairs
Some folks are describing the protests and violence sweeping through the Middle East as an “Arab Spring.” Now, if the definition of spring is the storm that clobbered the east coast of the United States last night–tornadoes, hail, snow and punishing thunderstorms–then maybe that term is correct. Normally I associate the word, “Spring” with Sun, flowers, baby birds, puppies and relief from the chill of winter. Would any sane person describe the events underway in Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Syria or Bahrain as “sunny with brilliant flowers, warm temps and cute puppies?”
Didn’t think so. I am not arguing for a status quo in the Middle East. I am in favor of getting rid of despots. But if we are going to pursue such a policy then we need to be willing to pay the price that accompanies such a policy. Let’s return for a moment to Egypt. Hosni Mubarak was not a thug compared to the likes of Saddam Hussein or Josef Stalin. But he was a cooperating partner with the United States in helping secure the border of Israel and pursuing a peace agreement with Israel. His predecessor, Anwar Sadat, was murdered for supporting this policy. So we should not minimize the import of his support for such a policy. Furthermore he was in the forefront of battling Islamic extremists in Egypt. He was guilty of imprisoning and killing them. But his policies served his interests.
When the protests broke out in Cairo he had every right to expect the United States to have his back. We bolted and abandoned him. And this has set off a chain reaction.
Despots and strongmen in Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Bahrain now find themselves no longer able to rely on the United States. So it should not come as a surprise that these folks start pursuing their own survival and entertain support from countries they previously eschewed or rejected. China in particular is a major beneficiary of the reassessment now underway in places like Saudi Arabia and Yemen.
Fair or not the White House is perceived as pursuing a policy that punishes those who supported U.S. interests in the past while going easy on the likes of Syria, Libya and Iran–all state sponsors of terrorism. We need to grow up and recognize that we do not live in a black and white world. We do not live in a world where we can always influence the outcomes in other countries. But we do live in a world where we can take actions in pursuit of policies that serve our national interests. For example, it would be in our interest to weaken ties between Syria and Iran. But it would not be in our interest to install a Sunni inspired government in Syria that would be more sectarian and more likely to promote terrorism against Israel.
Obama and his team of amateurs have managed to produce the worst of all outcomes. We have alienated our friends and failed to strongly back reformists that are not inspired by extreme theological visions. Like it or not a cold war between Sunnis and Shias is heating up. This conflict pits Iran against Saudi Arabia. If our interest is in stabilizing the world’s oil market and tamping down inflation then we need to back the Saudis and back them strongly. If our interest is in destabilizing the Sunni extremists and promoting the spread of Shia influence then we ought to be seeking to rekindle relations with Tehran. But we are not doing either. We are sitting on the sidelines watching events unfold and exercising little influence in the process.
The most apt metaphor in my opinion is the Chicago fire. The fire has spread to all neighborhoods. Some of those neighborhoods are better off if burned to the ground. Some, however, hurt us if they go up in smoke. Firefighter Obama is just watching. And his inaction is jeopardizing the future security of our country.


















Pingback: Is The MSM Hiding Attacks On Women Journalists? : NO QUARTER