U.S. strategy in the Islamic world is teetering on collapse. Angry, often violent crowds from Morocco to Afghanistan attacked anything associated with the United States or the West during the past week, from embassies and schools to fast food restaurants. All indications are that the protests accurately reflect a deep and persistent anger toward the United States, one that can be easily manipulated for nefarious purposes.
For decades, the United States was concerned with little but stability in the Islamic world, building partnerships with a sordid cast of monarchs, civilian dictators and military despots. While this approach continues to be applied in a few countries, it was largely discarded after Sept. 11, when the Bush administration recognized that the United States could not rely on friendly dictators to control violent extremism and hope for the best. America’s new strategy for addressing Islamic extremism took the form of counterinsurgency: The United States would attack terrorists directly while simultaneously undercutting support for extremism. While this made sense, it proved tricky to execute. ...
To read the rest, sign up to try World Politics Review
- TWO WEEKS FREE.
- Cancel any time.
- After two weeks, just $9 monthly or $59/year.
Request a free trial for your office or school. Everyone at a given site can get access through our institutional subscriptions.
- U.S. Delay on Anti-Nuclear Terror Measures Hinders Global Efforts
- The Realist Prism: China the Likely Winner if U.S. Intervenes in Syria
- Global Insights: Sharif’s Victory Offers U.S. Opportunity to Reset Pakistan Ties
- Russia Tries to Manage Arab Awakening From the Outside
- Diplomatic Fallout: A More Hawkish Europe Gives U.S. Second Thoughts