Special Report
The US policy in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf has a lengthy background, given various objectives of the US interest in the region. The detailed chronology of the US here will start from the First World War - 1914-1918 and cover up to the latest incident in the Middle East, which started with the Hamas attack on Israel on 7th October 2023. The area has been highly vulnerable to external world powers' political and military maneuvers due to the standard political conjuncture based on the transformations throughout the region's political history. Therefore, it would not be misleading to highlight the sharp shifts in the regional actors' policies, as they have had a substantial impact on one another.
The main objectives of the United States in the Middle East region are to prevent the region from being dominated by any external or internal state actor, to defend Israel, to reduce the terrorist threat emanating from the region, and to maintain close relations with its strategic partners in the region in order to maintain the security of the sea lanes and to meet the energy needs of the United States - although the validity of the claim that the United States is no longer dependent on the region's vast oil and natural gas reserves is disputed. [1]
From WWI to WWII, the US followed the Open-Door principle, mainly focusing on protecting US interests in Syria and Palestine while deepening bilateral relations to establish oil treaties and partnerships in a geography where Britain and France were more dominant. In 1928, The Red Line Agreement was signed with America and by partners in the Turkish Petroleum Company (British and French, though the firm was formed as a joint venture between Royal Dutch/Shell Deutsche Bank and the Turkish National Bank) concerning the oil resources within the territories that formerly comprised the Ottoman Empire within the Middle East. [2] The majority of the region's future major oil-producing regions were included in the Red Line, except for Kuwait and Iran. After a short period, the United States obtained exploration rights in Bahrain in 1930, and its exclusive concession in Saudi Arabia in 1933 significantly expanded in 1939. [3]
American involvement in the region increased during WWII, and the US established only supply missions in North Africa and Iran. Strained relations between the US and Britain over the region caused America to increase its efforts to build closer ties with the region's countries, mainly Saudi Arabia. As soon as the end of 1945, although Roosevelt was keener to follow a neutral policy on the Palestine question, the Truman administration introduced the Harrison Report that determined the conditions of the displaced persons camps in post-WWII Europe. The report was also meant to enforce British coordination with the United States on the Palestine question. However, the prevailing Soviet influence in the region over Greece, Turkey, and Iran was apparent more than ever, and the term Iron Curtain used by Churchill in a public speech was a harbinger of the order into which the world was drifting. The Truman Doctrine of 1947 was based on the containment policy promising American military and economic assistance to Greece and Turkey on the eve of the Cold War, which lasted more than 40 years.
In the era of the Cold War, the United States developed a foreign policy perspective that perceived the Soviet Union as an assertive and expansive force driven by the goal of spreading communism globally. This perspective was notably shaped by the crises involving Turkey and the Soviet Union, centered on territorial rights in Turkey's Eastern Anatolian region and the Soviet demand for control of the straits. Additionally, tensions with Iran over the Azerbaijani province contributed to this perception. [4]
During the Mohammad Reza Pahlavi period in Iran, the U.S. increased its effectiveness in the country; the first military agreements between the two countries were signed in 1947, the U.S. naval presence was transformed into the U.S. Sixth Fleet in 1948, and the U.S. Middle East force was permanently stationed in the Persian Gulf. While in Palestine, the Truman administration left following the British lead and supported the partition of the land between Jewish and Arab states, and immediately afterward, in 1948, the U.S. granted de facto recognition of the State of Israel.
By the first half of 1950, the region, nationalist movements were on the rise in the region; on the one hand, the supporters of Mossadegh had formed the national front, and their main opposition was based on the fact that the Iranian oil industry was controlled by the British-dominated AIOC- Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. [5] The Prime Ministry period of Mossadegh (51-53), ended with the 1953 coup d'état suppression of a national uprising against the royal autocracy. Shah took strict political measures to prevent the revival of the organized movement in the country and established the SAVAK internal security organization with the support of Israel and the United States to eliminate the Tudeh party. [6] But anti-Americanism in Iran persisted long after the overthrow of Mossadegh.
