France, America and the Middle East

Two countries are either going to win or lose the Middle East for democracy.

France, with its long history of hegemony in the region, ranging from Morocco to Egypt and north toward Syria and Lebanon, is a past master at understanding Middle East politics and personalities.

It should be no surprise to anyone that French President Sarkozy understood immediately what was needed to thwart Qadhaffi’s attempt to re-take the insurgent-held east of Libya. He was the first to call for a no-fly zone, he was the first to recognize the freedom fighters, he was the only member of the European Union to actively attempt to move the EU to action.

While, in times past, France certainly rode over independence movements in Algeria, where the separatists finally won, it has never lost its influence.

This can be seen in one of the first strategies implemented by President Sarkozy after his 2007 election - the Mediterranean Initiative that is organizing a trading zone for North Africa, France and other European nations bordering the Mediterranean Sea. His idea was met with some skepticism, but it is bearing fruit. Most North Africans speak French and France’s culture is more influenced by North Africa culture than any other European country. Sarkozy saw in this the opportunity to pull the region toward economic competitiveness. No other European country could have proposed such a wide-ranging initiative. 

Britain’s David Cameron has quietly followed Sarkozy’ lead vis-à-vis Qadhaffi, but Great Britain has long since forfeited its power in the Middle East to America, the other country that might be able to influence the outcome of the democratic uprisings in the region.

America has grown in influence since World War II, becoming the Gulf region’s best “partner.” The petrol-dollar economies are bound to the United States in a symbiotic relationship that allows America to base its naval fleet in the Gulf and to launch its Iraq-Iran policies with the support of Gulf region leaders by buying Gulf oil to feed the coffers of the region’s ruling families, instead of developing its own large petroleum resources as effectively as might be possible.

But, while France has, for many years, tried to make up for its past errors in North Africa, has educated its young and supported its fledgling democracies, the United States has, instead, taken the approach of covering over the Gulf’s terrible humanitarian record and absolutism in the name of political stability and expediency.  America’s quiet training programs for young Gulf democrats cannot save it from its regime support forever.

Today, America is paying the price for its error in judgment and if we see one day, as we surely will, the democratic wave become the next generation of Gulf region leaders, America will have to scramble to get on board their freedom train.

Short vs. long term vision, expediency vs. statesmanship - these have so far made the difference.

But, with the almost inevitable fall of Benghazi, France will need all its skills to help Libya to continue on its road to democracy, while having to deal with a Qadhaffi who will certainly become even more difficult. That France recognized his enemy within will not help.

As for America, it must decide if the stationing of a navel fleet is more important than its historic support for democracy.