Does The United States Policy Towards The Middle East Change in Relation to Which Party is in Power?

There were certainly differences in the foreign policy of President Ford and President Carter towards the Middle East. These differences were often more differences in approach or emphasis than in radical policy differences. Republicans and Democrats can and did approach foreign policy in the Middle East differently. The Republicans were usually more uncritically supportive of Israel and outspoken in their defence of America’s perceived national interests. The Democrats were generally seen as less strident in their defence of America’s interests and more willing to seek cooperation as opposed to coercion. Over all the United States strategic aims and interests remained the same. Neither of them had as much confidence to carry out foreign policy as President Johnson and President Nixon had, even if Johnson had devoted the majority of his presidency concentrating on the conflict in Vietnam. In many ways President Ford was a caretaker president trying to heal national divisions and pride after the defeat in Vietnam and in the wake of the Watergate scandal followed by Nixon’s resignation. Neither of them would have as much confidence as President Reagan displayed during the 1980s but then again they were both President when the confidence if not the power or influence of the United States appeared to be declining. Other factors contributed to the formation of foreign policy in the Middle East aside from which political party each President happened to be in. Above all the personality of the President, their political believes and outlooks and those of their Secretaries of State can affect the conduct or direction of the United States foreign policy in the Middle East. Both President Ford and President Carter heavily relied on Henry Kissinger and Cyrus Vance respectively to conduct foreign policy. The formation of United States foreign policy in the Middle East is more likely to depend on the character, strength and confidence of the President as much as whether that President is a Republican or a Democrat. Party politics is or can be important when the President needs to work with Congress to form and achieve their foreign policy. Logically a Democrat President would work best with a Democrat controlled Congress or vice versa for a Republican President and Congress. This was not the case for President Carter whose failures to agree with Congress were due to his poor relations with the Democrat leaders in Congress.

Above all American Presidents can be forced into adopting or changing foreign policy in the Middle East by the events in the region and by the actions of their allies and adversaries within the region. Both Presidents Ford and Carter were able to work towards peace between Israel and Egypt because the Egyptians and to a lesser extent the Israelis wished for that to happen. For President Carter the Camp David Agreement was the pinnacle of his success but the failure to release the hostages in Teheran was the finish of his political career.

Bibliography

Comfort, N. Brewer’s Politics – A Phase and Fable Dictionary 2nd Edition (1993) Cassell, London

Crystal, D. The Cambridge Biographical Encyclopedia 2nd edition (1998) Cambridge University Press

Dunbabin, J.P.D The Cold War – The Great powers and their allies (1994) Longman Group, London

Esposito, J.L. The Islamic Threat (1999) Oxford University Press, Oxford

Harbutt, F.J. Problems in American History – The Cold War Era (2002) Blackwell Publishers, Oxford

Keay, J. Sowing the Wind – The Seeds of Conflict in the Middle East (2003) John Murray, London

Murphy, D. Cooper, K. and Waldron, M. United States 1776 – 1992 (2001) Harper Collins, London

Painter, D.S. The Cold War – An International History (1999) Routledge, London

Watson, J. Success in World History since 1945 (1997) John Murray, London