The Great Pro-Democratic Revolutions of the spring of 2011 in Syria - Essay Example

The Great Pro Democratic Revolutions of the spring of in Syria The Great Pro Democratic Revolutions of the spring of In Syria Introduction The paper discusses the myths and illusions regarding the US foreign policy in the Middle East. The paper also analyzes the main goals and ideas, citing examples for each, of the positions of the Realists and Neo-Conservatives regarding US foreign rule in the Middle East. There will be a clear discussion showing the tension between idealism and realism while formulating US foreign policy. Answering some questions such as whether the Middle Eastern countries with deficit democracy can become democratic according to the authors, Ross, and Makovsky. The reader will also be able to understand what actually happens when a government is elected democratically but not supported by the United States. Finally, there will be a comparison between the main topic to the ideas of the Makovsky and Ross thesis in addition to a thorough conclusion. Question 1 There are three basic myths as analyzed by Makovsky and Ross in the book of Myths, Peace, and Illusions: Finding a New Direction for US in the Middle East. The first myth shows that all issues concerning the Middle Eastern countries are associated with the conflicts between Israel and Palestine. The second myth is about the comparison between the engagement and non-engagement of regimes, changes in regimes and their behavior. The final myth discussed by the two authors concerns the question about the democracy promotion. In the first myth, the Arabs claimed that they had a large population in Palestine before the creation of Israel forgetting there was Jewish population as well. The conflict began when Palestine wanted to create their own Jewish State claiming that they owned, but the Zionists rejected their right. It was claimed that Zionist leaders had a legal mandate for the existence of Israel State which was false as recommended by the UN. According to Ross and Makovsky the old saying that everything in the Middle East was connected to everything else gives a better road map rather than rejecting any connection between Israel and other matters (Ross & Makovsky, 2010). In the second myth, Ross and Makovsky focus on Iran and their satellites, Hamas, and Hezbollah, with Israel. The pattern of conflict between two-states was repeated when Hamas was voted into power in the year 2006. Hamas had accepted the form of the Israel state, although it rejected the two-state solution claiming that it was meant to destroy Israel. After Ismail Haniyeh was being elected in 2006, he said that Hamas had accepted the formation of a Palestinian state, according to 1967 boarders. Meshal said in 2009 that Hamas had accepted for the formation of a Palestinian state relying on 1967 borders, but there was total rejection concerning the existence of Israel state and Palestinians were accepting a two-state solution. The third myth focuses on democracy promotion where the authors elaborate that U.S had one ally in the Middle Eastern nation which is Israel (Ross & Makovsky, 2010). U. S supports Israel’s polices fully such as illegal occupation and all sorts of violations of global humanitarian law. US support all criminal policies in Israel militarily, diplomatically and in the financial aspect. The US Arab friends are only alas who are generally feckless and tyrannical, and their enemies include Hamas, al Qaeda, Iran and Hezbollah as according to Ross and Makovsky. It, therefore, gives a clear depiction as to why US usually supports Israel by all means since all America’s enemies are Israelites’ neighbors. US support Israel with 3 billion US dollars annually and use its veto power to diplomatically support most of the Israeli crimes. US usually block the implementation of the two-state solution between Palestinians and Israeli conflict because of its total support for Israel (Ross & Makovsky, 2010). Question 2 Neo-conservatism is distinctive political movement emphasizing the incorporation of military power with the idea of Wilson. The neo-conservations together with hard-line realists significantly influenced on Gorge. W. Bush and his decisions. The US defense and foreign policy was influenced by neo-conservative political ideology in three main aspects. The US nation decided to increase the spending for guard and armed forces and the engagement of the armed forces in the Middle East area with plenty of natural gas and oil reserves, but its decisions were intervened by neo-conservatives and became different (Kanra, 2009). According to Grossman and Mathews (2009), the neo-conservatives introduced the unilateral action in the intercontinental relations as a law without exception and refused implementation of certain intercontinental conventions and the customs of international law. The law was significant and deteriorated the relationship between the American state and Middle East region including its allies. The second aspect involved increasing the defense cost and introduced the preventive warfare policy. The policy prevented Middle East nations from being easily attacked by US. The third aspect involved the forming coalitions based on the own willing capacity and not legitimized military alliances in the Middle East region which were aimed at collapsing the regimes that were unwilling to collaborate with USA government. The aim of G. W. Bush was to form rogue states which would exercise evil towards other nations. The neo-conservatives policies to protect other countries were more tenable instead of the US foreign and defense policy which would cause wars. The neo-conservative policies caused a failure of Gorge W. Bush administration’s policy towards the Middle East Area. Question 3 According to my argument, there has been tension between the America’s foreign and realism and idealism. Realism emphasizes more on national interest particularly acquirement and retaining of power. Realists usually view global politics as a struggle to attain power. Realists do not have morality into the foreign doctrine and suggest that principles such as human rights and democracy should be rarely given priority on matters concerning the power. Realists do not incorporate humanitarian into their philosophy. US have focused more on realism than idealism with the willingness of maintaining and safeguarding their interests. US have secured Israel and control the international market flow of the oil suppressing Middle East nations. The presidents of the US usually find the stability between promoting the states’ values and guarding the national interests. Contrary, the presidents in the Middle East do not support national self-interests and downplay the importance