The American military has been actively involved in a number of Middle East. According to numerous official justifications emanating from Washington, the purpose of the troops sent to these various locations has been to defend, dissuade, or liberate, punishing the evil and protecting the innocent while promoting liberal principles and generally ensuring the safety of Americans (Bacevich). American assistance for Afghan insurgents battling a Soviet-backed government; this action ultimately aided in the rise of radical Islam. Finally, the United States would use military force to retaliate against any outside attempt to grab Persian Gulf oil reserves in an effort to dispel the perception of softness. The United States positioned its actions as positive, reflecting on the assistance to the countries of the Middle East and the protection of objects of strategic importance to them. However, the countries of the Middle East perceived this assistance as propaganda of Western values; thus, the potential resumption of relations escalated into hostility.
The rationale for this war can be aggregated up as follows: as the disease, disorganization, and disorder in the Middle East pose an increasing threat to critical U.S. national security interests, the skillful application of hard power will enable the United States to restrain these tendencies and thereby maintain the American way of life, which will facilitate the reinstatement of relations with the Middle East. Muslims will unavoidably view “Anglo-American” objectives in a different way (Bacevich). Their forefathers’ experiences during the Crusades, which are still vivid in their minds today, were motivated more by a desire to conquer than by a desire to be free.
The United States has now rigorously tested this idea by experimenting with various methods in field settings. Except for the most limited tactical contexts, it turned out to be wholly untrue. The Obama administration’s predilection for missile-launching aircraft and troops has not changed, which indicates that the preferred American mode of combat in the larger Middle East has limited political utility. This implies that the Middle East radicalizes its position and rejects Western principles despite U.S. efforts to establish its policies there.
The ultimate responsibility for the United States’ actions lies with an oblivious American public engrossed in shallow digital enthusiasms and the worship of celebrities. Americans support freedom, democracy, and prosperity in other nations as long as they get the lion’s share. Ensuring that Americans enjoy their rightful quota of freedom, abundance, and security comes first. Bacevich’s argument is heavy-handed at times, but when he writes about military strategy, he is genuinely intelligent (Bacevich). Citing numerous examples, he convincingly argues that destructive myths about the efficacy of American military power blind policymakers, generals, and voters (Bacevich). The use of overwhelming lethal force does not immediately cause dictators or terrorists to run, even if that’s what politicians in Washington want to believe.
Instead of presenting options, it has cultivated the idea that the United States has no choice but to continue, naively expecting that doing so will yield a different outcome. Despite the fact that few people in governing circles appear to be aware of it, this aspiration has led people to a dead end. The idea that employing military force would demonstrate to allies and adversaries that Washington was serious about an issue reduced the importance of diplomats and diplomacy. It also suggested that the leading representatives of American policy should prefer wearing uniforms to suits. Triumphalist American leadership repeatedly makes the error of prematurely declaring victory without comprehending that their adversary has just withdrawn to continue the struggle as a guerilla force. Thus, initially suitable, according to the United States, intentions about protection and security developed into the safety of their own interests on land that did not belong to them.
Work Cited
Bacevich, Andrew J. “America’s war for the greater Middle East: A military history.” (2016). Web.