Here is where the fundamental disconnect lies: it is never enough for these actors due to the inherent instability that comes with authoritarian rule. American foreign policy in the Middle East has been rooted in two foundational pillars: staunch support for select regional autocrats rooted in the “myth of authoritarian stability,” and unwavering support for the state of Israel. The “myth of authoritarian stability” refers to the flawed belief that Middle East autocrats “can protect American interests by imposing political and social order on disempowered citizens.” These authoritarians present a false reality to Washington and the West more generally, presenting themselves as the only viable upholders of “stability” and “order” in the Middle East despite their own policies producing and reinforcing many of the region’s underlying problems, tensions, and grievances. Concerned solely with regime preservation and power projection (often used as a mechanism to buttress the former), the authoritarian governments in the Middle East are responsible for the region’s political, economic, and social underdevelopment. This is because they have constructed and built upon political and economic structures designed solely to further the interests of a narrow elite. This is why they want a formal treaty, which would require the United States by law to uphold their rule by force despite these structures being unsustainable.

However, such staunch support undermines U.S. interests on a broader, global scale as well. The authoritarian regimes in the Middle East share a similar autocratic ethos with Russia and China. This has been evidenced by the various ways in which U.S. regional partners have supported Moscow and Beijing in some of their most nefarious activities, from funding Russian mercenaries abroad to actively supporting China in its persecution of the Uyghurs. Both Saudi Arabia and the UAE have also been accused of directing illegal activities within the United States as well. All of these examples, compounded by the events following the crisis in Ukraine, speak to the desperate need for a fundamental rethink of U.S. Middle East policy. As these examples demonstrate, the more the United States has supported these autocratic actors as they undermine democracy in their own neighborhoods, the more confident they appear in their desire to take that effort globally. Among autocrats, no persons or democracy is off-limits.

Moving Forward

The fallout between the United States and its “partners” in the Middle East following the Russian invasion of Ukraine has highlighted decades of failed American policies in the region. It is imperative for the United States to fundamentally rethink these relationships, recognizing how these actors seek to manipulate the return of great power competition to advance their own strategic imperatives which are not in harmony with America’s own. Many American lawmakers appear to agree: a recent letter signed by thirty members of Congress and addressed to Secretary of State Blinken targeted Washington’s relationship with Saudi Arabia specifically. Signed by the heads of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the House Intelligence Committee, and the House Rules Committee, the letter calls for a “recalibration” of America’s partnership with Saudi Arabia while highlighting how continued support for the Saudi monarchy runs counter to U.S. interests and values.

Moving forward, there are two ongoing developments to watch closely. First, many of these Arab autocracies in the region have been strengthening their ties with Israel, building off of the so-called “Abraham Accords“ that were ratified under the Trump administration. Strong relations with Israel, which is engaging in its own balancing act following the Ukraine crisis, are viewed by these governments as a lucrative mechanism through which to maintain strong ties with Washington. Even as the United States looks elsewhere strategically, Israel will always command attention in US politics due to America’s “special relationship“ with the state. Since the fallout between America and several of these Arab states after the crisis in Ukraine, it has been reported that Israel has been lobbying Washington to improve its ties with Saudi Arabia, redesignate Yemen’s Houthi movement as a terrorist organization at the behest of the UAE, and help push the case for a formal defense treaty with the Gulf states. Whether these efforts will be successful in unknown, but they highlight the extent to which these states are going to push Washington in the direction of their interests.

Second is the possibility of Donald Trump’s return in 2024. The Trump administration emphatically embraced these autocratic actors, and he was the one to advertise for a “NATO+ME” and a more institutionalized commitment to the region. Trump granted these actors numerous concessions while in office (bypassing Congress on arms sales, providing sensitive nuclear technology, etc.). Individuals within the Trump administration maintained close personal ties with many actors and have continued to do so after leaving the White House, evidenced most recently by the news of a Saudi investment fund—led by MbS—investing $2 billion in Jared Kushner’s private equity firm. These regional actors have also been very vocal in their criticisms of Biden, with Saudi state TV recently releasing a satirical video the other day mocking the president. It is very possible that these actors are biding their time, waiting for a more enthusiastic patron to enter the Oval Office.

Jon Hoffman is a Ph.D. candidate at George Mason University specializing in Middle East geopolitics and political Islam. Follow him on Twitter @Hoffman8Jon

Image: Reuters.