The Middle East Before & After WW2

Past, Present and Future of Cradle of Civilizations (9)

A direct result and impact of WW1 in the Middle East region was the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and the creation of what is called Modern Middle East. However the result of such Middle East proved to be also the creation of new and major conflicts in the region.

The League of Nations granted Class A mandates for the French Mandate of Syria and Lebanon and British Mandate of Mesopotamia and Palestine.

Parts of the Ottoman Empire on the Arabian Peninsula became what is today Saudi Arabia and Yemen.

 Image via Wikipedia

In September 1939, after Britain and France declared war on Germany following its invasion to Poland, the German Forces crossed Maginot Line and pushed deep into France. Italy joined Germany and declared war on France. The French government fled to Bordeaux and Paris was occupied on June 14, the same year.

France then was divided into a German occupation Zone in the North and West and Italian occupation in the southeast, with a free Zone in the south.

Metropolitan France remained under Axis occupation and ruled by a rump state called Vichy France.

The Allies, after France fell under Germany, rushed to prevent the Nazis from using Vichy French-controlled Mandate of Syria and Mandate of Lebanon as springboards for attacks on the Allied stronghold of Egypt. They fought a major campaign against Axis forces further west, in North Africa.

Although the French had ceded autonomy to Syria in September 1936, they had retained treaty rights to maintain armed forces and to maintain two airfields in the territory

The Germans requested permission from the Vichy authorities to use Syrian railways to send armaments to Iraqi rebels in Mosul. The Allies considered the support of Axis for anti-British parties in Iraq as a real threat, thus endangering strategic oil supplies and communications.

The Mediterranean Sea was a traditional focus of British maritime power, and the Mediterranean Fleet was Britain's instrument of this maritime power.

Allied forces in reserve called for reinforcements from their forces in the region, including their Brigades and infantry battalions that were positioned in Central Europe. In mid-June, those reinforcements came into the line, mainly on the Damascus front.

The Allied planned four lines of attacks:

On Damascus from Palestine.

On Beirut from Palestine.

On northern Syria from Iraq,

On Palmyra (in central Syria) and Tripoli from Iraq.

The 5th Indian Brigade Group ordered to cross the Syrian border from Palestine and take Quneitra and Deraa.

It was anticipated that this would open the way for the 1st Free French Division forces to advance to Damascus. Four days after the commencement of the operation, this force was bought under unified command and was named Gentforce after its French commander, Major-General Paul Louis Le Gentilhomme.

The operation was also to include a supporting commando landing from Cyprus at the south of the Litani River.

Once the two southern prongs were well engaged, it was planned that a third force, comprising formations drawn from Iraq Command, would attack Syria from Iraq.

Image via WikipediaAllied Forces were to advance the Euphrates River from Haditha in Iraq (upstream from Baghdad) toward Deir el Zor and thence to Raqqa and Aleppo to threaten the communication and supply lines of the Vichy forces mainly the railway line running northwards through Aleppo to Turkey (at the time, Turkey was thought by some to be sympathetic to the Vichy government and to Germany).

The plan also was to capture all the territory in north-east Syria, and make a link between Aleppo and Baghdad via Mosul.

A Habforce would gather in western Iraq between Rutbah and the Transjordan border, to secure the oil pipeline from Haditha to Tripoli.

The relations between the United Kingdom and the French Vichy government were difficult but hardened more after the Royal Navy sank French ships in Alegeria in 1940.

When In June 1941, a revolt in Iraq was put off by British forces, Britain then had unlimited rights to station and transit troops through Iraq. And in a move that displaced disapproval of Vichy government, of the British policy in Iraq, the French base in the Syrian Mandate gave some assistance to pro-Axi nationalists and even to the Germans by providing stages basis for the German aircraft that launched an attack on the British Forces in Iraq.

This had led the Royal Air Forces to attack French air basis in Syria, and that was followed by a full scale invasion of Vichy-occupied Syria and Lebanon during the Syria-Lebanon Campaign.

In 1942 British Forces invaded Syria, Lebanon and Persia.

