When President Obama made his Cairo speech two years ago, apologiz ing for nearly everything America had done in the Mideast since Jimmy Carter, some of us worried that the goal was nothing less than terminating US influence there. Two signal events last week at either end of that volatile region suggest that’s exactly what’s happening.
The first was the decision to pull US ships and planes out of combat operations in Libya and to leave the rest to NATO unless the rebels are on the brink of destruction. The second, even more disturbing, was the report that, at the height of the anti-government demonstrations in Bahrain two weeks ago, the Pentagon ordered our ships and personnel at our naval base there to clear out, leaving only a skeleton staff.
Our naval base at Manama is the biggest in the region. It’s the home of the Fifth Fleet, the guardians of Persian Gulf stability, and plays host to successive US carrier groups that keep watch over a hostile Iran.
Yet it seems the administration was ready to hand the place over to any anti-American or pro-Iranian demonstrators poised to take over in Bahrain, until the Saudis finally intervened and sent in troops — thus saving our strategic bacon as well as their own.
Now, let’s grant that this administration’s Libya policy hasn’t been well thought out. Our pulling back there might be cutting our political losses. Let’s also grant that the Navy says our Fifth Fleet ships were headed for naval exercises in Oman and strenuously denies any bug-out from Bahrain — all appearances to the contrary.
Still, our on-again, off-again vacillation on Libya makes us look indecisive. Starting prematurely for the exit in Bahrain makes us look unreliable. That’s a fatal combination for a superpower that wants to remain respected — or one that allies feel they can look to when serious trouble breaks out.
Taken in combination with this administration’s insatiable itch to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, it looks like the new tone of America’s Mideast policy is headlong retreat.
It’s certainly painfully reminiscent of Britain’s 1960s pullback from the same region. After a humiliating setback over the Suez Canal, the British government ordered a radical rollback of its overseas military posture. Britain pulled out of places it had once garrisoned, like Egypt. It left Nasser in place, triggering a string of dictators in the region, staring with Libya’s Khadafy and ending with Saddam Hussein.
In 1967, the Brits abandoned their base in Aden, Yemen, which had guarded the Horn of Africa — letting that region fall into chaos and sowing the seeds of today’s piracy.
And in 1971 Britain quit Bahrain, handing over its naval base to us. Since then, it’s been up to America to defend Western interests in the Persian Gulf.
That is, until now.
The British retreat then was the result of weakened political will at the top, a public consumed with domestic issues. and a shrinking Army and Navy facing steep budget cuts and still licking its wounds after a protracted exhausting war, in Britain’s case World War II. All that should sound familiar as we weigh the future of American power in the Mideast.
At least the British had the excuse that people in the region wanted them out, as part of decolonization. Every indication is that the world wants America to lead during this Arab spring — but Obama, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton simply refuse to show up for the dance.
It’s understandable if Obama and the American public have become weary of playing the role of Globocop. But don’t let’s throw away our status as a great power, too.
Britain’s headlong flight from the region left behind a brutal legacy — one Arabs in the streets are trying to overthrow right now. If America embraces a similar retreat, what kind of disaster will we leave in our wake?
Arthur Herman is author of “Gandhi and Churchill.”