Panel discusses Obama’s Middle East policies

Now that Barack Obama has been elected as the 44th U.S. president, the debate and discussion about what he will do while in office can officially begin.

Yesterday a group of Portland State faculty members helped kick off this dialogue.

Dr. David Horowitz, history professor, Dr. John Damis of the Middle Eastern studies department and Dr. Grant Farr, associate dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, paneled a discussion on the major diplomacy changes expected from President-elect Obama in regards to Iran, Afghanistan and Israel-Palestine.

Here are some of the faculty members’ expectations and projections for the regions.

IRANFarr, who is among the top Middle East experts in the United States, highlighted Iran’s recent missile range advancement, which may pose an increased threat to Israel.

“They have shown capacity to bomb Israel from Iran, just a few days ago,” Farr said, “and this doesn’t exactly thrill Israelis.”

Farr, however, said that he remains optimistic. He believes that since the Iranian economy is in such shambles, they will be open to negotiations with Obama that work toward ending the nuclear program.

“The Iranian economy is in serious trouble, they have developed an oil-dependent economy and they have to import and ration gasoline,” Farr said.

He explained that President Bush’s aggressive, hard-lining policies–what Farr calls the “bellicose diplomacy”–are ineffective. He expects Obama to try drastically different methods with Iran.

“We should offer incentives for Iran to disengage their nuclear program, offer trade incentives, like to join the World Trade Organization,” Farr said, “and Obama has expressed an interest in doing this through talks of tough diplomacy.”

Farr emphasized the necessity for the Obama administration to foster peace and cooperation with Iran, which, because it borders both Iraq and Afghanistan, he said is reason enough to facilitate a peaceful rapport.

“We need Iran’s support if we’re going to get out of Iraq like Obama has been saying,” Farr said.

Farr cited Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s denial of the Holocaust and other anti-Israel statements as real threats to Israel’s safety. He also stressed the importance of supporting development in Iran to foster cooperation with the West and Israel.

Farr also mentioned the control Iran has over the movement of oil in the region. He admitted that the United States would probably invade if Iran was to cut off the oil flow, but that sort of action would be dangerous and expensive.

AFGHANISTAN“Afghanistan is in some ways clearer, but not as optimistic, as Iraq,” Farr said. “The insurgency is increasing, the Taliban is spreading farther north than before, and the Karzai government appears corrupt and inefficient.”

These issues have led Farr to believe that negotiation with the Taliban is the only path to peace. “The path to victory in Afghanistan is not through military involvement,” Farr said. “It’s a hearts and minds issue.”

He believes rethinking the issue might continue to be the chosen option.

“The Bush administration is doing a major re-evaluation of their policy in Afghanistan,” said Farr, who expects this re-evaluation will carry over into the Obama presidency, which will include talks with Taliban leaders.

Farr responded to the criticism that has arisen in light of proposed negotiations with “murderers.”

“You will not find a political leader in Afghanistan who was not involved in some sort of carnage in the past 30 years,” Farr said. “But it also depends on which Taliban we’re talking about.”

He then described the three groups that make up the Taliban forces.

“It’s a mixture of drug lords, Islamists who’ve come from other countries and pissed off tribal leaders,” Farr said.

The “pissed off tribal leaders,” are who Farr considers worth negotiating with. These are the people who, according to Farr, have legitimate grievances with tribal issues, regional economic instability and disenfranchisement, and not a global terrorism initiative.

“The interest of the Taliban do not necessarily align with al-Qaida,” Damis said.

Damis also added the importance of cooperation with Pakistan, identified as a key ally by Farr.

Unfortunately, Farr continued, there will most likely be some sort of military coup hitting Pakistan very soon.

“Obama has recognized that the center of the war on terrorism has always been in Afghanistan,” Damis said.

ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT“The Arab-Israeli conflict is at the heart of the issues in the Middle East at large,” Damis said.

Horowitz, an American cultural history expert who has been with PSU since 1968, explained his expectations for the Obama administration’s Israel-Palestine policy.

Horowitz credited President Clinton for creating temporary peace between Israel and Palestine. But the eight years of the Bush presidency has led to increased violence, because Bush did not engage in discussion with the Palestinian leaders, Horowitz said.

“Obama shows more reason than the previous administration,” Horowitz said, which leads him to believe Obama will try to facilitate and foster peace between the territories.

Horowitz, however, fears that a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine may be disappearing, as some experts have expressed.

According to Horowitz, Obama’s advisors have also suggested the possibility of re-examining the Arab Peace Initiative set up by Saudi Arabia. The initiative would push through the “right of return” for Palestinians, as well as the re-establishment of pre-1967 borders.

Horowitz identified some major roadblocks to this nearly two-state solution.

“Will the Saudi peace plan be acceptable to Hamas? Will Israel veto the ‘right to return’? How will negotiations go with Palestine’s government in the West Bank and the government in the Gaza Strip?” Horowitz said.

Despite the potential roadblocks, Horowitz expressed some hope for the future.

“In the least, the Bush administration worked with an ideological approach, while Obama works with reason over ideology,” Horowitz said.

The concluding sentiments of the panelists reflected the reality expected by most.

“I can’t say Obama’s administration will be successful, but it has a greater chance of success than the Bush administration’s policies,” Damis said.