Back to Basics in the Middle East
4 fundamentals to build a pathway for peace in the region and bridge divides at home.
When President Biden delivers the keynote address at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum’s Day of Remembrance later this morning, he’ll be speaking to two main audiences—a divided American public just six months before national elections, and the people of a Middle East traumatized by a war that began exactly seven months ago with a brutal Hamas attack against Israel.
Both audiences will be listening to what Biden says, and it’s a safe bet that he will reiterate the same central message he put forward in his statement last week about the unrest and hate speech linked to protests on several college campuses about the war.
The region remains volatile and any number of things in the region could knock ongoing discussions over a possible ceasefire deal off track. No easy solutions to the many problems of today’s Middle East exist, so look with caution and skepticism at anyone peddling simple answers in slogans.
Here are four “big picture” fundamentals the Biden administration should keep in mind as it looks to the pathway forward on the Middle East:
1. Put the policy before domestic politics.
The best formula for policymakers is to shape their policy approach first according to the challenges presented by the real world, and there is no shortage of complexities in today’s Middle East. Effective leaders should set their policies according to what they think is best for their country, and then lead and persuade their constituents rather than getting whipsawed by the emotions of the moment or the most strident and organized voices in the debate. One of the best features of America’s democracy is the freedom people have to lift up their voices on issues from multiple perspectives. But it can also cause confusion about the best pathway forward to secure U.S. interests and advance American values around the world.
Missed opportunity: The news that people in parts of Gaza now suffer from famine, as head of the World Food Programme Cindy McCain said this weekend, is almost as shocking as it was predictable. I recall hearing briefings by officials at the State Department and other U.S. government agencies that warned about this risk at the end of last year, and U.S. policymakers have tried to address the crisis but fallen behind the curve. The same issue exists with the lack of protections for thousands of innocent Palestinians who have lost their lives to this conflict. Failure to plan for different scenarios in Gaza and then dedicating sufficient resources to address them repeats many of the same mistakes the United States made during the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021.
How to get better results: The United States needs to develop better policy planning functions to help plan for a range of scenarios, get ahead of emerging crises (especially those driven by war), and develop quicker responses to these crises. In the months ahead, the Biden administration should have a more active and expansive policy planning process that considers the broad range of scenarios that might unfold in the Gaza Strip, and then develop game plans that dedicate resources to meet the challenges of those scenarios. If a ceasefire is reached, for example, the implementation of the terms of that agreement will have many complications; working through contingencies in advance with an eye to an actionable plan is a main challenge.
From possible hostage releases in exchange for prisoners to longer-term issues such as reconstruction and governance, the Biden administration needs to plan in advance—otherwise it risks remaining caught in the reactive, crisis management mode that has dominated its approach to this war.
2. Build coalitions in the region to advance peace and security and absorb shocks bound to come from spoilers.
The United States is juggling many different problems at home and abroad, and America’s allies and partners serve as crucial force multipliers. They can help pool and coordinate resources, develop joint action plans, and inoculate efforts to end conflicts from those who are working to prolong them.
Missed opportunity: U.S. diplomacy with Middle East partners, particularly key Arab allies who the world will likely turn to and lean heavily upon when it comes to developing plans for post-war reconstruction and governance, has been episodic and focused on crisis diplomacy—like the five months of on again, off again talks that produced this latest reported ceasefire deal. The Biden administration has ongoing discussions with key partners, but these talks largely appear to be intermittent and linked to high-profile visits like the one Secretary of State Antony Blinken just concluded last week, his seventh visit to the region since the war began.
How to get better results: The Biden administration should create a formal contact group with reginal partners to coordinate the immediate crisis response but also plan for future steps, including efforts to rebuild and create a political framework for a two-state solution. These efforts should also have a security component that seeks to coordinate regional security cooperation that addresses threats posed by Iran and its network of partners that have worked for years to undercut progress towards Middle East peace. Similar multilateral groups in the past, like the responses in the 1990s wars in the former Yugoslavia or, more recently, the formal coalition created to counter the Islamic State, created frameworks to channel collective action and get things done that the United States might not have otherwise achieved on its own.
3. Create a vital center in America’s politics to support a steadier U.S. foreign policy.
The debate inside of America about the Gaza war has reached a fever pitch—but mostly in an elite, college-educated bubble disconnected from the lives of the vast majority of Americans, who according to recent polls are more focused on issues like inflation, immigration, abortion, and the health of America’s democracy. Even among college students and younger Americans, there is recent evidence that the Gaza war isn’t as much of a priority as other issues like healthcare, education, civil rights, and climate change. But the funhouse mirrors of elite advocacy movements and America’s modern political media-industrial complex often produces more confusion than insight.
The best way to achieve results puts the focus on the policy first, but any approach should engage the U.S. public to build support from moderate Americans who aren’t as embroiled in the political fervor over all things Middle East. Many of those activist voices on different sides of the debate tend to engage in a form of neo-Orientalism, using the people of the region and the challenges as props in our own social and political debates. Just because some groups are loud and organized doesn’t mean that they represent a large portion of the American public.
Missed opportunity: The Biden administration has made some tactical unforced errors in how it engages in this debate at home. Biden himself has seemed to lack empathy for the plight of the Palestinian people at times, and his spokespersons have under-performed in explaining the policy approach.
How to get better results: Get out of the typical box used by political organizers that falls into the red-versus-blue trap on most public policy issues, including foreign policy. Instead, seek ways to build new coalitions that support a steadier U.S. foreign policy, including in the Middle East—and exclude extremist voices that have no interest in building such coalitions and instead make a “blame America first” neo-isolationist arguments.
4. Remind people about the values framework that guides policy decisions.
U.S. foreign policy decisions directly affect the lives of people across the globe, and in a very real way they involve “life or death” decisions. Decisions to act or not act can have devastating consequences, as I’ve seen from friends I know living in Gaza right now. Simply taking a technocratic approach to these decisions misses this human dimension, and the value of human life and support for the common good has plummeted in U.S. foreign policy debates in recent years for a variety of reasons.
Missed opportunity: The Biden administration has largely avoided talking about the moral dimensions of this current war, as it has clung to the “old think” technocratic approach of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. When it has talked about values in its foreign policy, it has done so mostly in stovepipes (like organizing two “summits for democracy”) that don’t appear to have much impact at all, especially in the Middle East. The American public debate hasn’t been healthy on this score either, with different voices flinging accusations around like the “genocide,” when we should never forget the instances of genocides in recent memory—like the remnants of one I saw at Auschwitz last year.
How to get better results: Go the extra mile to integrate the discussion about values and support for basic human dignity and decency to all. One sad thing about the debate in America today about this Israel-Hamas war is how reductionist and essentialist it has been—the poor overall quality of the debate shows how narrow our collective mindset has become. Our hearts should be big enough and minds open enough to see this tragic war through the multiple perspectives of the people who are directly impacted by it.
President Biden’s speech today is an opportunity to open that door to a better discussion than the one we’ve been having. The speech won’t solve all of the problems of the Middle East or bridge all of America’s divides, but it might just take us in the right direction if he says the right things.
The question we should ask ourselves is: Do we still have the capacity and will to listen?