Now that Obama has come to power, judging from his speech and various situations, it is bound to adjust the US Middle East policy, but the fundamental goal of safeguarding US strategic and economic interests in the Middle East will not change. "Carrots and sticks" have always been the traditional means of American diplomacy, and Obama will not easily give up high-handed means such as military deterrence and economic sanctions. However, Obama may pay more attention to diplomatic means such as dialogue and negotiation, curb militant impulses, and avoid rash war.
Obama will be cautious about unilateralism, and may rely more on the role of the United Nations, seek the coordination and cooperation of European allies, Russia and China, and win the support of Arab countries. On the Palestinian-Israeli peace talks and the Iranian nuclear issue, more attention should be paid to the role of the Quartet and the Six-Party Mechanism.
Obama will also try his best to repair the image of the United States in the Arab-Islamic world, change the Bush administration's "friend or foe" policy, and slow down the implementation of the "Democratic Transformation Plan for the Greater Middle East".
Obama's adjustment of the Middle East policy is not to give up the interests of the United States in the Middle East, let alone to get rid of the chaos in the Middle East, but to maintain the dominant position of the United States in the Middle East more effectively and better realize the strategic goal of the United States dominating the Middle East. Some people think that the United States will shrink strategically in the Middle East, but it remains to be seen. After eight years of Bush's administration, the hard power and soft power of the United States began to decline from the peak, and now it is facing a serious financial and economic crisis. After Obama takes office, he will focus on the domestic economy. In diplomacy, he will feel powerless to hot issues, including the Middle East, and his priorities may change. However, the Middle East will remain a key area that the United States must control, which is determined by the global strategic interests of the United States. Counter-terrorism, non-proliferation, controlling the transportation routes of regional energy production and promoting American democracy will remain the core contents of the US Middle East strategy.
As for the three hot spots in the Middle East, Obama has said that after taking office, he will seize the opportunity to promote the Palestinian-Israeli peace talks to achieve results. After Obama took office, he urgently needs to deal with two major issues: First, Israel's right-wing election won, and Netanyahu came to power, which may hinder the peace process and how to advance it. The second is how to treat Hamas. The bloody attack on Gaza once again shows that it is difficult to destroy Hamas by force, and the Palestinians and the Arab world will strongly oppose it; It is difficult to restart the Palestinian-Israeli peace talks while splitting Hamas and Fatah; To promote reconciliation between the two Palestinian factions, it is necessary to make some compromises with Hamas, and it is difficult for the United States and Israel to take this step.
During the election campaign, Obama proposed to withdraw troops from Iraq in 16 months. In his inaugural speech, he also said that he would withdraw troops from Iraq responsibly. But if he really wants to withdraw his troops, he will find the situation very complicated. First of all, the United States spent $2.3 trillion on the Iraq war, paying a huge price for the lives of more than 4,200 soldiers and the disability of more than 60,000 people, in exchange for overthrowing Saddam Hussein's regime and occupying Iraq militarily. It is in the interest of the United States to continue to control Iraq. Ensuring American control over Iraq, preventing Al-Qaida from coming back, and quelling the war between Iraqi sects and ethnic groups are the prerequisites for withdrawing troops. Therefore, whether we can withdraw troops as scheduled depends on the situation.
During the campaign, Obama said that he would hold high-level talks with Iran after his election, and later stressed that Iran must stop uranium enrichment activities and support terrorism. Iran said that his speech was unacceptable. The essence of the contradiction between the United States and Iran is that Iran wants to play the role of a regional power in the Middle East, which conflicts with the strategic goal of the United States monopolizing the Middle East. The Iranian nuclear issue is only a symptom of the contradiction between the United States and Iran. Bush's high-handed policy has so far failed to force Iran to yield. Because of the lessons of the Iraq war, Bush did not dare to launch a "preemptive attack" on Iran during his term of office. Of course, Obama will not rashly use force against Iran. It remains to be seen how Obama will handle the contradiction with Iran.
Whether Obama can ease relations with Iran will also affect the direction of other two hot issues. Iran has considerable influence on Iraqi Shiites, especially the Mahdi Army led by Sadr and the Palestinian Hamas. Shiite Muslims in Iraq play an important role in the direction of the situation in Iraq. Whether Hamas can change its tough stance of resisting Israel by force is one of the keys to the smooth progress of the Palestinian-Israeli peace talks. In short, the three hot spots in the Middle East are still an unavoidable severe test of Obama's diplomatic ability.