CSS 2009 Solved Current Affairs Past Papers | Policy Options by USA Towards Middle East for Peaceful Relations
The following question of CSS Current Affairs 2009 is solved by Sir Ammar Hashmi, the best Current Affairs Coach, on the guided pattern of Sir Syed Kazim Ali, which he taught to his students, scoring the highest marks in compulsory subjects for years. This solved past paper question is uploaded to help aspirants understand how to crack a topic or question, write relevantly, what coherence is, and how to include and connect ideas, opinions, and suggestions to score the maximum.
Question breakdown
This question has one part, i.e., to analyze the failure of the U.S. to control oil resources and reshape the Middle East through the Iraq invasion and suggest policy options for peaceful relations in the region.
Outline
1-Introduction
2-U.S. Objectives in Iraq: Control and Geopolitical Restructuring
- ✓Attempt to Secure Oil Resources
- ✓Efforts to Redraw the Middle East Map
3-Consequences of Failure for U.S. Influence
- ✓Erosion of U.S. Credibility
- ✓Rise of Regional Powers and Non-State Actors
4-Policy Options for U.S. Towards Peaceful Middle East Relations
- ✓Engaging Regional Powers in Constructive Dialogue
- ✓Shifting from Direct Control to Economic Cooperation
- ✓Promoting Stability through Energy Independence and Fair Trade
- ✓Strengthening Regional Security Architectures
- ✓Facilitating Political and Social Reforms
- ✓Providing Comprehensive Humanitarian and Development Assistance
5-Critical Analysis
6-Conclusion
Introduction
Being a natural resource and geopolitical epicentre of vast importance in a region where hundreds of years of diversity have become inseparable from the lives of many peoples and nations worldwide, the Middle East has long played a significant role in the interest of major powers. Like other interventions in this complex region, the invasion of Iraq by the U.S. in 2003 was to initially dismantle weapons of mass destruction, fight terrorism, and establish a democratic government. However, many analysts contend that underlying these justifications was a deeper intent: It wanted control of Iraq’s wealthy oil resources to secure the region following American interests. Nevertheless, these ambitions failed to achieve much as events were played out in which the U.S. confronted barriers, including weakened standing worldwide, the spread of influential regional and non-state actors and undiminished instability in the Middle East. Therefore, the U.S. must turn its policy direction squarely more constructively and peacefully to play a more constructive and peaceful role in the region. This means continuing to talk with rather than at regional decision-makers instead of imposing policy preferences from the outside, privileging economics over politics and actively supporting regional energy security policies and free trade regimes. Further, it would be critical in nurturing long-lasting peace to promote consistent and selective development of regional security architectures, political and social changes and provide complex identification and support to humanitarian and development. It needs to be taken forward that the U.S. needs to adopt a more sophisticated understanding of the region’s politics and pursue a mission of entente and a vision of order and respect for the will of the Middle Eastern nations.
U.S. Objectives in Iraq: Control and Geopolitical Restructuring
- ✓ Attempt to Secure Oil Resources
The primary rationale given in the lead to the invasion of Iraq by the United States was the desire to control the country’s enormous oil resources. Iraq was and is an essential country in terms of security, as it has some of the largest proven reserves. Ownership of these resources would help supply the energies required by individuals in the United States and offer a strategic mechanism by which America can influence the global set price per barrel and the total markets within the Middle East. Thus, Iraqi oil became considered essential to the economic well-being of the American state and a critical component of its strategic interests in the Middle East, which is still defined to a considerable extent by the power struggle over access to oil.
- ✓ Efforts to Redraw the Middle East Map
Beyond oil, the United States aimed to redesign the Middle Eastern political map by moulding Iraq into a stable, pro-Western entity in the Middle of an unstable region. This coup was anchored on the hope that, unlike Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship, the Iraqi people would embrace democracy, thus eradicating strongholds of other anti-American dictators and diminishing support for horrific caliph-like groups. To change the political culture in Iraq, the U.S. sought to weaken unfriendly states in the region and set a trend of political change. This strategy sought to transform the Middle East regional order into one that was the democratic image of America and regional security interests as the foundation for a more stable Middle East that was friendly to America.
