The Century Foundation ; A Blueprint for a Progressive U.S. Foreign Policy in the Middle East

 

An oil and gas engineer inspects a gas refinery north of  Baghdad in 2009. Source: ILO/Apex Image For too long, progressives have spent their foreign policy energy cleaning up the messes of others. Small groups of dissenters have fought with clarity against disasters like the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the unjustifiable use of torture and extrajudicial detention after 9/11. Many of these same progressives saw the risks of ignoring justice for Palestinians and predicted the human and strategic tragedy in Gaza. But progressives don’t just oppose policy blunders. They also stand for an affirmative vision of American values and interests that benefits both America and the world—coherent policies that center on rights, security, and prosperity for all. Yet the case for such progressive foreign policy is still largely missing from mainstream American political platforms. Today, Century International unveils “A Blueprint for a Progressive U.S. Foreign Policy in the Middle East,” which articulates the progressive vision in detail. It offers a full and unapologetic answer to the supposedly intractable question: What should the U.S. government do in the Middle East? Progressives have precise proposals for the executive branch and Congress that would accomplish the core progressive aims for foreign policy in the Middle East: demilitarize American policy; restore moral leadership; equitably face the climate emergency; and, finally, support a just and durable peace for Palestinians and Israelis.  Our blueprint is a starting point, which we hope can grow into an enduring vision for a different approach to U.S. foreign policy. We will continuously expand it with new ideas in a living document that can serve as a resource for progressive policymakers.  The blueprint’s recommendations aren’t quick fixes. Long after the 2024 election is past, Americans and Middle Easterners will continue to suffer the long, corrosive consequences of state breakdown and lost rights.  But the good news is that America can play a constructive role in belatedly addressing the core crises of the Middle East. And many of these proposals already have kernels of bipartisan support. Ideas that seem politically impossible today may become common sense within a generation—and will help bring security and prosperity not only to the Middle East, but also to America. Thanassis Cambanis Director, Century International    U.S. Public Opinion on the Middle East Americans are weary of war and ready to impose conditions on military aid to Israel, according to a July 2024 Century Foundation/Morning Consult poll of 1,834 registered U.S. voters. The poll, conducted ahead of the release of our "Blueprint for a Progressive U.S. Foreign Policy in the Middle East," asked registered voters to rank their priorities for the Middle East; how they view the relationship with Israel and President Biden’s handling of the Gaza war; and what conditions might prompt them to support further U.S. military interventions. For those eager to see the United States embrace more diplomacy and less military action, the poll offered some hope and some caution. Voters have embraced a new willingness to question old assumptions, creating the possibility for change (although change can be for the worse as well as for better).  Fewer than 1 in 5 voters (19 percent) believe that the United States should continue sending Israel weapons without any conditions. A majority (58 percent) say Israel should meet at least one of a number of conditions for the United States to continue providing military support. Respondents who expressed this view included 68 percent of Democrats, 58 percent of independents, and 46 percent of Republicans. The remainder weren’t sure. More than half of American voters (51 percent) want the United States to stop sending offensive weapons to Israel if it is found to have committed war crimes or violated human rights. Nearly a third agree that the United States should stop sending both offensive and defensive weapons in such an event.  Voters are weary of further military intervention overseas. With regard to one of Washington’s biggest geopolitical foes, Iran, only 17 percent of Americans believe that the United States should take military action should Iran strike Israeli territory. Notably, fewer than 1 in 4 voters (24 percent) say that the United States should respond with military action if Iran strikes United States military targets in the Middle East. More than one in three voters (35 percent) said that America’s top priority in the Middle East should be to reduce violent conflict.  Nationwide, nearly 4 in 10 voters (38 percent) say they are less likely to vote for President Biden because of his handling of the war in Gaza. Less than 2 in 10 (19 percent) indicate they are more likely to support him.  Among Democrats, 13 percent say they’re less likely to vote for Biden over his handling of the war in Gaza, with 8 percent saying they are much less likely to support the president.  Independents, in particular, are unhappy with President Biden’s handling of the war in Gaza. More than 1 in 3 independents (36 percent) say they are less likely to vote for the president as a result, with 27 percent saying they are much less likely to do so. In total, 13 percent of independents said they are more likely to vote for Biden. But the note of caution: a large portion of voters don’t prioritize foreign policy, and appear open to policy changes for the better but also for the worse. Proponents of progressive policy have to make their case—American voters aren’t entirely convinced, yet, but they are persuadable. Century International Report: “A Blueprint for a Progressive U.S. Foreign Policy in the Middle East." Support Century International’s work with a donation. At Century International, our first priority is the human impact of international policy. That’s why we are committed to long-term research projects that identify better policies but also seek to change the way we think about peace, security, and governance.       → Make a donation today to help us make sense of a world being remade in 2024 Gaza Update The Gaza war has exposed the limits of existing policy frameworks. Century International’s series, “A Shared Future for Palestine and Israel,” convenes Palestinian, Israeli and international researchers to spur conversation and promote new, better options for security, rights, and governance—for Palestinians and Israelis. With each passing day, the idea of a two-state solution is more disconnected from reality: Israelis and Palestinians already live together in a one-state reality, though Israel controls almost all aspects of Palestinian life. Our “Shared Future” series so far includes: Commentary: “Palestinians Want Liberation, Not Recognition,” by Lana Tatour Commentary, “Without Free Palestinian Elections, There Can Be No Lasting Peace,” by Moien Odeh  “Palestinians and Israelis Already Live Together. What’s Missing Is Equality and Justice,” by Muhannad Ayyash.  Commentary, “Under Cover of Gaza War, Assault on West Bank Accelerates,” by Dalia Hatuqa Commentary, “Washington Can’t Make Israel’s War in Gaza Moral. Instead, It Needs to End the War,” by Sam Heller “Gaza’s Health Crisis Doesn’t Respect Borders. Israeli–Palestinian Coordination Is Critical for All,” by Dahlia Scheindlin. Commentary, “War Has Poisoned Gaza’s Land and Water. Peace Will Require Environmental Justice,” by Zeinab Shuker Commentary: “It’s Time for a Ceasefire in Gaza—and Then a New Push for Peace,” by Dahlia Scheindlin, Sam Heller, and Thanassis Cambanis Commentary: “America Needs to Prevent a Regional War in the Middle East,” by Sam Heller and Thanassis Cambanis Join Century International’s growing community of progressive thinkers and readers by signing up for our mailing list. If you received this email directly, then you’re already on our mailing list. If not, it’s easy to sign up to follow our work, which bridges the gap between policymaking, research, and original reporting on the ground. And it’s never been more important. We are critical, independent, and cutting-edge.    → Sign up now Baghdad and Washington’s Bumpy Relationship Can the United States and Iraq find an equilibrium in their relationship—and agree on a military relationship? Century International fellow Sajad Jiyad tackled these questions in a webinar hosted by the Quincy Institute in June, which you can watch online. The United States and Iraqi governments are engaged in a fitful strategic dialogue that is supposed to redefine the relationship and reduce the friction-causing U.S. military deployment in Iraq. A forthcoming Century report by Sajad will lay out the points of tension and common interest between Iraq and the United States, and map a plausible path to a new, sovereign relationship between the countries.