American Positions on Arms Proliferation Issues in the Middle East

Abstract

This research analyzes United States' positions regarding armament issues in the Middle East, focusing on three distinct case studies: Israel, Iraq, and Syria. The study highlights that U.S. foreign policy is predicated upon the principle of ensuring absolute Israeli military superiority, providing substantial technical and financial assistance to advance its weaponry while maintaining a policy of 'strategic ambiguity' regarding its nuclear program. Conversely, Washington employed a strategy of coercive diplomacy toward Iraq, leveraging international sanctions and direct military intervention based on allegations of possessing Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), which culminated in the destruction of Iraq's military capabilities and the dissolution of its army. Regarding Syria, the U.S. prioritized a strategy of isolation and stringent economic sanctions-notably the Caesar Act-alongside pressure for chemical disarmament and the deployment of a media apparatus to delegitimize the political regime. The research concludes that the United States manages the region's armament dossier through double standards aimed at safeguarding its national security and that of its primary ally, disregarding the principles of an equitable strategic balance among regional states.