Unrest in the Muslim World and American Foreign Policy

The recent uprisings in Tunisia seem to be the spark which has ignited a powder-keg in the Muslim world, to quote a phrase often used in the media. Though this subject may be somewhat off-topic, I feel that the timing warrants some discussion on how these events may impact Americas foreign policy in the region in the years to come.

Egypt is under full military control, and uprisings are spreading to Libya, Bahrain, and protests are breaking out in Yemen and even Iran. From the point of view of someone who isn't very knowledgeable of the political realities of these countries, or of the exact circumstances surrounding the events leading up to all these events, its hard to know if these mark the true beginnings of change in the region, or are merely a way for people to vent their anger and frustration, but will ultimately settle down. Even if the latter turns out to not be true, and we do see some form of "democracy" emerge - how true will it be to the wishes of the people?

Many of these Muslim countries have a history of coups, but most seemed to be caught in the same cycle of revolution, "regime change", brutality and corruption. As much as I would love to imagine that the Muslim people can finally liberate themselves and set up functional governments which truly represent the interests of the people - I think history has shown this is unlikely. What does this mean for American foreign policy in the region then?

It's no big secret that the U.S. has exerted influence over many countries through "backroom politics", meetings between heads of state where deals are negotiated. In exchange for U.S. foreign aid and other monetary supplements, these dictators or men of power agree to cooperate with the U.S. on whatever the issue at hand is, and because the U.S. is so rich, and many of these countries so poor, we are able to exert great influence in the world without necessarily having to impose our will by force. It's convenient for the U.S. to deal with dictators who are relatively easy to buy, and who we can build long relationships with. Unlike presidents who come and go, and who may have different political convictions, a dictator may remain in power for life, and so long as he stays on the C.I.A. payroll, may be content to cooperate with the U.S.

So if these men lose power, especially in countries the U.S. deems as "important" or "strategic" it may have major consequences for the future course of events. Mubarak, for instance, has been a close U.S. ally for years, and it will be interesting to see who, or what, takes his place. Regardless of how things turn out, I think this may mark an even further increasing involvement of the U.S. in the region. If a scramble for power occurs in Egypt, I think it's likely that whoever ends out ahead will be open to making deals and receiving aid from the U.S., and we will simply re-forge our alliance with the new guy. The same is likely to occur in these other countries, and in fact with new regimes and power holders popping up, it may be an opportunity for the U.S. to actually make even more "allies" in the region.

One thing to remember though, is that America isn't the only big kid on the block these days. These events may be a perfect opportunity for counties like China and India to gain influence in the region, which would certainly be in their oil-thirsty economies interests. I can imagine some sort of re-emerging "great game", but on a more diplomatic level, and this time between the U.S, India, China and the other powers of the world. Of course all of that depends on whether or not anything really comes of all this unrest.

Another scenario is that some of these uprisings may actually succeed in setting up a democracy, or even Islamic government - who may or may not be interested in dealing with the U.S. I think in the case of the former, modernization is a goal and that means talking to countries like the U.S. But what if Egypt and Tunisia and these other countries end up like Iran? I have no idea how unlikely that is (though I imagine fairly unlikely), but certainly it would have major political consequences. One thing is for certain though - most of the middle east does not like America. Emerging governments who are desperate to gain public support may not want to anger the people further by getting involved with America, and this again opens the doors to countries like China who may be seeking to build their presence in the region.

All in all, I feel these events are a sensitive issue, and may prove to be a significant turning point for the U.S. foreign affairs. In history there seems to be a common theme of long periods of stagnation, followed by explosive change which forever reshapes the future. It's probably to early to tell if we are at the beginnings of such change, and I don't yet feel informed enough to say either way, but more than ever I think the middle east is a place to keep a close eye on.