THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Friday, September 6, 1996 TAG: 9609060026
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A16 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: 47 lines
President Clinton is dealing this week with Saddam Hussein's latest act of aggression, but the necessity of doing so begs a longer-term question. What should the United States be doing in the Persian Gulf not just next week but next month and next year? A surprising cross section of foreign-policy experts thinks the answer is - less.
Sen. Sam Nunn, D-Ga., believes the United States has assumed too high a profile. We are making ourselves a target by giving demagogues and despots in Iran and Iraq a glamorous enemy to oppose, and we are discouraging regional powers from assuming responsibility for their own security.
Geoffrey Kemp, a foreign-policy adviser in the Reagan administration, and Barbara Conry, a foreign-policy analyst for the libertarian Cato Institute, make a similar case. In effect, we have made it politically difficult for Arab powers to become our allies and economically unnecessary for them to defend themselves, creating the foreign-policy equivalent of welfare dependency.
It wasn't until the Persian Gulf War that the United States assumed ownership of the region's security. And after the war there was every expectation that the states surrounding Iran and Iraq would defend against them.
For that to happen, improving self-defense capabilities of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Turkey should have been a priority. In a crisis, we could step in. But even then, we ought to expect help from others who depend on the region's natural resources including European powers and Japan. A lower American profile might persuade other Arab states to enter into security alliances.
Instead, a curious double bind now holds sway. Washington seems to have concluded that we can't let regional powers cooperate to contain aggression until they have shown themselves up to the challenge. But as long as we do the policing, they have no incentive to walk the beat.
Thus, we find ourselves spending billions of dollars a year and assuming substantial risk in order to be the guarantor of Gulf security. This policy is not just unsustainable, it is counterproductive insofar as it garners undeserved sympathy in the Islamic world for Iran and Iraq as victims of the West and discourages their threatened neighbors from defending themselves.
The present crisis ought to provoke a debate between presidential candidates on the proper role of the United States in the Persian Gulf instead of macho posturing. The stakes are too high for us to continue to pursue a flawed policy. by CNB