At that very moment, in Egypt, Free Officer's leader, Gamal Abdel Nasser, led the Egyptian Revolution of 1952, and Arab nationalism rose and reached its peak with Nasserism. Nasserism promoted a social order rooted in Pan-Arabism with an anti-imperialist stance. Nasser was to become one of the most influential leaders the Arab world has ever seen, mainly because of his socialist-inspired reform movements, including land reforms, and his nationalization of foreign companies in the country. Because of this, Nasserism came to be recognized as the founding of Arab Socialism, an ideology that affected not only Egypt but also other Arab nations. [7]
When the U.S. proposed the establishment of the Middle East Defence Organization (MEDO) in 1950, Egypt declined to participate. Soon after, Nasser's nationalization of the Suez Canal in 1956 marked a significant political triumph. Consequently, Soviet-Egyptian relations strengthened. In response to the perceived Soviet threat in the region, the U.S. introduced the Eisenhower Doctrine in 1957, offering economic and military aid to nations resisting communism. This move reinforced the pro-Western bloc established by the Baghdad Pact in 1955, an extension of MEDO signed by Great Britain, Turkey, Pakistan, Iran, and Iraq. Simultaneously, events in 1958, such as the formation of the United Arab Republic, the Iraqi revolution, and civil unrest in Lebanon, heightened regional instability.
In the 1960s, the United States experienced a reduced requirement for bases in the Middle East, having the capability to strike its objectives from the Indian Ocean using missile-firing marines. In addition, in the Yemeni war, the U.S. mediated between Egypt and Saudi Arabia and strengthened its relations with Saudi Arabia. During the short presidency of Kennedy (1961-1963), ties between Israel and the U.S. were strengthened, and the U.S. approved the sale of the first major American weapons system to Israel. The Johnson administration (1963–1967) also pursued the same course of action, but Egypt, Syria, and Iraq severed diplomatic ties with the U.S. as a result of his ultimate backing of Israel during the 1967 Six-Day War that originated from the heightened tension over the Straits of Tiran between Israel and Egypt. [8]
The Six-Day War brought about significant changes and consequences, as follows: Israel annexed East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights, resulting in the creation of a 1.5 million substantial Arab population; Egypt's military presence was decisively undermined and became fully aligned with the Soviet Union; the Palestinian guerrilla movement intensified its activities and gave rise to new military and political groups; and, above all, Nasser suffered a severe blow and the Arab community descended into despair. [9]
While the Nixon administration entered office in the U.S. in 1969, the 1967 War had left serious problems behind, Soviet influence was increasing in the region, and the Nixon administration was focused more on the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through two-power talks with the USSR and four power talks with the USSR, Britain, and France. While the War of Attrition between Israel and Egypt stretched more, the American Secretary of the State William Rogers came up with a peace plan- Rogers Plan that was based on the renewal of the Israeli-Egyptian ceasefire and a just solution to the post-1967 refugee problem for a lasting peace. [10]
What then transpired in the Middle East from 1967 till the 1980s? While Yemen was tired of being a sphere of 5 years of ongoing civil war stretched by the conflict between Egypt and Saudi Arabia, they decided to end it in 1967. Yemen is strategically significant due to its location at the entrance to the Red Sea and close to vital shipping channels. Oil tankers heading towards Europe and the Suez Canal depend on the Strait of Mandeb, a narrow waterway along Yemen's coastline.
In 1966, there was a coup in Iraq and Iraq, fearing that the Kurdish uprising would take over the oil-rich northern provinces. Meanwhile, moderate governments in Libya, Sudan, and Somalia were overthrown by a military coup. Kaddafi emerged as a pioneer of militant Arab nationalism, and Nasser felt great sympathy for this leader who fought against imperialism. [11]
After the 1967 war, Lebanon had to cope with the Palestinian guerrilla movement, which had shrunk in its geography, with most of the Palestinian population shifting to Lebanon and Jordan after the war. With the conflict in Lebanon, the center of the movement moved to Jordan. However, the PFLP's (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine) increasing hostage actions caused significant devastation in Jordan's history, which would go on as Black September or the Jordanian Civil War of 1970-1971. [12]
During this time, two pivotal events unfolded—the formation of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in 1954 and the establishment of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) in 1960. OPEC comprises twelve member states presently contributing 30% of global oil production, and AIPAC has emerged as an influential player shaping American foreign affairs.
Nonetheless, the occurrence poised to prominently characterize the period and region is the Iranian Revolution of 1979. This revolution rendered the monarchical regime in Iran, previously backed by the U.S., incapable of suppressing a growing resistance, even in the face of a development strategy emphasizing land reform and democratic reforms.
