The Delusions Driving U.S. Policy in the Middle East

I am sure that there is no part of the world where the contrast between objective reality and American foreign policy is greater than the Middle East. The invasion of Iraq, the “agenda of freedom”, and the various repetitions of the Israeli -Palestinian peace process are all examples of the intersection between the American imagination with failure during the past few decades. However, delusions continue.

There is no contemporary example than this low grumbling between at least 26 members of the Democratic congress who prefer recognition of a Palestinian state. Last week, Representative Roy Khanna of California, who leads this effort, said at a meeting on the Records Council of Foreign Relations, which leads this effort, said that recognition in the United States in Palestine will strengthen the two -state solution.

I am sure that there is no part of the world where the contrast between objective reality and American foreign policy is greater than the Middle East. The invasion of Iraq, the “agenda of freedom”, and the various repetitions of the Israeli -Palestinian peace process are all examples of the intersection between the American imagination with failure during the past few decades. However, delusions continue.

There is no contemporary example than this low grumbling between at least 26 members of the Democratic Congress who prefer recognition of a Palestinian state. Last week, Representative Roy Khanna of California, who leads this effort, said at a meeting on the Records Council of Foreign Relations, which leads this effort, said that recognition in the United States in Palestine will strengthen the two -state solution.

“This will provide people with hope in the area,” he said.

Allocating the moral issue and the interesting and serious interests of Khana in settling the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for the benefit of each of the peoples, his vision is almost what President George W. Bush explained 23 years ago: two democratic states-Israel and mug-Batni-divided side by side. Khanna has just turned the sequence, and the recognition of Palestine before peace.

But he struggled to clarify how recognition will achieve the result he wants, and is almost naive to the political reality of Israeli and Palestinian societies. The two -state solution was a long shot before October 7, 2023. Hamas attacked Israel on that day and the subsequent war in Gaza made it impossible to imagine it almost.

The many references of Khana to the long -related Israeli politicians, including Yitzac Rabin, who was assassinated in 1995; Shimon Peres, who died in 2016; Ehud Barak, who led the last time in Israel nearly a quarter of a century ago, revealed an American desire that the world would be the way we wish instead.

He is not only Khanna and his colleagues. The Trump administration is also guilty towards desires-Hezbollah and Hamas’s arms. Israel’s attack in Lebanon, starting in September 2024, with a notorious whistle attack, Lebanon’s political system from Hezbollah’s grip, allowing the election of a new president – after ten previous attempts – and the selection of the new prime minister. President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nour Salam has since began the state’s dismantling process in the state that Hezbollah built for four decades.

However, for all Israel’s military achievements and good intentions of the new Lebanese leaders, Hezbollah has not been destroyed. It is weaker than it was, but still contains guns, and its cadres are paid, and Iran has not been abandoned to rebuild it. For this reason, Israel was “carrying out” the ceasefire in which Washington mediated in Lebanon last November with cross military strikes-and the reason that the Trump team wanted to disarm Hezbollah.

To achieve this end, the US ambassador to Turkey Tom Park-a Middle East envoy ranked second after Steve Whizov-a four-stage plan for the Lebanese Armed Forces to achieve this goal.

But the barracks may reduce the removal of the burning Hezbollah. How can the organization that depends on the “resistance” – which declares science to be “Hezbollah” and the “Islamic Resistance in Lebanon” with a offensive rifle in the air -? Hezbollah is required not to be Hezbollah.

This is a goal that deserves, but can it be accomplished – especially by the end of the year, because the Trump administration requires? When military leaders in Lebanon submitted their plan to implement disarmament to the government in early September, the government members got out of the government.

There is no doubt that many Sunni and Christian citizens and Druze in Lebanon support the disarmament of Hezbollah. It is unlikely to do large numbers of Shiites. The arms of Hezbollah were the source of the authority of the Shiites, whose numbers exceeded its influence on the amazing Lebanese regime, where both the main religious factions in Lebanon are granted specific roles. Thus, the president is always Christian, Prime Minister Sunni, and Speaker of parliament is a member of the Shiite community. Hezbollah leader Naim Qasim – Khalifa Hassan Nasrallah, who was killed in an Israeli air strike in September 2024 – is the leader of guerrilla warfare and political. Agreeing to disarm would eat his support. Hezbollah politicians argue that the plan proposed by the army – whose details have not been published in public – “fully submitted by the Lebanese to the US government.” They want to know why Hezbollah must abandon its weapons before Israel withdraws from the five foci of the Israeli army in southern Lebanon.

Of course, the Lebanese army can use force, but the risk of violence is clear. Hezbollah may not be any matching with the Israeli army, but the AK-47s, the missile bombs, and the heavier weapons that still have a threat to peace and social cohesion in a country that has witnessed very little over the past five decades. The Trump administration and others in Washington, who are calling for Hezbollah’s disarmament, seems to be naive about the consequences of shooting between Hezbollah and the Lebanese forces.

Of course, I am ready to be surprised. There have been many moments of the “holy Mawli” in the Middle East over the past two years. Hezbollah may be weaker than people believe, and the Lebanese army can take away every last weapon and bullet from the group. However, I am still skeptical that Lebanese leaders want to risk it. This is why the long negotiation process, more negotiations and dealing under the table, which may leave Hezbollah with some weapons as an assistant to the armed forces, seem more realistic and wise than the barracks plan.

There is a similar dynamic about Hamas (an abbreviation of the Islamic Resistance Movement). The group will not give up its arms unless it is obliged to do so, and despite all its efforts and the power of fire, the Israelis were unable to force Hamas to submit. The group’s demand to abandon its arms is not a bad thing, but do you agree with reality? no. This is not just my opinion-that it is also from the Israeli army chief of staff, who advised the Israeli government to accept the recent ceasefire proposals.

It would be good for sure if there is a Palestinian state present along and in peace with Israel. It would also be positive if Hezbollah and Hamas disarmed, but the reality makes these goals very difficult. I am surprised that Khanna-a progressive democratic-takes a page from the old playing book for Bush for two decades, not only in his vision of two countries, but also the intense American participation in the Middle East that requires the treatment of peace and building the nation.

In a similar context, it is strange that the Trump administration is ready for a decline in the complex issue of disarmament, especially in Lebanon. This contradicts the ideas that the president offers during his visit to the Gulf in May, when he specifically denies this type of US participation.

It is impressive for us that officials want to make the world a better place, but when your policy diverges from the world as it is, the failure is the result. Just look at the US record during the past three decades.