Fearing the Germans would attack the area through Turkey or via Cyprus into Lebanon or launching a full scale war in Egypt,

Image via WikipediaIn 1940 Italian Dictator Mussolini stationed his forces in Libya to invade into the British held Egypt, however Allies Forces defeated them. Hitler sent his army to North Africa in early 1941 and took Tobruk a border town between Libya and Egypt, under the command of General Rommel, who managed to push the British forces back to Egypt.

The British General Bernard Montgomery was able to stop Rommel's forces, with the support of the British Forces in Malta, who cut Rommel's supply lines at sea, but he failed to keep the city of Alamein position that he took shortly before.

With the defeat of Hitler in Egypt, the Germans lost to achieve a strategic goal to slice through Egypt, capture Suez Canal, enter the British Mandate of Palestine, activate an Arab uprising against the British and link up with German forces thrusting south from Russia. The Vichy French forces, who were Nazi's allies, controlled Algeria to the west and Syria to the north of Palestine.

After World War 2, demands for independence from people across the Middle East increased, and the oil discovery made the geographic location of this part of the world tremendously important to the Superpowers, mainly USA and USSR who both had extremely opposite ideologies and strategies, and both wanted strong footholds to influence and protect their interests.

Image by ЯAFIK ♋ BERLIN via FlickrWhen the Jews pushed their demands for a homeland and shelter for the Holocaust survivors, the 1947 UN divided Palestine into two separate Jewish and Arab states, that led to a series of wars between Arabs and Israel.

Later Israel held more lands, took Jerusalem and forced around 1 Million Palestinians to flee their homes and homeland.

More Jews from all over the world arrived to settle in their new country.

More Arab Nations were given their independence, but remained under regimes that are controlled by the occupiers mainly France and Britain.

President Nasser of Egypt called for Pan-Arabism, and nationalized Canal Suez in 1956, causing a very painful hit to Britain, which was benefiting still from the Canal revenues.

England, France and the new country of Israel, launched a fierce war against Egypt in an attempt to retake Suez Canal. 

Image via WikipediaHowever under brave resistance of Nasser's army and the Egyptian people, and under heavy pressure from USA (which was emerging a strongest power after the last 2 wars that made France and Britain and Europe in general tired and very weak), the invaders were forced to accept a ceasefire and pulled their forces from the region. Suez Canal remained an Egyptian property and under Egypt full control and management.

In Syria, France refused to ratify the 1936 Treaty, suspended elected legislature and the constitution and ceded Alexandretta to Turkey in 1939. 

With the fall of France and the installation of the Vichy government, Britain decided that it cannot accept a Vichy government in Syria and Lebanon. The British Forces occupied the area, along with Free French troops, in 1941.

in Egypt, as Germans were pushing across North Africa, in 1942 British stepped in and forced the king to accept a Wafd government.

In Iraq, pro-German Rashid Ali al-Kailani launched military coup in 1942.  Regent and pro-British politicians fled to Jordan.  British troops from India and Palestine converged on Iraq, supported by the Trans-Jordanian Arab Legion. 

After the Nazi invasion of USSR and Moscow coming in with the Allies, Iran became a key to Allied strategy.  The British army invaded Iran from the south and the Soviet troops entered from the north. The US forces joined the operations and Reza Shah who was (mostly pro-German) abdicated in favor of his son Muhammad Reza.

Ruling circles around Reza Shah were mostly pro-German, so Allies militarily occupy the Allied forces stayed until the end of the war (Teheran Conference of 1943 commitment).

The Wafd government in Egypt, King Faisal in Iraq and Muhammad Reza in Iran, all served to undermine the nationalist credentials of local parties, which co-operated with the allies.

However, War represented a reversal of trend toward more local control, with reassertion of colonial power.  But in many ways a last gasp, as both Britain and France are drained by the war.

France in effect lost its Middle Eastern (not North African) possessions, with Syria and Lebanon becoming independent in 1943/4.

Britain could no longer maintain its role in Turkey or Iran (formally ceded that to USA), and gave up on Palestine in 1948 and had troubles in Egypt and Iraq as their client governments fell in 1950's.

The War saw the entrance of both the USSR and U.S. into the region in a major way:

USSR worked to set up pro-Soviet local governments in the region mainly in Iran which was in a way under their control. They had the same designs for Turkey, and succeeded to inject the Communist ideologies in Egypt, Syria and Palestine and supported the Communist parties to play political roles in these countries.