As the 1970s concluded, propelled by the Iranian revolution, anti-Western sentiments surged in the Middle East, Islamic extremist movements gained traction, and the dynamics of America's ties with its pro-Western partner, Iran, underwent a significant shift. The USSR's invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 heightened tensions with the United States, and Saddam Hussein seized the opportunity presented by Iran's vulnerability to launch an invasion shortly after assuming power. The Iran-Iraq war endured for eight years, and the political and military backing Israel received from Washington proved insufficient to install a sense of security in the region.
In 1981, Israel initially declared its intention to incorporate the Golan Heights. Subsequently, in 1982, following the bombing of Palestinian bases in Beirut and the subsequent killing of an Israeli diplomat in Paris, Israel opted to initiate a large-scale assault on Lebanon. The sectarian division within Lebanon's governance system fuelled a 15-year civil war that persisted until 1990, exacerbated by the involvement of Palestinians in the national movement. Throughout this time, the United States persistently supplied weaponry to Israel, with no Arab nation providing military assistance to Syria or the Palestinians engaged in the conflict in Lebanon. Additionally, the infamous Sabra and Shatila massacre unfolded during this period.
"While the Reagan administration aimed to establish an international consensus against the USSR, Middle Eastern governments were more concerned about Israel, internal conflicts, or uprisings than a potential Soviet invasion. The U.S. administration struggled to address fundamentalism in the Middle East, whether stemming from Muslim, Christian, or Jewish communities." [13] The killing of Anwar Sadat, the collapse of the Camp David peace negotiations, and, ultimately, the September 11 attacks in 2001 would signify the onset of a new era in the Middle East.
However, during the 1990s, a distinct alarm sounded for America and the West in the Middle East. Saddam Hussein, who assumed control of Iraq in 1968, emerged as an indomitable leader and a significant security concern for regional interests. This was underscored by Saddam's annexation of Kuwait in 1990, leading to the Gulf War and initiating a transformative 20-year period in the region where the most significant threat disappeared with the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. Worried about Saddam's dominance in the Persian Gulf, the USA under George H. W. Bush did not delay in intervening against the regime he had supported for years; the U.S. started Operation Desert Shield along with the coalition of thirty-five nations to liberate Kuwait. The U.S. had been becoming an absolute superpower in the Middle East. Additionally, with the deployment of a formal military force, Kurdish pilgrims retreated to the mountains, prompting two million Kurds to embark on a large-scale migration towards the Turkish and Iranian borders, resulting in the loss of 20,000 lives, predominantly infants, children, and the elderly, and almost 400,000 Palestinians living in Kuwait left Kuwait with the war. The Palestinian population in Jordan had become a majority.
On the other side, The Palestinian uprising that escalated in the late eighties started being portrayed by Islamic movements as an alternative to the PLO, influenced by the Iranian revolution in the region, Hamas- ḥarakaẗ ʾal-muqāwma ʾal-ʾislāmiyya was founded in 1987. The PLO, fatigued by its support for Iraq in the Gulf War and with Arafat leading the organization, concerned about the growing influence of Hamas, initiated Oslo negotiations with Israel in 1993, mediated by the Clinton administration. However, neither the Oslo Accords nor Camp David were successful initiatives. Oslo records failed to tackle core issues like the right of Palestinian refugees to return to Israel, the status of East Jerusalem, or the ongoing expansion of Israeli settlements in the territories.
The September 11 attacks occurred during the George W. Bush administration, prompting the swift implementation of the War on Terror policy. With United Nations approval and NATO support, Afghanistan was invaded in the same year, followed by the invasion of Iraq in 2003 on the pretext of harboring weapons of mass destruction under the promise of establishing democracy. George W. Bush, unlike his father, lacked political experience. His administration, guided by neo-conservative policies, decided to invade Iraq after the 9/11 attacks. Contrary to the intended goals of promoting democracy in Iraq and fostering regional prosperity, the intervention's economic, political, and sociological repercussions have severely impacted the region and the global landscape.
