"America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests" - Henry Kissinger
Throughout history - egos of some rulers aside - all decisions of the state were based on permanent interests. These interests could range from security to the control of strategic resources. It is in pursuit of these interests that states cooperate or compete with each other.
Let's look at the relationship between America and the House of Saud (ruling dynasty of Saudi Arabia) for example. It is harder to find a more different couple. As of today these two states look very differently on issues such as the Syrian civil war, nuclear deal with Iran, Sisi government in Egypt, Israel-Palestine conflict and even human rights issues (not that America fares much better on the last one) . However, their alliance shows no signs of falling apart. Why? Simply put, they need each other. Saudis need American security guarantees as their insurance policy. Americans, for their part, need a stable ally in the middle east (Saudis are notorious for clamping down on any form of dissent at home, though it doesn't stop them from exporting instability to brotherly countries ). More importantly, Americans need Saudis for their oil. Only the Saudis can increase or decrease their production by a couple of million bpd and send the markets crashing or skyrocketing. Saudis have done both in 1973 and 1980's with devastating effect.
Thus, Americans and Saudis have no choice to cooperate, for now at least. A decade from now when American shale revolution matures, Americans won't need Saudis anymore and this 70 year old alliance will fall apart.
6 comments:
Interesting points.
Your interest based argument for alliances is in line with the "realist" school of thought. But will the U.S.-Saudi alliance really decline because of the shale oil revolution? Perhaps, but given the myriad of ties that exist between the Saudis and the Americans, the alliance might have more staying power than you suggest. Only time will tell which direction the relationship goes.
Thanks for being the first poster!
Unlike most relationships American Saudi ties are government based and not people based. From a social context you can't find more different partners. I'm not saying that the alliance will fall apart but when their interests cease to align the scope of that alliance will shift dramatically in favor of America.
Good point.
Just to add to what Ahmed has pointed out on, It should be mentioned that the Cold War was one of the biggest examples of when the US's interest based relationship with other nations of the globe was highly noticeable. The economic aid programs after the end of WWII such as the Truman Doctrice, The Marshall Plan, The Berlin Airlift and many more signify the US's interest based relationship with Europe. These programs helped tilt part of post-war Europe towards capitalism which was to ensure the halt of the Red Scare (spread of communism). This goes to show that the US had no intentions of helping out in the devastation of Europe to "make friends". Their helping intentions were only based on halting the spread of communism which was only "interest" based.
Sarim - Your points about Europe are persuasive, but what about the America's current actions in Afghanistan? The US has invested $107.5 billion in reconstruction aid for Afghanistan which, adjusted for inflation, is more than the Marshall Plan. Sure the initial goal was to defeat Al Qaeda and the Taliban, but why is the U.S. still investing so much money and effort towards propping up the Afghan regime? Doesn't their commitment seem to go beyond traditional interest-based actions?
Most of Afghanistan's population in under 25 years of age. It is a war torn country, where destitution is high. People are neglected, unskilled, uneducated etc and are most likely to join the likes of the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Yes the initial goal was to defeat Al Qaeda but what about the future. You cannot just defeat the Taliban and expect to go home without ever hearing from them again. It is a process and conditions in Afghanistan still favor people joining the insurgency. The economic, political and social conditions in Afghanistan must be changed for a future without the likes of terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda and the Taliban. This could very well be the reason as to the high level of aid being provided to Afghanistan. The US has spent more in Afghanistan than in Europe post WWII because the future of post war Europe was not a threat.
Post a Comment