of the democratic values of America because of the strategic significance of the area (Curtis, 2008). On the other hand, idealism focuses more on values and morals and not the state interests which I fully support. Morals and values shape state and personal behavior. Idealism is known to be soft power meaning it is capable of enticing and attracting due to cultural appeal and values. Idealism allows people and states to have freedom in which immigrants can freely move all over the world. Idealism supports liberty and ownership of property as well as living a happy life unlike in realism where states and people suffer from wars. America has been an exception of idealism in which rather has shaped its both foreign and domestic policies. According to US idealism in foreign policy, there are two basic tenets where all trade-offs should be right, and the globe should be safe for democracy. Democracies among countries prevent the existence of some wars (Kanra, 2009). Question 4 In this section, we focus on the main reason that made US support Saudi Arabia during King Abdullah regime. The main cause was the oil because the region produces 40 percent of the globe’s oil in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). US being the topmost oil importer making an alliance with Saudi Arabia would add an advantage. US foreign policy in Saudi Arabia protected the citizens from being executed after unfair trials, crucifixion and beheaded and sentenced to worse punishments such as paralysis. US foreign policy also protected the rights of the Saudi girls and women, Shia citizens, and foreign workers. There was no official accountability in which workers were dismissed without mistakes. In general, US fought for violation of human rights and democracy to the citizens of Saudi Arabia (Romano et al, 2014). Question 5 According to Ross and Makovsky (2010), it is difficult for Middle East countries with harsh deficit democracy become democratic because of the religion influence. In the case of Muslims, they believe that there is no set system of government, but consider the significance of equality and justice which can eliminate corruption and bring the rulers into account. The Muslims are commanded by the Koran to make decisions regarding shura (consultation) while Arabs introduced to Islam the self-importance of bai’ah (allegiance). The elderly Muslim scholars took the ideas as ruling with the consent and forming a contract with the ruled. Religious conservatives usually say that Islam prohibit democracy. Islam only believes about God’s government alone; therefore, sovereignty should not belong to the humans. Basically, Muslims are the one who make Islam. It clearly depicts that there will be always tensions between modern Muslim sensitivities and Western-style democracy on gender parity and freedom of speech based on the human rights framework. Nations with large Muslims and Arabs populations, therefore, becomes difficult for them to have democracy. In some of the nations conducting elections today, there is usually an influence of the superpower countries; in this case, it is the United States. The US supports one party’s leader who seeks the national seat of the presidency and endorses him or her. If the party they were supporting loses the seat and had strongly opposed the won party leader there begins destabilization of the government. US powers can incite rebellions in such a country to overthrow the government. For example, in Ukraine US government was said to have funded rebellions with 5 billion dollars in order to overthrow her democratically elected government that was anti-United States. US can also withdrawal its relations with a country that does not cooperate with it. US can also deny country’s government if it fails to meet the agreements they had made before they took off the power (Grossman and Mathews, 2009). Question 8 During the spring of 2011 in Syria, it was difficult to forecast whether several pro-democracy activists who formed peaceful demonstrations to overthrow Bashar’s dictatorship would turn to jihadist groups. The groups now engage in bloody civil wars. The groups included al Qaeda-linked, Islamic State of al-Sham and Iraq and al-Nusra Front. The Islamist supported democracy in which Ross and Makovsky supported in their thesis concerning US foreign and defense rule in Middle Eastern areas. Unknowingly, the aim of Islamists was to widen their pro-democracy where they had an opportunity to recruit more fighters. The Syrian revolution grew with more participants even from Egypt and Tunisia. FSA group of fighters was formed which brought corruption, prostitution, absence of sharia law, drug abuse flourished in support of democracy. The authors suggest that it is better for people and nations to have their democratic rights, but should set according to the rule of law (Tomuschat, 2014). In conclusion, the methodology that Ross and Makovsky used to set up their ideas was in the form of thesis supporting various ideologies. In their book, they give all sorts of myths concerning US foreign and security policy in Middle Eastern regions where the try to explain on what really in their own understanding. Israel was not created by the Palestine or the UN Security Council, but United States intervened, and it was created. They support their argument by how the US foreign and defense policy protect Israel in all manner. Research has also shown that Middle East countries containing high populations of Muslims and Arabs face a lot of challenges to get their democratic rights since the two tribes believe the ruling from God. At the end of the paper, the pro-democratic revolutions have been discussed where it not easily for a country to be democratic without the rule of law either internal or external. All the countries in the world are under UN Security Council formed by five superpower countries, which provides the rules concerning the security, trade, economy and many other issues. References Curtis, E. E. (2008). The Columbia sourcebook of Muslims in the United States. New York: Columbia University Press. Grossman, M. O. and Mathews, R. E. (2009). Perspectives on the legacy of George W. Bush. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Pub. Kanra, B. (2009). Islam, democracy and dialogue in Turkey: Deliberating in divided societies. Farnham, England: Ashgate. Romano, D., Gurses, M., & Palgrave Connect (Online service). (2014). Conflict, democratization, and the Kurds in the Middle East. New York: Oxford University Press. Ross, D., & Makovsky, D. (2010). Myths, illusions, and peace: Finding a new direction for America in the Middle East. New York: Penguin Books. Tomuschat, C. (2014). Human rights: Between idealism and realism. London: Cengage Learning. Read More