Consequences of Failure for U.S. Influence
- ✓ Erosion of U.S. Credibility
The U.S. intervention in Iraq had severe setbacks, and it failed to achieve the greatest of its primary objectives, doing severe damage to credibility regionally and globally. There were hefty questions about the legitimacy of U.S. intentions because of the absence of the promised weapons of mass destruction and the difficulties of laying international ground rules for a stable government. The erosion of credibility exacerbated America’s reputation and contributed to a negative U.S. sentiment and scepticism around foreign policy. Perceptions of American overreach also fuelled the trouble in managing post-war Iraq, affecting the U.S.’s standing in the Middle East and unravelling American influence on global allies and partners who started turning against U.S. commitment and judgment.
- ✓ Rise of Regional Powers and Non-State Actors
Upon the failure of the U.S. strategy in the Middle East, instability in Iraq put the power into play for regional powers and non-state actors to seize and exercise autonomy. Some countries, like Iran, increased their regional power by gaining influence in Iraq and power-sharing with essential groups. This change led to such a decentralization of Middle Eastern politics and aggression that new wielders of power, such as militias and insurgent groups, emerged who either directly or indirectly took power in many regions. Yellow groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS later took advantage of the situation, which festered more havoc and caused the region chaos. The actors that the United States empowered weakened its objective to establish stability in Iraq and exposed the critical missteps that were causing this.
Policy Options for U.S. Towards Peaceful Middle East Relations
- ✓ Engaging Regional Powers in Constructive Dialogue
One of the policy options for the U.S. towards peaceful Middle East relations is establishing a long-term communication process with regional actors, including Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, which is crucial to easing the tensions. A good example is JCPOA. With Iran: multilateral negotiations smoothed the nuclear problem for a time and provided diplomatic contacts. Like them, the US-sponsored Abraham Accords, which normalized the relations between Israel and several Arab countries, also proved the role of diplomacy and immediate diplomatic interactions even among former mutually hostile nations. In this sense, the U.S. can leverage such frameworks and enhance the management of a regional framework that can enhance peace with an understanding of the principal actors.
- ✓ Shifting from Direct Control to Economic Cooperation
Moreover, taking this from the control to the partnership method might promote sustainability. The U.S. could do this by simulating its post-World War II strategy with Europe after using the Marshall Plan to foster economic growth and stability. Specific economic interactions, like investments in the development of infrastructure and educational sectors in Jordan, have given it more or less political stability in the Middle East. By prioritizing the economic benefits of its engagement with the region, the U.S. can achieve linked economies that benefit the military’s objectives.
- ✓ Promoting Stability through Energy Independence and Fair Trade
In addition, it would be beneficial to encourage regional energy independence, which may help avoid developing conflicts around oil and contribute to sustainable economic development. An example is the current partnership between the United States and Saudi Arabia regarding renewable energy, especially solar energy. Seeking to promote the opportunities that will help Middle Eastern countries diversify their energy supply sources, the USA can mitigate the pressure of an oil focus that has sometimes led to inter-antagonistic stands. Promoting fair-trade agreements strengthens this approach even more, making the economic arrangements beneficial to all players in the market without necessarily employing political influence.
- ✓ Strengthening Regional Security Architectures
Furthermore, developing local security systems means the region could solve its problems independently. The best example is NATO in Europe, which allowed European countries to stand as one regarding threats. In the Middle East, building the GCC could be the base for creating a similar security organization, making countries cooperate in counterterrorism, border protection, and information exchange. By building up a security community, the U.S. can assist the region in solving security issues without leaning heavily on the American army.
- ✓ Facilitating Political and Social Reforms
Similarly, experience in reforming the institutions of governance in countries like Tunisia and Egypt through support to locally generated programs such as the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has demonstrated how best practices can be introduced from external sources. Some of the issues that extremists exploit would be dealt with if the U.S. invested in governance training and anti-corruption. Efforts to increase the credibility of institutions promoting transparency and accountability also promote the government’s responsiveness to core needs, thus lowering the attractiveness of extreme solutions.
