What are Washington's priorities in Middle East and how has the Arabs Spring

Qn.3. What are Washington’s priorities in Middle East and how has the Arabs Spring changed them, if at all?
Name:
Institution:
Date:
Table of Contents
 TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc352870797"
Introduction  PAGEREF _Toc352870797 \h
3
 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc352870798"
Washington’s Priorities in Middle East  PAGEREF _Toc352870798 \h
3
Calculated  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc352870799"
Intervention  PAGEREF _Toc352870799 \h
4
 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc352870800"
Middle East Peace Outlines  PAGEREF _Toc352870800 \h
6
Tactical  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc352870801"
Creation of Opportunities  PAGEREF _Toc352870801 \h
7
 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc352870802"
Arab Springs Alteration  PAGEREF _Toc352870802 \h
8
 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc352870803"
Conclusion  PAGEREF _Toc352870803 \h
11
 HYPERLINK \l "_Toc352870804"
Reference:  PAGEREF _Toc352870804 \h
12


INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Introduction
Middle East has experienced the ever-changing and tumultuous livelihood for a very long time. Similarly, different issues have caused instability in Middle East. Before oil was discovered, the region was facing religious conflict as well as wars concerning other valuable resources and land (Taylor, 1991). Ottoman Empire created a route for the increasing colonial powers and European imperial that had interests of securing a number of territories as well as manage access to Asia. The main scandal in the Middle East was caused after the realization of the resources of energy in the region, where the Washington grew great interest in its access and control (Konigsberg, 2007). The main priority that Washington had upon this region was to be able to establish stability and control in the entire oil based region. Nevertheless, Washington outlined various priorities that would help in accomplishing their aim. The Arab Spring also reshaped these priorities in different ways.
Washington’s Priorities in Middle East
The main priority that the United States had upon the Middle East was the interest to control the resources of oil within the region. Due to this interest, the Americans got involved in supporting oppressive and corrupt governments in the region. In this process of involvement of their intervention, the political and economical development was hindered for a very long time. The motive and interest of the Washington upon Middle East was not promoting democracy as they claimed, because they could go to the extent of supporting the oppressive and dictatorial leaders as long as they collaborated with them. This reason made their priority to be vivid all over the world that if their reason were to promote democracy, then it would be their duty to demote those kinds of leaders and allow free and fair elections from the citizens of the respective countries of the Middle East without endorsing any of them.
Washington found it quite efficient in supporting a variety of dictators in all parts of the Arabic region as long as these leaders would be conventional to the foreign policy requirements of the United States. The foreign policy requirements are specifically the demands of very strong and powerful corporations. The corporations are termed as the weakening of democracy that the Middle East dwellers despise, as they hate the United States act of support towards the oppressive and harsh government. The imposed government are said to hinder democracy as well as development in the region, while the U.S do that due to their self-interest of gaining control of the oil resources. Therefore, the leaders endorsed by the Washington ruled in their favor and in dictatorship, which only brought negative effects upon the citizens.
Ever since the last century’s mid years, the foreign policy of the Washington mainly focused on the way the United States will establish control over the Middle East’s tactical power as well as one of the most popular material prizes in the world history, which is the vast reserves of the crude oil in the region. The Washington regarded the oil in the Middle Eastern region as the most likely richest economic reward in the world while considering the area of foreign investment. Thus, they regarded the Middle East as the strategically significant region in the entire world (Shaked & Rabinovich, 1980). The imposition of the Washington of leaders of dictatorship caliber has brought about endless war in the region of Middle East.
In addition, the sober leaders and citizens realized that these endorsed leaders were collaborating with the United States in gaining control over their region, which contributed to massive resistance and hostility. After the Washington’s realization of resistance and hostility, they decided to use a peaceful approach towards the Middle East, which was not positively embraced as well (Ramadan, 2012). This has been proven in Washington’s continuous persistence in trying to put their priorities into practice, regardless of the oppositions from some countries in Middle East (Hollis, 2010). Obviously, the main interests of the Washington, which also led to their intervention, were based on the grounds of their interest of controlling the oil-based regions of the Middle East.
Calculated Intervention
In order to follow up their interest of gaining stability in the Middle East, the United States got committed in aligning their values and interests, which were based on responding to events that occur in Middle East. They decided to intervene in peace keeping as well as provision of security and branded it as one of their main priorities in the region. This was meant to blind the citizens who would give them credit for their actions. Unfortunately, the citizens continued with their resistance and hostility regardless of all the measures taken (Reus-Smit & Snidal, 2008).
In Middle East, most people would rather make the wrong choice and live; than do the right thing and die. The terror attacks have continually left many families traumatized due to the loss of their loved ones and properties, yet there is no justice served against the terrorists. This is why the United States, through Washington City put the issue of violence in the first priority, in the knowledge that in order for any state or region to develop, peace must exist. In addition, Washington emphasizes on a set of worldwide rights, which includes; the freedom of speech, the liberty of peaceful association and assembly, the equality for women and men under the regulation of law (Schoenbaum, 2006).
Similarly, there is the right of following your religion without any fright of discrimination or violence, as well as the right to elect your choice of leaders via democratic elections. If these universal rights were followed, there would not be any signs of wars or deaths in the region. The people would obtain the freedom of speech, allowing them to express their feelings about political, social and economical issues that affect them. The right of electing the leaders that they want would lead the ruling of qualified and substantial leaders who stand for peace and development of the region (Shimko, 2009).
The other priority by Washington is the support of both economical and political change in Middle East, which can cause the legitimate ambitions of the individuals throughout the region. This would happen effectively if the wars ceased in Middle East, as businesses and various investments would be planted in different areas of the region, increasing the economic status. The ceasing of war would also attract foreign investors and interrelations from numerous nations that were previously restraining from handling any business deals and relations, due to the fear of insecurity in Middle East. Moreover, if Washington succeeds on the implementation of the universal rights, the political status is likely to improve because every citizen would have their democratic rights and would live without fear of violence as well as the fear of discrimination. This would reduce any chaos, as people will understand their limits and those likely to cause violence would realize that they are under the law, and restrain from such acts (Gause & Council on Foreign Relations, 2011).
Washington’s support for the principles is the main priority and focus to the quest of other interests within the region. The United States marshaled all the economic, strategic and diplomatic tools to support these principles. The United States was determined to first shape and change Middle East before considering any interests as the region had not secured yet the core interests of the United States (Great Britain., & Great Britain, 2012).
Middle East Peace Outlines
It is to be noted that the terrorists are part of the Middle East citizens who feel that the oppressive government imposed by the Washington needs to end. The Washington created a suitable environment that would encourage negotiations and they found this possible through the laying out of principles on security and territorial boarders. Washington set out strategies regarding territories of certain countries like Israel and Palestinian. Washington set out strategies regarding territories of certain countries like Israel and Palestinian. The boundaries of Palestinian and Israel state ought to be based on the lines of the year nineteen sixty-seven, with the swaps that were jointly agreed.
Regarding security, the Palestinian state must not be militarized and the whole and phased withdrawals of the forces of Israeli would be practiced to the capability of security forces of Palestinian. The other arrangement that was agreed upon would also be put into practice to avoid a renaissance of terrorism; offer effective security within the boarders and stop the weapon infiltrati...