\n
By <\/b>Shimon Arad*<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n February 4, 2018<\/span><\/p>\n BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 731, February 4, 2018<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Though the recently released US <\/b>National Security Strategy<\/b><\/a> (NSS) is not intended to present a concrete and detailed set of American policies for the Middle East, it does reflect the general logic and goals of the Trump administration for the region \u2013 and indicates a convergence of US and Israeli views on the Middle East. Its substance and implications warrant close attention in Jerusalem.<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n The chapter in the new US National Security Strategy (NSS) document on the Middle East is short but powerful. It marks a significant departure from the Obama legacy and is thus of great interest to both America\u2019s partners and its adversaries in the region.<\/span><\/p>\n The strategy recognizes that instability and an unfavorable balance of regional power in the Middle East adversely affect US interests. According to the NSS, the region\u2019s instability derives from the interaction between Iranian expansion, violent jihadist terror and ideology, weak states, socioeconomic stagnation, and regional rivalries.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n The document cautions that disengagement from the Middle East will not shield the US from a spillover of the region\u2019s problems. Nor does it maintain that there is a quick or easy fix. Rather, the NSS promotes long-term and patient US involvement in the region as a means of promoting a favorable balance of power, fostering stability, and furthering US security and economic interests.<\/span><\/p>\n In a distinct change from the perspective of the Obama administration, the NSS does not view the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a major cause of the region\u2019s problems. Nonetheless, the strategy reaffirms the Trump administration\u2019s commitment to facilitating a comprehensive peace agreement, which it believes can serve the wider interest of promoting a favorable regional balance of power by increasing Israeli-Arab cooperation in confronting common threats.<\/span><\/p>\n The priority actions outlined in the NSS in the regional context center around retaining an American military presence, shoring up partnerships to strengthen security and stability, sustaining Iraq\u2019s independence, seeking a settlement of the Syrian civil war, denying Iran its nuclear and regional aspirations, and promoting an Israeli-Palestinian comprehensive peace agreement.<\/span><\/p>\n The NSS underlines Washington\u2019s commitment to help the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) monarchies strengthen their political and military institutions, which includes providing them with military capabilities and building an effective joint missile defense system. The US will also encourage the Arab states to modernize their economies and advance social reforms. Having learned from past mistakes, the US will attempt to achieve these goals in a gradual fashion without imposing American values on the countries in question.<\/span><\/p>\n Implications for Israel<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n The NSS makes clear that the US is not disengaging from the Middle East. This is reassuring news for Israel. It was not so long ago that America\u2019s partners in the region were grappling with the possible implications of the Obama administration\u2019s desire to pivot away from the region towards Asia.<\/span><\/p>\n Moreover, the general policy principles outlined in the NSS represent a convergence of American and Israeli views on the region. The Iranian issue shows this clearly. Trump\u2019s NSS breaks from the previous administration\u2019s perception of Iran as part of the solution to regional instability, instead squarely defining Tehran as a major contributor to the region\u2019s problems. American leadership is working to contain and roll back Iran\u2019s malign influence and nuclear ambitions. This is a primary Israeli interest.<\/span><\/p>\n In this context, continued US military involvement in Iraq and Syria will serve to ensure direct US \u2013 and indirect Israeli \u2013 influence on the role of Iran and its proxies in those arenas.<\/span><\/p>\n