On one side, the second intifada commenced with Sharon's visit to Haram al-Sharif, and the divergence between Hamas and the PLO started accelerating. Conversely, the unsuccessful invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq contributed to the empowerment of Iranian-supported militias in those regions, especially Hezbollah in Lebanon. In such a conjuncture in the early 2000s, the utilization of hard power and the absence of public backing created conditions for Obama's ascent to power. His primary concerns encompassed nuclear disarmament, securing the oil trade, combating terrorism, safeguarding Israel, and advancing the cause of democratization.
During the Obama administration (2009-2017), the U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East underwent significant transformation. Hard and soft powers had been influencing the U.S. policy in the region. On one side of 9/11, the attack prompted the U.S. to declare war on terrorist groups and nations perceived as harboring them. Key focal points, such as Iraq and Afghanistan, were deemed crucial in combatting anti-American factions like Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. The elimination of Osama Bin Laden underscored the deployment of the U.S. hard powers in the Middle East. On the soft power side, Washington officials observed that within 24 months of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda had been significantly weakened, reduced to a mere propaganda arm, and strategically defeated. In 2002, the U.S. backed the election of Hamid Karzai as the first democratically elected leader of the nation. Notably, Obama declared his intention to pivot Washington's foreign policy efforts from the Middle East to Asia. [14]
However, by 2010, the picture of the Middle East was different than what the U.S. envisaged for the region; it was marked by high unemployment rates, aging dictatorships, and massive corruption, but also tired of civil wars and interventions. The rapid population growth, coupled with the inadequacy of political and economic progress in many Arab states, was exacerbated by the incompetence of ruling elites, contributing to their eventual downfall. The uprisings started in Tunisia and continued in Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, Morocco, and Jordan. Nevertheless, the most unforeseen events unfolded in Syria, governed by a sectarian ruling elite aligned with Iran and strategically positioned. Initial protests started in March 2011 in provincial towns, gradually spreading to major urban centers. The regime's harsh response led to armed opposition, and by the mid-2011, army defectors organized the Free Syrian Army. By the end of 2011, Syria plunged into an entrenched civil war, with the Alawite minority backing President Bashar al-Assad and the Sunni majority supporting rebels. Both factions received support from external actors- Russia aided the regime, while Saudi Arabia supported the rebel groups. [15]
However, in a short time, the Syrian Civil War soon turned into a proxy war. In 2012, Iran sent hundreds of officers to the field, and oil-rich Arab countries provided arms and money to the rebel groups. One year after the Obama administration authorized the CIA to train rebel groups, the war was transformed with the emergence of ISIS. ISIS was not only fighting against the rebel groups but also against the Kurds. Simultaneously, Turkey launched a military operation against Kurdish groups in Iraq and southern Turkey. Russia decided to send its military craft and became de facto involved in the war a month later.
By 2014, two significant events had transpired. The U.S. Congress approved the export of U.S. oil in December 2015, and the shale oil revolution positioned the U.S. as the world's leading crude oil producer in 2014. The authorization for American oil exports had repercussions for Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Russia, all involved in the Syrian conflict.
In 2015, Russia entered the conflict by conducting air strikes on Islamic State positions in Syria and targeting Assad's adversaries. The primary objectives of the Russian airstrikes were to preserve the Syrian regime, a Russian ally, display Russia's military and diplomatic capabilities to Turkey, a rival, and maintain access to the Russian military base in Tartus, situated there for decades and offering access to the Mediterranean Sea. In 2016, the Russian Air Force initiated a withdrawal. [16]
Upon Trump's ascent to power in 2017, while initially intending to avoid involvement in the Syrian matter, the White House initiated missile strikes on a Syrian airbase, citing the alleged use of chemical weapons and marking its first direct engagement in the conflict. His agenda was primarily based on isolating Iran while favoring Saudi Arabia and Israel in the region. Iran stood as a prominent focal point for the administration. The 2017 National Security Strategy emphasized it seventeen times and underscored preventing any power hostile to the United States from gaining predominance in the region as a crucial priority. This was a clear allusion to Tehran. However, the administration faced challenges in formulating a practical policy following its withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in May 2018. Trump had been a vocal critic of the deal, contending that it failed to address other concerning facets of Iranian foreign policy, such as its regional hegemonic ambitions and backing of radical groups like Hezbollah.
