Foreign Policy Memorandum on the Middle East - Admission/Application Essay Example

Foreign Policy Memorandum of Introduction The two key U.S foreign policy issues in current times is the threat from Iran and the unresolved dispute between Israel and Palestine in the Middle East. In fact, due to their centrality to the security and other interests of the U.S and its citizens, these issues have attracted a lot of interests, resulting not only in heated debates and numerous controversies but also anxiety in the U.S public. For example, most U.S citizens wonder what exactly the Iran threat is. On the other hand, the U.S public asks the obvious question of the reason the Israel/Palestine conflict is yet to be solved. This is not to say that the Middle East crises are the most difficult to solve by means of sound foreign policies, strategies, and practices (Arens, 1995). In fact, there are more serious and harder to solve foreign policy problems elsewhere in the world. Compared to these problems, the Middle East troubles would be quite easy to solve were the right foreign policy to be established and implemented to conclusion. Backed by other stakeholders such as the Organization of Islamic States, the Arab League, Europe, the United Nations, international law, and almost every other peace-loving nation, it would be easy for the United States of America, by sound and applicable foreign policy, to find a solution to the Middle East problems (Arens, 1995). Unfortunately, the possible solutions to the Middle East problem have not been embraced within the Western ideology and doctrines. In fact, the rather simple and straightforward solutions to the Middle East problems are constantly remote from the U.S and her western allies. Regarding Iran, the U.S military intelligence is of the opinion that Iran has no military threat to the U.S. In fact, military intelligence reports indicate that Iran’s offensive military capacity is rather low, even by regional standards, let alone in comparison with the world and U.S standards. This memorandum recommends to the U.S President the various foreign policy strategies, interventions, and practices that would help address the many conflicts in the Middle East. An effective foreign policy on the Middle East should first identify the foreign policy problems that the U.S faces in the Middle East then incorporate the region’s people opinions, participation, and values in the policy and its implementation (Arens, 1995). Problem Identification There are quite a number of problems in the Middle East that the United States, as a world superpower should identify and seek to solve. For instance, the civil war between President Assad’s regime loyalists and a number of rebel groups continues to rage in Syrian battlegrounds. In fact, this war has been taken to the media world with major Arab media such as Al Arabiya and Al Jazeera coming in to counter the propaganda spread by Assad’s regime. In the process, these Gulf media outlets have continued to distort the information in their bid to support the rebels in Syria. Unfortunately, the international community, the United States included, have yielded to these news, which Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya have disseminated without elementary fact-checks. The other problem in the Middle East that the U.S foreign policy should address is the Israel/Palestine conflict. The U.S foreign policy makers should therefore rethink the foreign aid situation in Palestine. For example, reports indicate that it is the external aid given to Palestine, which facilitates Israeli occupation and supports the survival of the incompetent Palestinian leadership. Additionally, dependence on external aid by Palestine has only served to weaken the Palestinian civil society to a large extent. Because of overdependence on foreign aid, the Palestinian authorities have to continue begging and exchanging energy for handouts from the U.S., the European Union, the UN, and Arab governments. Iran is the other Gulf state that posses serious foreign policy challenegs to the United States of America. For instance, the sanctions that the U.S and the international community slap on Iran do not affect the elite of the country. Rather, it is the middle class and the poor in the country who suffer due to the sanctions. As a matter of fact, recent times have experienced an escalation of sanctions against Iran by the EU and the U.S as more crippling measures have been undertaken against the country. What is more, the situation continues to get unbearable for Iran’s ordinary citizens as the country’s health sector reports that medicine and other medical supplies are dwindling by the day and there are shortages all over the country (Javedanfar, 2011). Consequently, the lives of ordinary Iranians, more so women and children are endangered. Besides medicine and other medical supplies, food supply in Iran has also dropped, resulting in high prices for the most basic of foodstuff. Therefore, the policy of sanctions against Iran does not affect the upper class; instead, it