It would be no surprise if the Middle East continued to be at the heart of American foreign policy even with Democratic majority rule in both the White House and Congress. Barack Obama, with a great financial crisis at home, is expected to confront numerous political problems in the Middle East more than any other place in the world. Beside the rising anti-American sentiments that are sweeping the Middle Eastern region, he inherits two wars which have yet to be won. However, some people in the Middle East believe that Obama is going to pursue a different foreign policy regarding Middle Eastern issues. Others adhere to the idea that no big difference is expected. Between these two extreme opinions, there is much room for speculation. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that Obama's foreign policy on Iraq will not be significantly different from that of the Bush administration. Until the last minute in office, President Bush is going to fabricate a long-term presence strategy that will allow a number of US troops to stay there for a very long time on permanent military bases. The current resurgence of suicide attacks in Baghdad and elsewhere is a reminder to the president-elect that the situation there may determine whether or not troops ought to be brought home. But if Obama retreats from his troops-back-home promises to voters, he will undermine his legacy as an anti-war icon and will, ultimately, lose their confidence. The situation in Iraq is inextricably linked to that of Iran. Since the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2001, the United States has repeatedly said that Iran is waging a proxy war against it by arming Shiite militias affiliated with Tehran. Ever since the election of Ahmadinejad as Iran's president in 2005, hatred and mistrust have shaped relations between the two countries. Several military incidents came close to resulting in large-scale military confrontation. In January 2007, US forces raided the Iranian Consulate in Irbil and arrested five of its staff. The incident sparked anger among Iranians who, in retaliation, captured 15 British soldiers alleged to have been in Iranian territorial waters. However, the United States and Iran have been involved in indirect negotiations to resolve the controversial Iranian nuclear program which the United States feels is a precursor to a more ambitious project that would enable Iran to become the next nuclear power, something that would not be acceptable to either the United States or Israel, its closest ally in the region. Despite Iran's and the IAEA's numerous assurances that it is much too premature for Iran to claim developing a nuclear bomb, the United States is pressing hard for action. On numerous occasions, Americans have said that all options are on the table, including that of a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities, something that could embroil the entire oil-rich Gulf region in a state of war, which would have a devastating impact on the whole world. What is clear now is that Israel is going to attempt to influence the Democratic administration to take military action to stop Iran from gaining nuclear technology. The Israeli pressure for military action against Iran will be intensified once hardliners in the Likud Party assume power in the next Israeli elections expected within months. Barack Obama said that he would embrace a different approach to solve the Iranian nuclear problem. He promised to work collaboratively with his European allies to open channels of dialogue with Iran. Further, he said he would consider toughening sanctions and mounting international pressure to prevent Iran from obtaining weapons of mass destruction. Beside Iraq and Iran, Barack Obama must address two other major Middle Eastern issues: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Syria. During the past eight years, the strategy adopted by the Bush administration involved promises of a future Palestinian State, the isolation of Syria and a much tougher stance regarding the Sudanese government in Khartoum. Regarding the Palestinian issue, Obama is not expected to become involved in applying personal pressure on Israel to negotiate seriously with the Palestinians to end hostilities in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank and to find a way to create an independent Palestinian state. It is also unlikely that Obama and his foreign policy team are going to formulate another road map for peace or continue to encourage partners to go to the negotiating table. In January 2002, President Bush earmarked Syria as a member of the axis-of-evil club. He charged Syria alongside Iran and North Korea with sponsoring “terrorist” groups with the intent to pursue the production of weapons of mass destruction, allegations that have long been dismissed by the three countries. During Bush's presidency, the United States has pressed hard for isolating Syria. The US-Syrian relationship deteriorated sharply after the US-led invasion of Iraq. The United States accused Syria of allowing hundreds of foreign fighters to cross Iraqi borders and target coalition troops there. It also accused Syria of funding and harboring militant groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah. The Republican administration in the White House worked hard to pass the Syrian Accountability Act, toughened sanctions and overtly facilitated an Israeli air strike against an alleged Syrian reactor. On the diplomatic front, the United States promised to support Syrian opposition movements. However, everyone expects things to be different with Barack Obama. Obama has repeatedly said that he would go the extra mile in diplomacy regarding Syria and Iran. This means that he would engage in direct negotiations with Syria on matters such as the latter's alliance with Iran and the role Syria can play in the Middle East peace process. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's trip to Syria in April 2007 reflects the Democrats' commitment to open channels of dialogue with a country previously shunned by Bush as a sponsor of terrorism. Many analysts believe that Barack Obama and his foreign-policy team are going to make active contributions in order to reach a final solution to the conflict. A graduate of Harvard Law School, Barack Obama has numerous political talents for dealing with the issues at hand. Without knowing who will be in his administration, it is hard to imagine the general framework of his policy in the Middle East. However, many people in the region believe that it will, even in the worst-case scenario, be better than Bush's. __
