On global trade and the middle east









In case you've missed:
August 7, 2006
Baghdad, Beirut, Doha
Trade-talks failure a blow
to US strategy in Mideast
by Leon Hadar
In addition to being the capitals of three Middle Eastern countries, Baghdad (Iraq), Beirut (Lebanon), and Doha (Qatar) have something else in common, and it's President George W. Bush's global policy. While the violence taking place in Baghdad and Beirut is a direct consequence of the collapse of Bush's Middle East policy and much of its geo-strategic approach, the breakdown of the Doha round of trade talks is a reflection of the failure of the Bush administration to project U.S. leadership in the global economic arena. If Washington does not take immediate steps to reevaluate and re-energize its role in global affairs, then not only the United States but the entire international system could be threatened.(read the rest)
And:
American Proscenium

After Zarqawi: The New Thirty Years’ War
by Leon T. Hadar

When the U.S. government toppled Sad­dam Hussein in 2003, it thought regime change would help bring democracy to Iraq, and then to the rest of the region. President Bush and his aides based their expectations on the premise that politics in the Middle East revolves around the relationship between individuals and the state, as it does in the West, and failed to recognize that, in that part of the world, people see politics as the balance of power among communities, as Vali Nasr, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, writes in a recent issue of Foreign Affairs.(read the rest)

Comments

Anonymous said…
Leon,

In "After Zarqawi" you suggest Washington should try to work with regional powers, including Tehran, to preserve the current power structure and encourage liberalization.

What Iranian interest would encourage this? The bit of Nasr's article that you quote suggests the threat of a U.S. attack and its potential consequences would be a motivator. Do you share this view or is there another motive for Iran's cooperation that you have in mind?
10:48 AM
Leon Hadar said…
I've written quite extensively on the topic of U.S.-Iran relationship (see links to articles). My main point is that the U.S should try a realopolitik Nixon-goes-to-china approach to Iran and see if we they are open for cooperation in trying to bring stability to Iraq, the Levant and Afghanistan. I think the Iranians have an interest in achieving that goal out of self-interest. as far as democracy, if and when we have ties with Iran, trade and engagement should help produce change in Iran (again, China is the model)
12:49 PM
Anonymous said…
What about this plan?

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article14412.htm

This might discourage liberalization though.
4:49 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pundits who screw-up: No big deal...

Image
Matt Barganier desconstructs Andrew Sullivan's mea sorta culpa on Iraq in Time magazine (Sullivan seen above in a thoughtful pose on Bill Maher's "Real Time"). There have been many of those in recent weeks (including by WFB and Fukuyama ). In an commentary published last year, Oops! I helped start a War which was about one of the earlier apologizing-war-aplogists, I pointed out to the contrast between the way the losers who operate in the market (including financial analysts) are punished and the reality in which the losers in the political game (including foreign policy analysts) rarely get punished: Imagine: for a few years you were investing the money you had saved for your daughter's college education in one of those moderately conservative plans that provided some increase in the value of the investment without exposing it to major risks. But then your financial planner – let's call him Ken P. – got in touch with you and came up with a really great ide...
Read more

When will Israel attack Iran?

Image
I'm not an "Intelligence analyst" and I don't play one on television. But I urge you to study the following items: 1. Seymour Hersh new piece in The New Yorker, "The Next Act: Is a damaged Administration less likely to attack Iran, or more?" 2. Tony Karon's "Israel's Domestic Political Games Raises the Danger of a U.S.-Iran War." 3. Aluf Benn's "Olmert's Drums of War" in Haaretz . 4. Bush:I would understand if Israel chose to attack Iran. 5. Michael Oren's op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal on November 16 which is only accessible to subscribers. So here are a few interesting quotes: Much like 1967, Israel faces a Middle Eastern leader who has repeatedly sworn to wipe it off the map, and to that end is assiduously trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Like Nasser, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can cripple Israel economically by keeping it in a state of alert, driving away foreign investment and tourism. In the absence of interna...
Read more