USA with its troops in Iran, paid specific attention and committed more to Saudi Arabia, which was for them a strategic importance, being an oil-fields country and also a religious center to the Muslim world.

Image via WikipediaWhen the Saudis were trapped for resources during the War, US stepped in with Lend-Lease Aid (first through Britain, then directly).  As an appreciation gesture, the Saudis granted USA the right to build an airbase in the oil area of Dhahran and a military US mission arrived to train the Saudi armed forces. 

Oil started flowing from Saudi Arabia immediately after the War, and US role grew tremendously and rapidly. 

Under terms of Teheran Declaration of 1943, US, UK and USSR must evacuate Iran within 6 months after the war was ended. 

USA and UK did, but Soviets remained, helping to set up pro-Communist regional governments in Azerbaijan and Iranian Kurdistan.  Iran raised the issue at the new United Nations Security Council; however The US made strong but private representations to the Soviet government calling for a Soviet withdrawal. 

The Iranian government offered USSR oil concessions in the northern part of the country in an attempt to make them leave the country. The Soviets accepted and withdrew, but the Iranian parliament refused to ratify the oil concession. 

USA began limited military and economic aid to Iran in 1949.

The stand off between USA and USSR started in the region and the cold war began between the two powers.

At the conclusion of the War, USSR demanded territorial concessions from Turkey; a Soviet base in Turkish Straits and revision of the Montreaux Convention and the international agreement governing the Straits. 

Soviet diplomatic pressure on Turkey through 1946 coupled with agitation by pro-Communist forces in Turkey. 

Britain informed USA that it could not offer military support to Turkey if the crisis escalated, and Greece was engaged in a civil war.

March 1947, the US President Truman announced the “Truman Doctrine” of support to countries threatened by Communism.  He offered $100 million in military aid to Turkey immediately, much more followed. In May 1947 US fleet visited Istanbul and in 1951 Turkey joined NATO. 

Coming on heals of Azerbaijan crisis, US increasingly involved in defense commitments to Middle Eastern countries bordering the Soviet Union.

In wake of 50-50 deal for Saudi, Iran pushed for a similar deal with British Petroleum,

but the British government was not in a position to subsidize such a deal and BP refused the offer. 

The National Front group in Iranian parliament, headed by Qajar noble Muhammad Mossadeq, pushed for nationalization of the oil industry.  Parliament passed a nationalization law in 1951, and Mossadeq was appointed prime minister by a reluctant Shah.  BP persuaded other oil companies not to buy oil from Iran, enforcing an effective boycott on Iranian oil.  Other oil producers increased production. With increasingly difficult economic situation and pressing political unrest, Mossadeq and the Shah struggled over control of policy and the military, and looked to the Tudeh (Communist) Party of Iran for support.

Truman Administration had urged the British to find some accommodation between BP and Iran, to avoid crisis.  With new Eisenhower Administration, there was more willingness for USA to get directly involved, alleging that Mossadeq was increasingly in league with Communist forces.

In league with British secret service (MI6), CIA worked with Iranian officers loyal to the Shah to depose Mossadeq in 1953.  The plot almost went awry, as Mossadeq refused to accept the Shah’s order of his dismissal, and the Shah left the country.  Units of the military were mobilized under US and British plans; along with street mobs mobilized out of mosques by religious leaders who feared the growth of Communist power in the country.  Eventually the royalist forces gained control of Teheran, Mossadeq was arrested and the Shah returned to the capital.  The US military and civilian aids increased to Iran, and Iran became a centerpiece of US Cold War strategy.

As those events were unfolding, in another area of the Middle East the decline of British imperial power was creating a new crisis, in which the United States, the Soviet Union and all the regional powers were becoming enmeshed.

Those events in the Middle East region, which happened before and after WW2, can give more lights on what is going on presently in the region.

The Regimes that were left to govern the countries in the Middle East, contributed fully in bringing the West another time to control the region.

Why and on what grounds the West is struggling to directly dominate the region again.

However the West, remains only a term; there is even more hidden struggles between the Western countries on how to dominate the region.

