America’s latest strategic shift

For some time, Bush Administration’s Middle East strategy had brought it closer to an open confrontation with Iran. But when Hezbollah put up a tremendous resistance to Israel after being attacked in 2006, the US leadership realized that Israel could not ‘finish’ the job within a week or so, which was anticipated by it.
In fact, Israel could not shake the resolve of Hezbollah during four weeks, which exploded the myth of invincibility of the Jewish state and its backer. It was considered as Iran’s victory, as many in the international media had said that it was Iran’s proxy war, which was started to deflect the attention of the international community from Iran’s nukes issue. Having also failed to win the war of attrition with Iran, the US had made diplomatic move to halt Iran’s sensitive nuclear work and also sought Iran’s cooperation to end violence in Iraq. According to this significant strategy shift the US is now trying to further mend fences with Iran.
This was obvious from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s statement that the US was behind the diplomatic move on Iran. This move, however, is reflective of ‘redirection’ of the US policy, and now the focus seems to be on Pakistan instead of Iran.
Since, presidential election in the US is a few months away, nominees of Republican and Democratic parties are unfolding their agendas to attract voters. However, their agendas are reflective of the super power syndrome. Both vow to continue the present aggressive policies. John McCaine stands for maintaining maximum forces in Iraq whereas Barack Obama vows to withdraw major chunk of its forces from Iraq but put more boots in Afghanistan. President George W Bush through his misadventures has caused a colossal damage to American economy, as almost trillion dollars have been spent on war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The US is ‘earning’ less and spending more; similarly Americans are producing less and consuming more with the result both are on the verge of bankruptcy. According to a recent report, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have stretched the US military to the breaking point.
An investigation by renowned American weekly TIME into state of health of American soldiers in Iraq revealed combat’s heavy toll on their mental health, and observed that military’s efforts to treat them with anti-depressants may be making the problem worse. Majority of troops are either suffering from depressions, which will adversely impact their performance in the field of war.
On the other hand, American citizens are scared of another 9/11-like attack, and with fear looming large the nation will lose creative faculties, and this phobia can be converted in war frenzy. James Steinberg, a potential US secretary of state, wrote an article in Newsweek special addition issues-2008 under the caption ‘How to lead the world’, in which he had given a piece of advice to the next president. He writes: “To steer the nation in the right direction, you must begin with some core principles. Start by listening….To get off on the right foot; invite respected Islamic thinkers and leaders to an ongoing dialogue to bridge the gap between America and the Muslim world”.
America is bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan; its influence as the sole super power has waned and its allies have started doubting its ability to lead the world, because invincibility of the superpower was shredded into bits in Iraq, where the US and the coalition of the willing could neither stop the bloodshed nor stem the resistance.
In Afghanistan, the Taliban’s resurgence is due to flawed policies of the government vis-a-vis neglecting the majority (Pushtuns), and secondly due to the collateral damage that killed innocent people during operations by US, NATO and Afghan forces. As a result, the survivors of those killed in the operations are out for revenge.
They are offering stiff resistance and it appears that the US and coalition forces are in for a long nightmare with no end in sight. So far as US policy on Iraq is concerned, it may not have achieved all its objectives in the Middle East but it has been successful in eliminating the threat to Israel by destroying Iraq - the strongest country in the Arab world.
From the very beginning, there was a strong perception that President Bush’s strategy to take on terrorists was wrong, as he had often accused ‘Muslim militants of seeking to enslave whole nations and intimidate the world’. He had also described Islamic terrorism as a tyrannical heir to Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot and Adolf Hitler. Such statements and President Bush’s habit of shooting from the hip could push even moderate Muslims to the side of the militants. Being the President of the only superpower, it is his responsibility to ensure that no injustice is done to the smaller countries.