BUSH'S LAST CHANCE

US foreign policy differs from the European one for its attitude to the settlement of a whole number of global problems. As a rule, it is based on two simple questions: "Who, if not us?" and "When, if not now?" If we take into account that US President George Bush comes from a family of cowboys, it is no surprise that he has spent his two presidential terms trying to solve geopolitical problems facing the USA.

Such an approach to important geopolitical problems has both positive and negative aspects. Unlike the Europeans who are used to thinking twice before doing something, the Americans are never late. Of course, this is a positive thing in US foreign policy. However, having identified their goal, the Americans often ignore minor details. It is exactly details that often have a decisive effect on the end result. As a consequence, the USA often ends up in a situation that is reflected in the proverb "haste makes waste".

US President George Bush has ended up exactly in this situation. He has spent several years trying to solve the issue of expanding NATO, ousting Russia from Europe and securing complete US control over the main sources and routes of energy transportation. He has also had to smooth over the negative consequences of Europe's aspiration to excessive independence (of course, from the USA) and to solve the problem of American-style democratic reforms in the world.

For the sake of fairness, it must be noted that the US president has managed to do a lot. In order to completely oust Russia from the regions of the Baltic, Black and Caspian seas, he only has to involve Ukraine, Moldova and South Caucasus countries in NATO, because in essence, the new members of NATO are the "fifth column" of the United States in Europe. Afghanistan and Iraq have already been occupied, and he only has the Iran problem to solve. In that case, the main sources of energy and their transportation routes bypassing Russia will be totally controlled by the USA. Moreover, in this way the USA is trying to restrict Europe's economic intervention in Asian countries.

However, it is exactly here that those same details failed Bush. The Kosovo problem proved to be a time bomb. Any solution to this problem, especially on the basis of the US position on the province's independence, will aggravate both the situation in Europe and relations with Russia.

It proved to be much easier to occupy Afghanistan and Iraq than to ensure stability in these countries. In fact, the US-led coalition has its hands tied up. Washington cannot even withdraw its troops from Iraq because this will lead to a disaster not just for this country, but also for US geopolitical interests. In essence, this would be tantamount to acknowledging the complete setback of Washington's policy in the Middle East, which would have negative geopolitical and long-term consequences and put an end to the United States' dominant position in the world. For this reason, we can assume that all statements by the leaders of the Democratic Party about the need to withdraw troops from Iraq are just another populist campaign trick.

For this reason, on the whole, Bush's long-term policy was correct. He just proved to be a very bad dancer though he was quite good at dancing the twist in Tbilisi. However, the time is different now. The twist is no longer in fashion. The use of the Kurdish factor to counter-balance the Arab, Turkish and Persian factors unites the forces and countries that have diametrically opposed geopolitical interests.

As a result, we see the natural strengthening of anti-American and anti-Western sentiments in the whole Middle East.

Under these conditions, Bush is unable to accomplish his historical mission, i.e. to solve the Iranian issue and place the whole of the Middle East under the military and political control of the United States. If we use chess terminology, he ended up in a zugzwang where every next move will worsen his position on the chessboard. Any action by Washington in this direction, at least today, will lead to the total unification of the Muslim world, including the forces and countries that have diametrically opposed interests. This will lead to the complete isolation of the USA.

In order to accomplish this historical mission, it is necessary to achieve a positive impulse, i.e. at least to create a veneer of the settlement of one of the most serious conflicts in the Middle East. This would split the Muslim world and allow the USA to set up a new anti-Iranian coalition from the same Muslim countries. This factor could be the settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

It is necessary to bear in mind that many Arab countries, Iran and partly Turkey are involuntary allies today though they have diametrically opposed interests.

The irony of the fate is that, being a "foreign body", i.e. an ethnic minority in the region, Persian Iran is the only state that is interested not just in maintaining instability in the Middle East, but also in aggravating the already existing conflicts. Only in this case, will Tehran be able to claim the role of a regional superpower, using some religious and general anti-Western and anti-American sentiments.

However, though there are no national-identification instruments within this or that state in the Middle East, there is pan-Arab nationalism which totally denies the presence and participation of the Persian factor in solving regional problems.

It is exactly this factor that the USA is trying to use in solving the Arab-Israeli conflict. 

For example, George Bush, who recently made a tour of the Middle East, said while summarizing the results of his meetings with the Palestinian and Israeli leaders that he believes in the possibility of signing an Arab-Israeli peace agreement before the end of his presidential term (January 2009). However, in order to achieve this goal, Israel and Palestinians will have to make "painful political decisions". "It is time to make a difficult choice," the president said. He also stressed that both sides should honour their "roadmap" obligations.

Bush confirmed that the USA bears responsibility for the security of Israel, but said that it is unacceptable to maintain the status quo any more and it is necessary to create a Palestinian state. He also called on Arab countries to "extend their hand to Israel" and make their own contribution to the establishment of peace in the region.

At the same time, the US president clearly said that Iran is a threat to peace not just in the Middle East, but also in the whole world. "This country, like no other country, poses a serious threat to the Middle East. They are trying to develop nuclear weapons. This is extremely dangerous. A country that is capable of enriching uranium for peaceful purposes can also do so for military purposes. We will continue doing everything in our power to prevent this danger," he said.

According to Bush, Tehran has suspended its military nuclear programme, but may resume it at any moment. "Intelligence information shows that the Iranian threat should be taken seriously. The actions of the Iranian government have a negative impact on the Iranian people," Bush said.

The Israeli prime minister agreed with him. We have to do everything possible to eliminate any threat from Iran.

In response, the leader of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmud Abbas, not only criticized the actions of the Israeli army on the territory of the PNA, but also reminded them that Iran, a country that supports Hamas, creates obstacles to the peace process.

For his part, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said that both the Israelis and Palestinians are "quite serious" about the project "two states for two peoples" on the basis of the "roadmap" - a peaceful settlement plan proposed by the USA. At the same time, the Israeli prime minister assured the US president of his readiness for "difficult compromises".

Thus, President Bush clearly outlined the only choice that the conflicting sides have. First, for Arabs there is no alternative to peace with Israel because the USA guarantees the existence of this state.

Second, for Israel there is no alternative to the establishment of a Palestinian state because you cannot live in a hostile 100 million-strong environment forever, which the Israelis themselves understand full well.

Third, the peace agreement should be signed before Bush's presidential term expires.

And finally, fourth, the Arabs and Israelis can successfully cooperate in the fight against their "common enemy", i.e. Iran.

To be honest, such a situation also suits the Arab countries visited by the US president during his tour of the Middle East - Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. If we add Jordan, that could form the core of the future anti-Iranian coalition?

Moreover, we have to point out that, trying to secure the signing of a Palestinian-Israeli peace agreement before the expiry of his presidential term, Bush is actually trying "to save his own skin". The matter is not just that Bush's foreign policy mistakes deal a serious blow to the positions of Republican candidates in the forthcoming presidential elections. The matter is about the "dynasty interests" of the Bush family who are planning to return to the White House. For this reason, George Bush cannot leave the White House as the worst president in US history, the former US secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, says…