During this period, Israel, perceiving Tehran as a threat to its existence, witnessed a heightened improvement in its ties with the United States, its closest ally. The relocation of the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem by Trump and the announcement to shut down the Palestinian diplomatic mission in Washington were notable actions. Additionally, the administration terminated all funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine refugees and expressed intentions to decrease the number of Palestinians granted refugee status significantly. Conversely, ties with Turkey and Egypt became tense. The Trump administration expressed significant apprehension about Cairo's involvement in North Korean arms sales, temporarily withholding specific funding before eventually releasing it.
Moreover, Trump's conflict with Erdoğan arose at an inconvenient time. Turkey held considerable influence in Syria, and the U.S. military relied on the Incirlik Air Base for conducting air strikes against the Islamic State. Furthermore, the administration faced challenges in developing a cohesive strategy concerning the Syrian civil war. [17] In addition, it should not be forgotten that the two developments that marked this period and led to a change in American foreign policy were the disappearance of America's dependence on the region's oil resources and the emergence of China and North Korea as new challenges.
Immediately after Biden took office in 2021, Crimea tensions between Russia and Ukraine escalated. Control of Crimea was important for Russia, giving Moscow constant access to the naval base in Sevastopol, home to Russia's Black Sea Fleet. Then, the announcement that Ukraine could potentially become a NATO member after the 2021 Brussels Summit led to Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. In response, Biden signed the Ukrainian Democracy Defence Lending and Leasing Act of 2022, which approved a $40 billion aid package for Ukraine.
The United States is particularly concerned about the increasingly challenging Russia-China partnership. Since the beginning of the war, this concern has been heightened by the fact that China and Russia have intensified their efforts to promote the BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, multilateral organizations led by them to the exclusion of the West. These groupings are essential building blocks for their vision of a post-Western multilateral global order. Six countries - Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates - will join BRICS in 2024, as announced at this year's BRICS summit in Johannesburg last week (held without Putin's participation); nineteen countries have applied for membership. Some prospective members and applicants have close ties with the United States, and the impact of joining BRICS on these relations remains unclear.
As the conflict between Ukraine and Russia continues, Biden, unlike Trump, has sought to rebuild Middle East relations along the strategic trajectory set by Obama. Trump's decision led to abandoning the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Simultaneously, amid escalating tensions with Iran, the United States reiterated its commitment to support Israel, its primary ally in the region.
After a two-year pause, Biden resumed U.S. aid to the Palestinians. During the Negev Summit in March 2022, Trump severed U.S. ties with the Palestinians and reaffirmed support for a negotiated two-state solution. However, Hamas' surprise attack on Israel in October 2023 shocked the region, killing more than 1,200 Israelis and taking more than two hundred hostages.
The growing scale of the ground offensive points to the potential for a wider regional conflict. As the occupation advances into the southern Gaza strip, millions of Palestinians could be stranded on the border with Egypt, where various Islamist groups are already present. Alternatively, given the potential for the conflict to expand, another scenario involves the relocation of some three million Palestinians living in the West Bank to Jordan, which is already the second-largest host of refugees and poses a risk to both Jordan and Saudi Arabia.
Israel may also find itself battling various Iranian-backed militias on multiple fronts. It faces threats from the Houthis in northwestern Yemen, as well as potential actions from Syria and Iranian-backed entities such as Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and Popular Resistance Committees (PRC). The Houthi targeting of Eilat is aimed at blocking Israel's trade routes through the Suez Canal and the Red Sea. It poses a threat not only to Israel but also to the United States by restricting the economic corridor linking India, the Middle East, and Europe, which was presented at the G20 summit as a counter agenda to China's Belt and Road Initiative.
Continued attacks by the Iranian-backed Houthis could provoke the U.S. to threaten the Strait of Hormuz. U.S. aircraft carrier strike groups have been redeployed from the Eastern Mediterranean to locations closer to Israel and are in a position close to the Strait of Hormuz.
