By Lynn Abou Hamzeh | Staff Writer
The Biden administration’s approach to the Middle East has been influenced by various competing factors: The desire to promote democracy and human rights, diplomatic ties with authoritarian governments, and the tensions arising from Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories. Despite campaigning on a platform of accountability for human rights abuses and a commitment to democracy, the administration has not fulfilled these pledges.. It has expressed concern about human rights violations in the region, but has not taken meaningful action to address these issues, particularly abuses perpetrated by US allies. The Biden administration has prioritized maintaining relationships with authoritarian governments that do not uphold democratic values. In addition, it has taken no action to curb Israel’s harsh treatment of Palestinians. The longstanding Israeli-Palestinian conflict has remained a significant challenge for the administration, yet the Israeli government’s harsh treatment of Palestinians living under its military occupation has continued unabated.
As the Biden administration enters its third year in office, questions remain as to how it will conduct itself in the Middle East. Some experts believe that the administration will continue to prioritize maintaining diplomatic relationships with authoritarian regimes, particularly in the face of mounting geopolitical challenges in the region. Others argue that the administration will be forced to make significant changes to its approach, particularly if the Israeli-Palestinian conflict continues to escalate or if human rights abuses in the region become more egregious. Shortly after President Biden’s inauguration, Secretary of State Antony Blinken stated that the President was committed to reinstating human rights as the cornerstone of American foreign policy, a commitment that he and the Department of State took very seriously. As we look toward 2023, especially in regard to the Arab region, it is difficult not to reflect on these comments and consider how the Biden administration will approach human rights. Unfortunately, it seems unlikely that there will be any significant departures from the policies of the previous and current administrations, as pertains to Palestine, Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other countries in the region. Rather than actively protesting and condemning some of the most egregious human rights violations, corruption, and anti-democratic practices, the administration is either turning a blind eye or even enabling them through various means, namely financial support. This trend was evident in 2022 and there are no indications that there will be any changes that will result in a genuine prioritization of human rights by the administration in 2023.
Despite the rhetoric, it appears that the Biden administration’s actions in the Arab region are not matching its stated commitments, which raises questions about its true intentions and its ability to make meaningful changes.
Recently, there have been numerous discussions about the U.S. pivoting towards Asia and reducing its involvement in the Middle East. According to Vali Nasr, a professor of international affairs and Middle East studies at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, President Obama started the pivot to Asia, stating that Asia is more important than the Middle East. This sentiment was echoed by President Trump, who initiated the U.S.’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, reduced its footprints in Syria, and started the conversation about withdrawing from Iraq. The decision to reduce the U.S.’s involvement in the Middle East is not without consequences. The withdrawal from Afghanistan, for example, has left many Afghans uncertain about their future, and the Taliban has retaken control of the country. The reduced U.S. presence in Syria has also raised concerns about the region’s stability, with some fearing that the power vacuum could be filled by a resurgence of extremist groups.
Ultimately, the US must balance its priorities and make strategic decisions that serve its national interests and promote global stability. While reducing involvement in the Middle East may be a strategic decision, it’s important to consider the potential impacts of such a shift. The US must also be consistent in its commitments to human rights and democracy, regardless of geopolitical considerations or relationships with authoritarian regimes. Only then can the US truly be a leader in promoting global stability and security.