A look on post WW2 events, explains somehow why Russia is opposing all West’s policy and roles in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Iran, Palestine, Egypt and Yemen.

A glance on Arab and Iranian regimes after WW2 will give more lights.

This is what we will try to do in the next article.

Sami Cherkaoui

Is Pride in the Middle East a Virtue or Curse?

People of the Middle East including the people of the European countries that have coasts on the Mediterranean Sea; Italy, Greece, Spain, France in general, and Arab and Muslim people in particular, are famous in describing themselves as people of pride. And they have through out history engaged in military battles mainly because ordinary people or leaders feel that their pride has been injured by their offenders.

Pride played a major role in the Middle East when foreign occupied forces invaded the region. Their political plans were to play on the Pride issues to split people and gain some alliances from them, which in the end proved to be false sympathies of individuals or groups that hailed the occupants to seek revenge against their own opponents, basically because of hurt feelings.

Arabs specifically are people with long history of feuds caused by hurt feelings and pride. They are proud of their pride, and famous historic wars were made between their tribes because of this pride.

Pride is a very nice human feature, however if it is stubbornly practiced it can become an ugly beast that can eat its owner.

It plays between high sensitivity and ego, and can be the direct antonym of humility or guilt. The excess of pride as a vice leads to vanity. And vanity can manifest very fast to tyranny. Tyranny is certainly a killer.

When pride involves a nation it becomes National Pride and this can turn easily to Ethnic Pride.

When pride is a rebel on slavery it becomes a victory of morals and liberates the person or group from remaining subservient.

The slogan "Black Pride" helped black people in America to take their liberty and be identified as a respected heritage with equal rights in the country.

Whereas the slogan "White Pride" was used in the USA not only to identify the White Race but also to indicate the White Supremacy.

In religion when pride becomes a vanity, it directs immediately to the story of creation and the rebel of Lucifer against God. Later all world dictators were and still are hit by this disease.

The German National Pride for example is a term that is usually associated with the Nazi regime. Here the term is just the opposite of Patriotism.

The famous Chinese/Japanese conflicts and wars through out history were based on national pride that the people of both countries shared against each other. In this case Honor was touched, and National Pride definitions can vary in each country.

Honor is touched in a different way when Europe colonized most of the Middle East. People considered themselves really hurt in their Pride and Honor. They were treated with real humiliation, and were forced to accept every singly oppression practiced against them.

Several revolutions erupted for liberty. People got their freedom, however their pride was not released after their new rulers kept a strong grip over them.

Some dictators, social groups and political parties developed narcissism and they become in love and obsessed with their own images. So they put their slogans, photos and images everywhere where they can see them and they make sure that all public can see them.

In recent history, hereditary dictatorship remained a common phenomenon. In Muslim and Arab countries of the Middle East, such dictatorship are seen in republican regimes, where rulers practice and absolute monarchy, and power is transmitted between members of the same family due to the overwhelming authority of the leader.

Most of the hereditary regimes in the Middle East are under totalitarian rules, where the state is under power of a single political person, faction or political party. In such regimes, ordinary citizens do not have even a minimal share in the state decision making. Such regimes are usually bound schemes of ideological beliefs that direct all aspects of public and private life.

Ironic enough, such dictators and for different reasons, always have some kind of supports from Western countries, consequently they use those supports as an advantage in helping them remain in power, and attempt to transmit this power to other individuals in their families.

When normal people rebel against their leaders, they do so because their tolerance against oppression has reached its limits, and suddenly their pride become more important than their lives.

Igniting such rebels is a different story.

The pride of rulers is also emerged by their refusal to respond positively to people’s demands, and their resistance to leave the authority. They find in such rebels a deep insult to their honor. Their resistance in this case becomes brutal against their people because it is vital for their existence.

After decades of ruling, rulers find it difficult to believe that their people do not like them, and absolutely impossible to leave the authority.

They relate any kind of rebellion to an outside conspiracy against them and the country, and they believe without doubts that rebelled groups in the streets are not from people but rather foreign groups that penetrate the streets and influenced innocent people.

They try to inject some rapid reforms to absorb the anger.

In the end they leave or forced to leave.