is the poor and the middle class, which face a possible economic doom. Although the U.S continues to implement its sanction policy, most U.S citizens, as evidenced in electronic, print, and social media feel that sanctions would not convince the Iran regime to compromise its nuclear program (Javedanfar, 2011). Consequently, the nuclear threat to the U.S and the rest of the world remains despite the sanctions. Therefore, to ensure the safety and well being of its citizens and interests all over the world, the U.S should design a foreign policy that does not emphasize stronger sanctions on Iran. That is, while the Iran top hierarchy continues to amass wealth and enrich their nuclear, it is the middle class and the poor who bear the consequences of these sanctions (Javedanfar, 2011). If the sanctions against Iran are not lifted and a better policy established, the suffering of the Iran middle class and the poor will not end in the near future and death or/and civil unrest could erupt as people struggle to survive. Such a scenario would only make things worse not only for the Iranians but also for the U.S and the rest of the international community. The Search for Solutions Interested individuals and organizations such as human rights groups, religious leaders, political leaders, and scholars have searched, researched, and suggested a number of possible solutions to the Middle East crises for the benefit of the U.S and other countries and groups that would like to help with the situation. Generally, these solutions could be viewed and described as alternatives to war, military incursion, terrorism, and politics. There are several major issues that the U.S foreign policy makers ought to consider in their approach to the escalating unrests in the Middle East. The first issue to be addressed by the proposed foreign policy is the Palestinian refugee issue, which is root cause of the Middle East crisis. During the creation of the Israeli state, millions of Palestinians were expelled from their coastal strip, which became Israel. Since then, these refugees’ outcry has not been addressed, resulting in the emergence of “Palestinian Terrorism.” Therefore, to establish permanent peace and stability in the Middle East, the issue of the millions on Palestinian refugees has to be addressed. The UN Resolution 194, which demands that the Palestinian refugees be allowed to reoccupy their ancestral land, which is the present day Israel would threaten the existence Israel as an ethnic Jewish State. Consequently, the whole world has ignored the plight of the Palestinian refugees. One applicable solution to this refugee problem is to compensate the refugees monetarily for their losses and suffering, a solution that would address the injustices suffered while in the process not threatening the existence of Israel as a state. Although such a solution seems financially unattainable, it would have been possible had the money so far used on the Gaza and Jenine steel and concrete and humanitarian aid in the past forty years been used to compensate the refugees. The other solution to the Middle East crisis is the withdrawal of the Israeli settlements and presence from the land the Israelis occupied in the Gaza strip and the West Bank in 1967 since they were initially Palestinian private and communal lands that the Israeli seized and militarily control. Realizing that any prolongation of the Middle East conflicts would only turn them into global problems, the United States, to whom peace and real democratic change in the Middle East are matters of national interest, should have the right policy to achieve peace and stability in the region in place. The following are a few recommendations for U.S foreign policy on the Middle East, particularly with regards to the Israeli/Palestine conflict and the Iran nuclear enrichment crisis. Policy Recommendation and Evaluation Currently, the United States has hitherto unseen opportunity to help achieve peace and bring change in the Middle East. In its foreign policy, the U.S must show that it values the rights of a street vendor more than the might of the most powerful of dictators. Therefore, in its foreign policy on the Middle East, the U.S must not only show but also prove that it hopes for and welcomes a Middle East change that would promote equal opportunity for and self-determination of the Israelis, the Palestinians, the Syrians, the Iranians, and the rest of the region (Javedanfar, 2011). Nonetheless, in implementing a compromise policy that treats all the parties to the Middle East conflicts equally, the U.S government must align the U.S values and interests with the principles that have guided the country in its response and strategies towards the Middle East crises. The first recommendation is that the foreign policy on the Middle East should oppose the use of violence or repression on the people of the Middle East. In the same stride, peoples’ universal rights such as the freedom of peaceful assembly, free speech, association, equality for women and men, and the rule of