Israel has also gained significant leverage in the region by discovering the Tamar and Leviathan gas fields in Israeli waters, one of the twenty-five largest gas reserves in the world. From 2019, Israel will produce more gas than it consumes. This will make it less dependent on foreign gas and give it the chance to become a significant exporter of natural gas. Thanks to the East Med project, which is planned to run through Israel - southern Cyprus - Greece, and Italy, Israel has the potential to become one of the top fifteen countries in the world regarding natural gas exports. However, potential attacks by Hezbollah could threaten Israel's offshore gas fields. Alternatively, if Hezbollah were to become involved in the conflict, the conflict could escalate into a much larger regional war. If it escalates into a full-scale war, Azerbaijan could take advantage of the power vacuum in Armenia to seize the Sunik region. For its part, Iran will have to manage the geopolitical dynamics very carefully. [18] The U.S. policy of containing the Soviet Union globally has now morphed into containing Russia in Europe, the Black Sea, the South Caucasus, and the Eastern Mediterranean. In the same vein, it should not be forgotten that the United States has also been remarkably busy with China over the issue of Taiwan.
In light of these issues, the Middle East is a region that has always been open to exploitation and aggression. It will continue to be the focus of leaders' ambitions at home and abroad because of its strategic location and abundant natural resources. Despite being the birthplace of scientists, poets, artists, architects, philosophers, and prophets, the Middle East is remembered as the cradle of human civilization. There is a common hope that it will not become its tomb. [19]
[1] (Bolan, 2021)
[2] (Relations, s.d.)
[3] (Sela, The Continuum Political Encyclopedia of the Middle East, 2002)
[4] (Cleveland, 2004)
[5] Ibid
[6] Ibid
[7] Ibid
[8] (Sela, 2002)
[9] (Cleveland, 2004)
[10] (Goldschmidt Jr., 2015)
[11] (Goldschmidt Jr., 2015)
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid
[14] Fang, Q., & Lu, X. (2021). The Transformation of the US Strategy in the Middle East: Retreat after 2011. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211020.234. Pg-656
[15] The reasons for the transformation of the Arab Spring into a civil war in Syria and the ongoing civil war in Syria is a separate issue that needs to be addressed on its own. This issue will be dealt with in detail in a separate section.
[16] Mayeur-Jaouen, C., Dupont, A., Verdeil, C. (2011). Le Moyen-Orient par les textes : 19e - 20e siècles. France: Armand Colin. pg -476
[17] Thompson, J. J. (2018). Trump’s Middle East policy. CSS Analyses in Security Policy, 233. https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000292962
[18] RealLifeLore. (2023, December 9). How the US & Iran Are Preparing to Fight Over Israel [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzSRMzb_2 (RealLifeLore, 2023)jE
[19] (Goldschmidt Jr., 2015)
References:
Bolan, D. C. (2021). Twenty Years After 9/11: Implications for US Policy in the Middle East. Carlisle, PA: US Army War College Press.
Catherine Mayeur-Jaouen, Anne-Laure Dupont, Chantal Verdeil. (2011). Le Moyen-Orient par les textes 19e - 20e siècles. France: Armand Colin.
Cleveland, W. L. (2004). The Independent Middle East from the End of WW2 to the 1970s. In W. L. Cleveland, A Hİstory of the Modern Middle East (pp. 303-308). Westview Press.
Goldschmidt Jr., A. (2015). A Concise History of the Middle East. Routledge. Retrieved 1 3, 2024
Qifeng Fang, Xiaocheng Lu. (2021). The Transformation of the US strategy in the Middle East: Retreat after 2011. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 656-657.
RealLifeLore. (2023, December 9). How the US & Iran Are Preparing to Fight Over Israel. Retrieved from Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzSRMzb_2jE
Relations, M. i. (n.d.). Milestones: 1921-1936. Retrieved from Office of The Historian: https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/red-line
Sela, A. (Ed.). (2002). The Continuum Political Encyclopedia of the Middle East. Continuum. Retrieved 12 27, 2023
Thompson, J. (2018). Trump's Middle East Policy. CSS Analyses in Security Policy, 1-4.
Voll, J. O. (1980). Arthur Goldschmidt Jr. A Concise History of the Middle East. Boulder, Col.: Westview Press, 1979. 410 pp., bibliography, glossary, index. Paper. Middle East Studies Association Bulletin, 14(1), 66-68. Retrieved 1 3, 2024, from https://cambridge.org/core/journals/review-of-middle-east-studies/article/div-classtitlegoldschmidtarthurjra-concise-history-of-the-middle-east-boulder-col-westview-press-1979-410-pp-bibliography-glossary-index-paperdiv/59260ed8eda03407baf94aea604ff0c9
Comments