Recent history gave many examples; Hitler, Marcos, Mussolini, Idi Amin, Milosevic, Chowchesko, Saddam Husein, Husni Mubarak, Zain Eddine Bin Ali etc...

Today the struggle in the Middle East is a struggle of existence.

It is a struggle to control.

It is a struggle of challenges.

Above all, it is a struggle of pride and prejudice.

May be Pride in the Middle East has become a virtue and a curse at the same time.

Sami Cherkaoui

www.samicherkaouiarabicblog.blogspot.com

Confused US foreign policy destabilizes Middle East

When people of Tunis and Egypt, rebelled against their leaders, USA literary was the first country to support the people and asked both presidents Bin Ali and Mubarak (who both were the strongest allies of USA in North Africa and Middle East) to step down.

Prior asking why USA gave up on them so quick and easy, we have to ask why the US administrations were approving such tyrant and non democratic regimes for countless years, knowing for certain that one day time will come for people to topple them? And is it possible that such administrations were/are not aware of the fact that there can be great risk that those people will turn against the USA for supporting the regimes that were sucking their blood and bones without any mercy?

Well it is not easy to think of a proper or logic answer, but I have seriously considered several possibilities, all of them lead to an obvious fact; USA has a wrong or confusing or misleading or unpredictable, or miscalculated or devious, or strange, or weird, or camouflaged, or uncertain, or unplanned policy towards the World in general and the Middle East in particular.

No matter which of the above words you choose to define the USA policy, you end up with one result: CHAOTIC politics for sake of Israel.

Why?

Let us see.

After WW2, Britain succeeded to establish a UN vote in 1947/48 led to replace the whole country of Palestine with a new Jewish country of Israel, forcing half million Arab Palestinians to flee their homes to neighboring Arab countries.

 Image via Wikipedia

USA recognized Israel, and did not give a damn about Palestine and Palestinians!

As a reaction, Arab countries, namely Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria, backed by Saudi Arabian and Yemenite contingents invaded the territory of the former British Mandate of Palestine.

UN Secretary-General Trygve Lie (who was the first Secretary-General of the United Nations) characterized the Arab countries' action as "the first armed aggression which the world had seen since the end of the Second World War”!

It seemed he did not see the exodus of the Palestinians from their land.

China, meanwhile, broadly backed the Arab claims.

As a result, a truce was declared between Israel and Arab States.

In December 1948, the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 194 which declared (amongst other things) that in the context of a general peace agreement "refugees wishing to return to their homes and live in peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so" and that "compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return." The resolution also mandated the creation of the United Nations Conciliation Commission. However, parts of the resolution were never implemented, resulting in the Palestinian refugee crisis.

To correct its first mistake, USA tried to befriend with Arab States, which most of them were at that time, still under the British or French occupation.

When France, Britain and Israel attacked Egypt in 1956 to regain the control of Suez Canal, Britain and France vetoed a US-sponsored UN resolution calling for halt to military action.

Image by dlisbona via Flickr 

Egypt led by President Nasser was able to defeat the three armies together, and affirm that the control of Suez Canal, its management and revenues are purely for Egypt and the Egyptian people.

The defeat of Britain and France in the Egyptian war, forced them to pull out their military forces from all Arab States and end a long military occupation era in the Middle East.

USA found a way to penetrate the Arab shield and gain some trust.

When in 1960 Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela formed the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Nations (OPEC), USA managed to win the sympathy of those countries after huge orders put by the US Administration to buy their oils.

Of-course oil prices to USA were at that time by means of trading oil with American support to end the British Occupation and back up the new free Arab States politically, economically and military.

To make it up with Israel for not supporting its war against Egypt, the US in 1966 sold its first jet bombers to the Jewish state, breaking with a 1956 decision not to sell arms to the Jewish state!

This decision brought USA back to square zero with the Arab countries, especially Egypt. However its support to the Saudis in their conflict with Yemen, made them think that they can win the sympathy of other Arab countries.

President Nasser of Egypt had other views and supported Yemen to the extent that he sent his army to Yemen to fight against the Saudis.

In 1964, King Saud of Saudi Arabia and best friend of USA, was removed from power and his brother Faisal Bin Abdul Aziz proclaimed king. The new king continued to rely on USA for arming and training his military forces. However unlike his brother, he did not agree with USA policy in the region and its continuous support to Israel and neglect of the Arabs; the double standard policy.