- ✓ Providing Comprehensive Humanitarian and Development Assistance
Last, providing practical and strategic solutions in needy areas can meet human needs and improve citizen diplomacy in the long run. For instance, the approved aid that the U.S. provided to reconstruct the health care as well as education sectors in Iraq provided the framework for the establishment of stable segments in the regions severely affected by war and conflict. As with other refugees from Syria in Lebanon, aid has not only helped those in need but also benefited the communities and empowered them. By directing the resources to facilitate decisive areas such as health, education, and facilities, the U.S. can enhance conditions supporting peace and economic growth, minimizing the degree of conflict.
Critical Analysis
To critical analysis, while the initial focus of the U.S. intervention in Iraq was on security and stability, the exercise revealed certain aspects of strategic misperception and organizational blind spots that persist today. The U.S. overestimated the unsophisticated nature of Iraq. It adopted a military-centred approach focused solely on direct control, thus underestimating the demanding social, political, and cultural processes that could not be adjusted through regime change. The physical elimination of Hussein was proved to be strategic. However, where there was no master plan for handling Iraq right from the aftermath of the invasion up to after the displacement of Hussein, this created developmental instability as well as internal conflict wherein insurgent groups were facilitated, thus negating the whole idea of stability in the region. This, many in the region perceived as an effort to gain control of the large oil reserves of Iraq and to install a friendly government as per the American’s wish, created much resentment against Americans in Iraq, not to mention the rest of the Middle East, thus eradicating the credibility of America amongst friends and foes alike. Moreover, the U.S. unintentionally propped up regional enemies: Iran, a longstanding foe of the United States, increased its influence in Iraq on the back of forming alliances with factions and delivering Iraq’s political and security architecture, directly opposing American aims. The expansion of the socio-political influence of non-state actors such as ISIS, who exploited the situation to build a strong foothold, deepened the implications of a narrowly militarized approach to failing to address the roots of radicalization and political disorder comprehensively. If only the U.S. had aligned the military action with steady diplomatic and economic support, extensive discussion and willingness to address issues with governance in the region, the results could have been better. Although efforts to introduce these elements were made afterwards, such an approach concerning the system’s reformation indeed contributed to establishing further years of instability. This experience should be viewed as significant for the need for the concept of a more sophisticated, regionally oriented and focused approach based on sustainable peace, economic development, and mutually respectful relations with Middle Eastern countries rather than pursuing short-term goals, which is Carol Savitz’s major conclusion regarding the analyzed period and lessons for future U.S. policies in the Middle East.
Conclusion
To conclude, the history of U.S. intervention in Iraq is an essential story of the piecemeal nature of U.S. foreign policy and intervention, highlighting the challenge of leading in the regional order to achieve a strategy. From the outset, the proffered intentions for intervention to bring Iraq stability, security and democracy have been undermined by the outcomes of an intervention performed in the exemplary style of militarized intervention, meaning an intervention without an appreciation of local conditions. Instead, the U.S. failed to meet the core objectives of securing energy resources and remaking the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East, which ended up with prolonged instability, increased empowerment of adverse regional actors and diminished credibility abroad. Moving ahead, U.S. policy to the Middle East should emphasize diplomacy, economic cooperation and local governance support to help establish long-term stability. To have a sustainable presence in the Middle East through peaceful relations, a balanced approach that respects the region’s unique socio-political landscape and pursues mutually beneficial partnerships will be the hallmark. The lessons from Iraq underscore the need for a strategy that can withstand short-term gains and embraces a commitment to respectful and constructive engagement with Middle Eastern nations instead.
CSS Solved Past Papers’ Essays
Looking for the last ten years of CSS and PMS Solved Essays and want to know how Sir Kazim’s students write and score the highest marks in the essays’ papers? Then, click on the CSS Solved Essays to start reading them.
CSS Solved Essays
CSS Solved General Science & Ability Past Papers
Want to read the last ten years’ General Science & Ability Solved Past Papers to learn how to attempt them and to score high? Let’s click on the link below to read them all freely. All past papers have been solved by Pakistan’s top CSS GSA coach having the highest score of their students.
General Science & Abilit
