American objectives in the Middle East - speech given at the May 14, 1996 CENTCOM Southwest Asia Symposium, Tampa, Florida - Transcript

US Department of State Dispatch, June 3, 1996 by Robert H. Pelletreau

It is a particular pleasure to speak at CENTCOM's annual Southwest Asia Symposium. Today, I would like to present an overview of U.S. policies toward the Middle East, taking into account recent developments.

Some in the region diagnose Saddam Hussein's Takriti regime as "dead and still flying," and it is true that the Iraqi armed forces are less imposing today than they were in 1990. But we who bear the responsibility for ensuring security and stability in the Gulf cannot afford to be complacent. Saddam has shown on too many occasions his ruthless unpredictability.

I have taken a special interest in the Central Command and its predecessor, the Rapid Deployment Force, since their creation after the traumatic events of 1979: The fall of the Shah and taking of American hostages in Iran, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and President Carter's declaration of the Gulf as an area of vital U.S. interest. Returning from Bahrain to my first tour in OSD, I participated in our early access negotiations with Oman, Egypt, Somalia, and Kenya. We have come a long way since those early days. Your superb performance in Desert Storm and closely coordinated political-military action since have consistently strengthened our security framework in the Gulf. We are better able to meet the challenge today than at any time in the past. But we are still well below the comfort level.

Enduring U.S. Interests

Close political-military coordination is uniquely important in the Middle East, where security issues have a high profile. There are few if any areas of the world that combine such strategic importance to the United States with such chronic instability. While remarkable progress has been made toward achieving Arab-Israeli peace, serious obstacles remain to be overcome. We must contend with proliferation threats; border disputes; the problems of domestic instability and economic underdevelopment; human rights problems; to say nothing of the challenges of dealing with terrorism, extremism, and fanaticism.

Instability in the Middle East carries profound dangers. It can threaten the security of close friends and partners such as Israel and Egypt and the GCC states. It can threaten our NATO partners in Europe. It can threaten our ability to protect vital oil supplies from the Gulf. It can bring new outbreaks of terrorism to our shores. And it can fuel a race to acquire weapons of mass destruction.

With so many of our interests at stake, the United States cannot remain indifferent to this turbulent sector of the globe. Tempting as it is, we do not have the option of picking up our marbles and going home. We have a major interest not just in preventing the outbreak of conflict and promoting the peaceful resolution of disputes but also in changing the conduct and limiting the means of potential war-makers and in isolating extremists who foment destabilization and conflict. This can be achieved only through active and sustained political engagement backed by American military power and through support from our friends and allies.

Securing a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace between Israel and its neighbors remains a cornerstone of our overall foreign policy. A successful peace process will enhance regional stability, remove a rallying point for fanaticism, and enhance prospects for political and economic development. The United States is engaged on several fronts to advance peace negotiation - an engagement which in turn helps achieve our other objectives in the Middle East. These include preserving Israel's security and well-being, maintaining security arrangements to preserve stability in the Persian Gulf and commercial access to its resources, combating terrorism and weapons proliferation, assisting U.S. business, and promoting political and economic reform.

Let me focus particularly on our two biggest areas of initiative: the peace process and Gulf security.

The Peace Process

Today, more than at any time in recent history, Israel and the Arabs have a historic opportunity to resolve one of the most complicated and intractable conflicts of the 20th century. Over the past 2 1/2 years, the United States has lent its full support to Israel and Arab partners for peace as they take courageous measures to chart a new course for the Middle East.

Our support has been essential because the forces of extremism and terror in the Middle East have worked hard to discredit the peacemakers and undermine their achievements. Particularly in the past few months, the peace process has been subject to very serious challenges - first the suicide, bombings in Israel, then the confrontation in southern Lebanon and northern Israel.

Improving the 1993 Understandings. In both cases, the United States took the initiative to overcome the immediate crisis and refocus attention on peace negotiations. In the case of south Lebanon, Secretary Christopher spent more than a week in the Middle East in April, shuttling seven times between Damascus and Jerusalem to broker a cease-fire. At one point, we had to trade in our Air Force 707 for a C-141 owing to crew rest requirements. At another, we had to enter Lebanon via land convoy across the Bekaa Valley when the air bridge was judged too dangerous.