Military-Centric Policies Sideline U.S.

Published: June 24, 2008 at 1:35 PM
Courtesy Of United Press International

WASHINGTON, June 24 (UPI) -- The U.S. foreign policy preference for military solutions to issues such as Iraq and the Middle East has undercut regional objectives, a former ambassador said.

Speaking to the World Affairs Council in Washington, Ambassador Charles W. Freeman Jr. said American foreign policy in the Middle East "has most consistently shown a preference for bluster, boycotts and bombs and a concomitant disdain for diplomacy."

Freeman, who served as U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia from 1989 to 1992, said the refusal by policy officials in Washington to engage adversaries in the Middle East has, as a consequence, emboldened and strengthened their cause.

With Hezbollah and hamas emerging from this policy as major political players in the region, Freeman says many of the U.S. allies in the region see Washington as part of the problem, further sidelining any chance for effective U.S. diplomacy.

The military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan were meant to display the U.S. fighting forces as the most lethal force in the world, but that display came at a cost, the ambassador said.

"Instead, these military campaigns have had the paradoxical effect of demonstrating the strategic limitations of the use of force," he said.

Freeman said that instead of enforcing U.S. hegemony to counter threats to peace, Washington should pursue a dialogue with moderate voices in the Middle East to obtain its objectives.

"Cultivating support in the Islamic world should therefore be a principal focus of U.S. foreign policy," he said.