Like Nasser, Israel also had different calculations and in 1967 attacked its Arab neighbors, capturing Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights from Jordan, Egypt and Syria.

As a result another half million Palestinians had to flee the West Bank and Gaza Strip, towards Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.

Many Syrians were expelled from Golan Heights by the Israeli Army.

USA gave unlimited and unconditional military and economic support to Israel during that war.

As a consequence, Kuwait and Iraq cut oil supplies to US.

UN adopted Resolution 242, calling on Israel to withdraw from captured territory.

Israel refuses.

This resolution remained un-fulfilled, and now it is still in the Archives of the UN.

The Americans were very clear when President's Special Assistant, Walt Rostow said in a memorandum to President Johnson, describing the US confused attachment to Israel:  “The tough question is whether we'd force Israel back to 4 June borders if the Arabs accepted terms that amounted to an honest peace settlement.".

During the 1973 Arab-Israeli War (launched by Sadat of Egypt), King Faisal withdrew Saudi oil from world markets, in protest over Western support for Israel during the conflict.

The oil prices quadrupled and led to the 1973 energy crisis.

The new oil revenue also allowed Faisal to greatly increase his aid and subsidies to Egypt, Syria, and the Palestine Liberation Organization.

It is a commonly-held (but so far unsubstantiated) popular belief in Saudi Arabia, also in the Arab and Muslim world that Faisal's oil boycott was the real cause of his assassination, via a Western conspiracy, his assassin having just returned from the United States?

In 1974 the UN General Assembly recognized right of Palestinians to independence. And in 1976 The UN voted on a resolution accusing Israel of war crimes in occupied Arab territories.

USA was the only country to cast a one "NO" vote.

US Ambassador to Lebanon Francis was shot to death in Beirut and the US Embassy was shut down.

Nonetheless, USA succeeded in 1978 to persuade Egypt and Israel to sign a US-brokered Camp David peace treaty.

Eighteen Arab countries imposed an economic boycott on Egypt.

America was widely hated in the Middle East.

Shah Iran was the US “buddy” in Iran and the region, but USA was not able to protect his regime when in 1979 Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini led a grass-roots Islamic revolution in Iran, expelling the Shah and deriding the US as "the great Satan."

Iranian students stormed US Embassy in Tehran, taking 66 American hostages for about 15 months.

All US military attempts to rescue the hostages failed.

The best USA could do was to impose sanctions!

In Egypt, Muslim militants opposed to Egypt's peace treaty with Israel assassinated in 1981 the Egyptian President Sadat, who was at that time a good ally of USA.

Contrary to Iran revolution, Egyptians with the support of USA managed to bring Hosni Mubarak as successor to Sadat.

Mubarak continued Sadat's policy in Egypt, by being an Ally to USA, keeping the Egypt/Israeli peace treaty and leading a pro-USA alliance in the region, with Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Arab Gulf countries, Tunis and Morocco.

A strong front was established in Levant, led by Hafez Assad of Syria against USA and Israel.

During that time, Lebanon was heavily engaged in a civil war that parted the country pro-Syria and pro-West.

President Assad of Syria, succeeded to control most parts of Lebanon, and strengthened the Palestinian resistance from Lebanon against Israel.

1982 Israel invaded Lebanon to expel the Palestine Liberation Organization, facilitate election of friendly government, and form 25-mile security zone along Israel's borders.

USA and other nations deployed peacekeeping troops in Lebanon.

In 1983 A truck bomb exploded in US Marines' barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, killing 241 soldiers. USA rushed to withdraw its forces from Lebanon.

President Assad returned stronger to Lebanon. However this time he was covered by a secret agreement with USA; now he can control Lebanon if he eliminates the rest of PLO forces that remained in the country. Which he did.

In 1990, leaders of Arab countries met in Taif of Saudi Arabia, and brought all the Lebanese war lords to the table. They made a peace agreement that ended the civil war, and declared a new constitution in Lebanon.

Syria and Saudi Arabia remained the sponsors and controlling powers of that agreement.

Saudi Arabia managed to bring Rafik Hariri as Prime Minister to Lebanon, which Syria un-happily accepted to keep its army in Lebanon as long as possible.

