Impact of Soviet and American Policies on the Middle East - Coursework Example

Impact of Soviets and American Policies on the Middle East Impact of Soviets and American Policies on the Middle East IntroductionConflict in policies set by America and the Soviet are among the fundamental factors that prompts economic exploitation and political instability in the Middle East region. American and Soviet’s foreign policies were conflicting, in most instances, since the inception of the Cold War. Supremacy rivalry between America and Soviet during the Cold War had diverse impacts, historical and theoretical, on most world regions and countries including the Middle East. America’s interest in the Middle East, through its foreign policies, prompted reactions from its rival Soviet powers. Similarly, Soviet’s interest in the region through various activities mostly instigated reactions from American administrations. Soviet’s communist ideologies also contradicted America’s democratic ideals in influencing concerns of governance in most Middle East countries. Although Soviet and American powers claimed motives such as protecting the interest of Middle East countries, policies set by the rival sides had several adverse impacts on the region’s economic progress and political stability. Impacts on interstate relations in the Middle East Russia formed and deployed aid agencies in Military defense and economic departments in Middle East countries. These aids resulted into a series of events, effects and influence by Soviet Union and America on the Middle East. Among the contentious issues between Soviet republic and America was USSR’s investment in the economy and military training of the Middle East countries. Soviet Union pushed for exploration of oil reserves in Middle East countries including Saudi and Iran. Soviet would then remit the money and resources gained to other Soviet aid regions within Middle East with the aim of developing the countries and Russia supremacy. United States would not agree to Soviet Union investment policy because they were also interested in exploring oil resources in these Middle East countries. The two world super powers conflicts on oil exploration resulted into cold war within the Middle East Countries such as Afghanistan as leaders were dived on who to support, Soviet or America. Soviet Union Military strengthening policies resulted into a raw of disagreement amongst the Middle East Countries and intervention of America. The Union mostly enlightened the Middle East countries and helped them build their economy besides strengthening their military defense. The states in Middle East started to relate to one another based on the powers and greatness of their military weapons and intelligence. For instance, Iran, which is a small country, channeled most of its oil revenue in building their military strength by acquiring and dxesigning powerful weapons. Middle East countries acquired very many military tanks compared to those owned by British Army in Germany and the Soviet military on its borders. Soviet’s military defense empowerment policy caused war amongst Middle East countries. Each country would want to overpower the other based on Military capabilities that prompted wars such as Iran-Iraq war. America identified the opportunities created by USSR and decided to support some of the Middle East countries such as Iran. Similarly, Soviet aid affected Egypt’s military defense where the government managed to train over 300,000-armed soldiers with military aid from Russia. Money remitted to Middle East countries by the Soviet Union or European allies either destabilized or stabilized the countries. Destabilizing effects of aid money included adoption of foreign policies of mostly the aiding countries. Once a country received the aid, either the Soviet republic or the allied European country would require them to amend or implement certain policies that would later affect their government. These new policies compromised the sovereignty of the country making it more vulnerable to external influence. America would exploit such cases and lobby the Middle East countries allied to USSR to abandon the latter and adopt their policies. For example, America tried to lure Moscow in 1972 to abandon Soviet alliance during Afghanistan invasion. Such struggle for supremacy between Soviet Union and America in governing Middle East countries influenced negatively in the development of these countries. Moscow economical and political development has been slow due influence from the super powers. Middle East countries that received aid support either politically or economically presumed that they exploit Soviet resources. These countries try to manipulate Soviet Union by requesting Military support only to withdraw later after receiving aid. They then shift their focus to west countries like USA for extra support. The Middle East countries consequently manage to cause disagreement between the two world super powers. For example, Egypt government expelled Soviet military from their country after they had received aid. They then started to form allies with the west Countries that were partially successful. These negative ideas developed by Middle East countries affected negatively on their economy as they spent most of their time appeasing the super powers. Soviet policies in Middle East remained selfish and contradictory. As much as the Soviet bloc provided aid to Middle East countries, their objectives remained centered in protecting and building their political, economic and military capability at the expense of the aided country. These self-centered policies contributed to the continued dependence of most of the Middle East countries. For instance, Moscow’s political powers and policies had become the weakest among the countries deployed by Soviet republic in Middle East. Among the vital soviet policies’ influence in the Middle East countries was their resultant disagreements with NATO. Soviet exploited vulnerability of Egypt and made the country turn itself against NATO. These irresponsive undertakings resulted in serious suffering of the by then Egypt president Colonel Nasser between 1970 and 1972. Russia republic also facilitated the use of weapons of mass destructions against other countries under the aid of west countries such as United States. Reports links soviet support for use of weapons in defending Arab policies against Israel. Moreover, the Soviet Union supported Middle East countries’ advances for damaging west countries resources in Middle East and abroad, these misguided policies has resulted into constant disagreements between Russia policies and those of its allied countries with the United States of America Soviet Union had great influence in building good relations between Arab and no-Arab countries. Such influence includes the Iraqi-Kuwait agreement signed in March 1970 under the supervision of Russia. The agreement was part of Soviet effort in solving disputes between Iraq and Iran. America policies never accepted the Iraqi-Kuwait agreement draft, which resulted in disagreement amongst the super powers. Consequently, the disagreement influenced negatively on the political and economical development of Iran and Iraq. American Trade Policies’ Influence on the