law must be the basis of such a foreign policy. Importantly, the policy must uphold peoples’ rights to practice their religion, choose their leaders freely and democratically without violence, fear, or intimidation. A sound U.S foreign policy on the Middle East must also foster political and economic growth, change, and stability in the region. In addition, such change and growth should be in line with the aspirations and the needs of the people of the region. As a matter of fact, the entrenchment of and support for these principles through the marshalling all its economic, diplomatic, and strategic resources and prowess must be the hallmark of the U.S’s policy on the Middle East. In other terms, it is only in a democratic and prosperous region that the United States could secure and advance its interests and values. In this regard, an environment in which negotiations can start and proceed to fruition should be achieved in the Middle East. One highly recommended strategy to the Israeli/Palestine conflict is to outline and implement effective principles on territorial borders and security. In this respect the U.S should seek to base the boundaries of Israel and Palestine on the 1967 demarcations, allowing the two states to mutually agree on any changes they wish for. Second, while a full and phased withdrawal of Israeli forces is implemented, the Palestinian state should be non-militarized. The withdrawal of the Israeli forces would be quite affective in preventing any resurgence on Palestinian terrorism besides stopping the infiltration of terrorists and illegal weapons into the region. Consequently, there would be an effective border security between Palestine and Israel. It would only be upon Israel and Palestine to agree on the date and the period of such a transition. However, the United States and the international community must prove, by their foreign policy, that such an arrangement would be credible and effective in addressing all the issues of the conflict, more so the security and autonomy of the region. Finally, the policy must allow the Israelis and the Palestinians to take action as peace cannot be imposed on them. Notwithstanding the many approaches that may be suggested for peace in the Middle East, it is only true that lasting peace will only be achieved when the two states for the two peoples are created. The Iran crisis is the other Middle East issue that would directly affect life, security, and well being in the U.S. This memorandum recommends that a policy that seeks to address the crisis in two phases (interim and permanent) be implemented. While the interim phase would address immediate nuclear concerns in the West regarding Iran’s current stockpile of 20 percent enriched uranium, the permanent phase should aim at permanently persuading Iran to stop its uranium enrichment program. The interim phase could also help Iran alleviate the sanction concerns currently bedeviling the country. In this phase, Iran should be allowed to enrich uranium at 3.5 percent but stop the uranium enrichment at 20 percent at Fordo (Ansari, 2007). As Iran saves face and justifies the cessation of uranium enrichment at higher levels, the EU and the U.S would lift any further unilateral sanctions against it (Ansari, 2007). This phase would help avoid any further disasters and build trust between Iran and the West. The policy should then have a final/permanent solution phase in which the security council of the UN would offer to give Iran the nuclear fuel it needs on a continuous basis under the IAEA supervision in return for its cessation of enrichment at the Fordo and the dismantling of the site in Fordo (Javedanfar, 2011). Conclusion Regardless of the policy adopted, it is a dangerous practice to merely argue that the current confrontational policy towards the Middle East has far-reaching positive impacts and has achieved its objective. In fact, such evaluations are the main reasons foreign policy issues are hard to resolve, more so where participants develop self-serving evaluation schemes and claims on the positive impacts of preferred policy positions (Walt, 2011). It is thus recommended that academics should be employed to make real contributions by designing and performing more sophisticated, tested, and reliable foreign policy assessments and reformation (Walt, 2011). References Ansari, A. (2007). Confronting Iran: the failure of American foreign policy and the next great crisis in the Middle East and the next great crisis in the Middle East. Basic Books. Arens, M. (1995). Broken covenant: American foreign policy and the crisis between the U.S. and Israel, first edition. Simon & Schuster. Javedanfar, F. (2011) A Blueprint for Solving the Iran Crisis. CNNWORLD. Retrieved on August 9, 2012 from http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/12/a-blueprint-for-solving-the-iran-crisis/ Walt, F. M. (2011). Evaluating Policy is Hard. Foreign Policy. Retrieved on August 9, 2012 from http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/06/20/evaluating_foreign_policy_is_hard Read More