Strangely, USA did not object on keeping Syrian army in Lebanon, and asked Assad to restrain any military resistance from South Lebanon against Israel. He did, but to a certain extent.

Yasser Arafat who is by now considers Assad of Syria his worst enemy, agreed to have peace talks with Israel, which ended with a peace agreement in 1991sponsored by USA.

As a result, Israel gave back West Bank of Jordan River and Gaza Strip to Arafat, with a promise to push for a new Palestinian State soon. Obviously, soon never came.

With this, USA completed safe borders to Israel from its South, South East and South West.

However, the north borders were still at risk from Lebanon and Syria.

The Syrian-Israeli borders were amazingly calm since 1967, and continued to stay so till now.

But the Lebanese front with Israel was and still is the most dangerous and risky. Syria is still continuing to play a good role in keeping it this way, for many reasons, all of them actually have kept the Syrian regime intact so far.

In 1991 a surprising invasion of Kuwait by Iraq, made USA to lead coalition forces to free Kuwait.

US army entered Iraq, but pulled back for no real reason except what USA declared victory and liberation of Kuwait.

The Iraqi army after that launched severe attacks on Kurds and Shiites!

Strangely enough, the Shiites uprising in south Iraq aired the “Voice of Free Iraq", which was broadcasting from a CIA run radio station out of Saudi Arabia!

More strange to know that Saddam Hussein was engaged in 10 years war with Iran, and his war was supported by USA, including billions of dollars worth of economic aid,  sale of dual-use technology, arms, military intelligence, special operations training and direct involvement in warfare against Iran!

In 1994 King Hussein of Jordan followed suit and signed a peace treaty with Israel.

Syria later managed to make Hamas (The defiant party against PLO) gain power in Gaza Strip, and by this the Palestinians were split in two political sects, one is pro-USA and the other is Pro-Syria and other countries like Libya and Iran.

This in fact has benefitted Israel and USA more than did to Syria!

The confused and hesitant US policy in Afghanistan, led Taliban to take control of the country, and by the time USA decided to assist its allies, mainly Ahmad Shah Massoud, who was thought to create a democratic form of government in Afghanistan, he was assassinated and two days later Al Qaeda made the famous September 11, 2001 on US soil. That attack killed nearly 4000 people, and triggered USA to invade Afghanistan.

When George W. Bush was declared president of USA, the first day he was in the White House, he ordered two Air strikes on Iraq, for unknown reasons.

Later he led a small coalition to invade Iraq, removed Saddam Hussein from power and brought Saddam’s expelled opponents, who were mainly Shiites, and most (if not all) of them are pro-Iran!

To make a balance, he managed to bring a Kurd to be the new President of Iraq.

This angered the Iraqi Sunni(s) and of-course the Sunni majority in Arabia.

On the other hand this confused US policy paved the way to Iran to gain extraordinary powers and maneuvering space, Iran controlled Iraq, befriended Turkey, made alliance with Syria and empowered Hezbollah in Lebanon.

These massive and swift steps of Iran panicked both USA and Israel. They both tried to make a move in 2006 by attacking Hezbollah in Lebanon aiming to destroy its military infrastructure (Like they did to PLO in 1982).

Hezbollah amazed the world by winning that war and consequently gained more political power in Lebanon.

From that moment on, USA was most hated in the region.

The confusing US policy in the Middle East confused its new president Barack Obama himself!

Today we see more attempts to topple other leaders in the Middle East, who are considered allies and friends to USA; Yemen, Jordan and Bahrain and it seems it is working out.

Amazingly, the method of toppling leaders using demonstrations and civil commotions was introduced by USA to people of Iran and Syria mainly; but it seems it is not working there, when the same method is working extra fine in the countries that having good relations with USA.

Is this confusing enough to you?

It certainly is to me?

So what is next?

Some say that Obama and his administration are not bold enough to face the challenges in the Middle East.

This can be true, but I say they also have Israel on their back, which does not allow them to think straight.

This is why USA is confusing the whole world including themselves, but not at all Israel. Not even a bit.

Sami Cherkaoui

www.samicherkaouiarabicblog.blogspot.com