Middle East America primarily had economic interest in the Middle East and applied democratic policies as a strategy to trade in resources in the region, mainly oil. Similarly, the Soviet Union wanted to establish trading relations with the Middle East countries. Because of the disputed interest between America and the Soviet, the Soviet Union threatened set counter strategies to dominate the Oil countries in the Middle East region. In most instances, Soviet applied communist ideologies that contrasted America’s democratic ideals, hence the conflict. America’s oil policies in the Middle East had expansive implications on the region’s economic progress and political stability. It had implications on the Persian Gulf states through control by U.S. and its allies. The U.S. ensured that the Gulf Oil was under protection from its rivals including the Soviet. Countries including Saudi were allies of the America and benefitted from its support through supply of arms from the west. U.S. oil policy affected countries such as Turkey because of overexploitation of their oil reserves. The 1973 oil shocks experienced by the U.S. resulted from the interplay between American and Soviet policies that had common interests in Middle East countries’ oil reserves (Siniver 2013, p. 164). Key among the causes of the embargo was the Arab-Israeli conflicts. The Arab-Israeli conflict attracted different standpoints between America and the Soviet. While America supported Israel, the Soviet had military support for the Arab countries including Egypt. Soviet’s support to Arab countries was a cause of conflict with the U.S. and subsequent instability in the region. Differences in trade policies between America and Soviet, therefore, had extensive implications on the region’s political stability and collective bargain for its oil resources. American War Policies on Middle East America developed anti-communist approach and policies to combat Cold War. The House of Representatives in 1964, endorsed The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution to expand the United States’ military involvement in Vietnam by a vote of 416 to 0 (Siegman 2009, p.115). The passing of The Gulf of Tonkin resolution permitted President Johnson to take appropriate action towards the Communist North Vietnam. Vietnam was one of the countries in Middle East that had one of the longest conflicts with the United States. Vietnam had the highest death rate of young service members that surpassed any acceptable rate and the public’s opinion was strongly against the Vietnam War. Therefore, it easily influenced the Congress to pass the amendment to the Paris Peace Accord and the Case Church Amendment with the intention to promote peace throughout Vietnam. Furthermore, the amendments were to ensure an end to the war. However, the Case Church Amendment did not permit use of the American forces in any conflict in Vietnam (Tucker 2011, p. 239). After the end of one communist conflict, the last thing the American people desired prevent communist overtake. Consequently, the US landed itself into the Korean War. After the end World War II and the collapse of the Japanese Empire came the division of the Korean Peninsula at the 38th parallel, with the communist Soviet Union inhabiting and persuading the North whereas American military troops guarding the South. The present occupation of each is a direct reflection of each government ideology adopted by the North and South that are still in effect today. The main concern that lingers to place the North Korean government in the spotlight is that of their controversial nuclear programs. Even though there are persistent efforts to resolve the tension, the demands are less than acceptable. A consideration to the North Koreas statement, suggested that it could accept multilateral talks (Siegman 2009, p. 78). The control of nuclear arms and talks continued and eventually became legitimate policy in the Middle East. Amongst many debates in today’s society is that of the Middle East Wars, known as the War on Terrorism, which face fights from two fronts. President Bush approved the policy on National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) nuclear, biological, and chemical in the possession of hostile states within the Middle East. The president pursued an elaborate strategy to counter terrorism threat in every dimension. The President Bush’s strategy on initiating war policies, was central to counter the propagation on the use of weapons of mass destruction by the hostile states within the Middle East (Miglietta 2002, p. 29). Therefore, engaging in the War against Terrorism within the borders of Afghanistan was because of a policy outlined by Bush administration. US policies on war continued to remain in effect and Middle East states adapted accordingly to these policies. Regardless of the Period, the Western World promotes democracy throughout the world and is willing to take extreme measures if needed to protect all. While maintaining an intervene approach the United States felt they were helping the weaker nation of the Middle East, only to realize the cost of helping had deepen the nation’s debt. Shortly US realized the increased debt and adopted an isolation approach that attempts to remain neutral and let the other nations fight their own conflicts. America Governance Policies on Middle East American administrations contributed towards the formulation of policies to govern most states within the Middle East. America and its allies had set commissions of inquiry to most of the states to seek opinion of the locals about the kind of governance that they would prefer. The locals preferred self-governance, which prompted US to develop policies regarding diplomacy. Subsequently, the Middle East states adopted the policies. Differences between Soviet and American policies had extensive impacts on the Middle East region that remained of common interests to the two powers. . The controversy in political standpoints instigated impacts among Middle East countries. Division among Middle East countries depicted the U.S.-Soviet political contention created through their policies. Divisions experienced among Middle East countries had notable implications on the economic progress and political stability of the region. Bibliography Admin, October 10, 2006, The Soviet Occupation of Afghanistan, PBS NEWS HOUR, retrieved August 25, 2014 from http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/asia-july-dec06-soviet_10-10/ London, L 1974, The Soviet Impact on World Politics, Ardent Media, New York, NY. Miglietta, J 2002, American alliance policy in the Middle East, 1945-1992: Iran, Israel, and Saudi Arabia, Lexington Books, Lanham. Proukaki, E 2009, The Problem of Enforcement in International Law: Countermeasures, the Non-Injured State and the Idea of International Community, Routledge, New York, NY. Siegman, H 2009, U.S. Middle East Policy and the Peace Process: Report of an Independent Task Force Sponsored By the Council on Foreign Relations, Council on Foreign Relations, New York, NY. Siniver, A 2013, The October 1973 War: Politics, Diplomacy, Legacy, Hurst, London. Tucker, S 2011, The Encyclopedia Of The Vietnam War: A Political, Social, And Military History, Santa Barbara, CA. Read More