Sowing Crisis explains how the Cold war and policies taken by the U.S. have spilled over into today and how it has affected modern U.S. relations with the Middle East. Rashid Khalidi feels that wartime and postwar moves in North Africa and Iran, as well as U.S. air bases in Saudi Arabia, Libya, Morocco, and Turkey, marked the beginning of “an American role as the major Middle Eastern Power, a reality that was masked for a time by the power and proximity to the region of the USSR (Page 9).” Khalidi believes that since the end of the cold war the U.S’s interest in the Middle East has grown greater and greater, like the Gulf war of 1991, and the Oslo accords in 1993. He closes the opening chapter by asking how the U.S. got itself into this situation
…show more content…
He believes the strength of the Soviet Union was exaggerated by the U.S. He argues that because there were not any battlefields near the U.S. (Cuba was the closest), the U.S. was never really being challenged by the Soviets, also the Soviets never got any land or air troops anywhere near the U.S. Khalidi also explains how the Soviets were behind in weapon technology and economically were far behind the U.S. Stalin was looking for oil in the Middle East just as the U.S. had been 15 years previous and despite many attempts to seize oil from Iran he never was able to and after putting troops in Iran in 1946 was convinced to withdraw them. This was another example of U.S. dominance over the …show more content…
He believes long unsettles events like the Palestine question, depute over the Israeli borders, and Lebanon’s conflict have been caused by and continue to be an issue because of the spillover of cold war policies that the U.S. and Soviets were using, like supplying weapons and overthrowing Democratically elected leadership for their own profit of oil or other resources.
Khalidis view on Bush’s war on terror is that it causes a fear in the American people that allows them increased spending and funding for war against Al-Qaeda. He believes that the U.S. replaced Communism with Terrorism as the global threat of democracy. This war on terror allowed the U.S. to continue its invasive military movements in the Middle East. This has led to constant combat with Al Qaeda and the Taleban and “Justified” the increased spending on defense as
He believes the strength of the Soviet Union was exaggerated by the U.S. He argues that because there were not any battlefields near the U.S. (Cuba was the closest), the U.S. was never really being challenged by the Soviets, also the Soviets never got any land or air troops anywhere near the U.S. Khalidi also explains how the Soviets were behind in weapon technology and economically were far behind the U.S. Stalin was looking for oil in the Middle East just as the U.S. had been 15 years previous and despite many attempts to seize oil from Iran he never was able to and after putting troops in Iran in 1946 was convinced to withdraw them. This was another example of U.S. dominance over the …show more content…
He believes long unsettles events like the Palestine question, depute over the Israeli borders, and Lebanon’s conflict have been caused by and continue to be an issue because of the spillover of cold war policies that the U.S. and Soviets were using, like supplying weapons and overthrowing Democratically elected leadership for their own profit of oil or other resources.
Khalidis view on Bush’s war on terror is that it causes a fear in the American people that allows them increased spending and funding for war against Al-Qaeda. He believes that the U.S. replaced Communism with Terrorism as the global threat of democracy. This war on terror allowed the U.S. to continue its invasive military movements in the Middle East. This has led to constant combat with Al Qaeda and the Taleban and “Justified” the increased spending on defense as