Lebanon and The Beginning of American Military Action in the Middle East
Lebanon: A Reminder
The Beginning of the US Military Action in Lebanon and the Eisenhower Doctrine
A summer in Lebanon half a century back, the beachgoers of Lebanon’s capital, Beirut, saw a curious sight. Boats after boats of US Marines began to arrive on the shores of Beirut. Bruce Riedel, the author of the book, ‘Beirut 1958: How America’s Wars in the Middle East Began’ (2019), writes that the local Lebanese people even helped the US Marines transport their equipment and street vendors tried to sell cigarettes and local food items to them. The locals did not understand that the entry of the US Marines was an act of foreign invasion of their motherland. The children who sold Coca-Cola on the beach tried to sell them to the Marines. The general impression was that the US troops had come just to keep order short-term. However, there was some fighting here and there, and a few Marines were killed in it.
It was a massive operation named Operation Blue Bat. The US had sent seventy warships to this mission. Three of them were aircraft carriers. The Lebanese President Camille Chamoun had requested US help as a nationwide uprising was threatening his rule. The Marines took control of the airport and the capital city.
There was a civil war raging between Christian and Muslim groups in Lebanon. Also, there was a coup in neighbouring Iraq, where the US-supported King Faisal II was assassinated and his government dethroned. In Jordan, America feared a reprisal against King Hussein’s government, which was an ally of it.
Then-US President Dwight D. Eisenhower explained to the American public that the Soviet Union and Egypt were behind the ongoing civil war in Lebanon and that a US military intervention was necessary to curb the growth of communism in the region. Gamal Abdel Nasser, the young and charismatic leader of Egypt, ended the reign of the monarch and became the President. He was an Arab nationalist who despised American influence in the region. His government was the first Egyptian-led regime in Egypt in 2000 years.
Initially, Nasser had cordial relations with the CIA and the US, as his fight was primarily against British colonialism. Yet, by 1958, relations between Egypt and the US soured, and Nasser began to drift in favour of the Soviet Union.
He initiated the United Arab Republic, a union of Arab nations, to which Syria and Egypt were the first to join. The Muslims in Lebanon wanted their country to join this league. Lebanese President Camille Chamoun decided not to join. This was another reason he had to seek the US's help to deal with the dissent caused by it.
The Muslims saw Chamoun as an imposter, as his government was formed under the aegis of French colonial rule. A Christian President was chosen based on a census that said the majority in the country were Christians. The Muslims questioned this census, claiming that they were the majority. Syria also actively supported the political unrest in Lebanon.
The Eisenhower Doctrine
The US President Eisenhower had sent troops to Lebanon in an unprecedented action as he felt geopolitically threatened by the direction in which the Middle East was going. Until then, the US had only participated in the Middle East politics and conflicts as an interested party and never militarily. Eisenhower justified his action, citing the spread of Communism in the region.
In a special message to the US Congress about the situation in the Middle East, Eisenhower had set a new policy framework for the Middle East. The policy involved providing military and financial assistance to any Middle Eastern country if that country requested financial or military aid from the US when facing armed aggression.
The doctrine was specifically aimed at the rise of Communism and the influence of the Soviet Union. It specifically said that if a country controlled by “international Communism” initiated a military action against any Middle Eastern nation, threatening its political and territorial integrity, that nation could approach the US for financial and military aid.
Background of the Eisenhower Doctrine
After World War II ended in 1945, the scene was set for the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States of America as they emerged as the major powers in the post-war era. As a result, both countries began to consolidate their geopolitical and ideological influence, especially in Europe and the Middle East. A Western-Capitalist and Eastern-Socialist-Communist Block was quickly evolving.
Gamal Abdal Nasser was a rising star of the Middle East, popular and strong. He was just 37 years old. He had charisma and capability. Even Palestinians believed this Egyptian leader would deliver them from the miserable condition inflicted on them by the establishment of the nation of Israel.
On the contrary, America saw this leader as a Soviet Union-supported communist revolutionary. Britain, supported by the US, orchestrated the Baghdad Pact involving Turkey, Iraq, Pakistan, and Iran to balance the power of the Soviets in the region. Jordan was being pressured to join the pact. Nasser asked Jordan to reject this agreement.
The people in the Middle East saw the pact as an imperialist agreement and rose up against it, entering the streets and rioting. The consulates of the countries who were part of the pact were attacked.
Saudi Arabia was also unhappy with the pact and tried to use the opportunity to pursue territorial expansion by moving its military to Aqaba and Ma’an. In 1956, Nassar nationalised the Suez Canal and foiled the attempts of Britain and France to nationalise it.
The Middle East was a boiling pot in which Arab nationalism and the hatred of European colonialism were ready to spill over. This was the context of the US military intervention in Lebanon.
The Response of the Middle East to the Eisenhower Doctrine
The Middle Eastern countries were volatile during that time. One after another, the nations rose against the American influence on the region. Syria, Egypt, Iraq, and everywhere America’s hold was being overthrown by inter-state alliances and public uprisings. The people of the Middle East did not take kindly to the Eisenhower doctrine. They saw it as a threat to their national sovereignty. The truth was also close to their perception.
Before this military action in Lebanon, the US had kept its involvement in the region to logistical support in the Second World War. The Lebanese intervention marked the crossing of a line for America. The Marines stayed in Lebanon for three months. Lebanese President Camille Chamoun could complete his Presidential term thanks to the American military intervention.
What Has Been the Real American Interest in the Middle East
By the end of the 19th century, the US began to consolidate its power globally as a superpower. It was rather a process of empire-building. Initially, this was limited to the Pacific Ocean nations and the Western Hemisphere. During this time, America kept itself away from the power tussles of Europe and the rest of the world.
Great Britain, Italy, Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, and France were the powerful nations of Europe. They colonised the Middle East, Asia, and Africa. The Middle East was a hub that connected three continents, a travel route, logistically important, and also the stage for the growth of Christianity. Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodox Church were finding inroads of influence into the Middle East.
While the European countries set out to take command of the Suez Canal in the Middle East, the US did not intervene as they thought they had no particular stake in it. America was instead focused on controlling the Panama Canal.
The Ottoman Empire was very much in power. Yet, American missionaries were already in the Middle East, spreading the faith. They introduced modern medicine and Western education to the region. The missionary work often led to clashes between the local Muslim inhabitants and the American missionaries.
There were also trading relations, though nominal, between the Middle East and America, which had existed since sea voyages between the continents started. The US also engaged in treaties with the Ottoman Empire to protect its citizens and Christians in the region. American historians, anthropologists, archaeologists, adventurers, and tourists were also beginning to explore this less-known land. Since the founding of Israel, the Israeli Jews and the American Jews have been in close contact.
All the above factors interacted in complex ways to increase the stakes of the US in the region. Gradually, American businessmen began to pick lucrative opportunities emerging as the land and the people modernised. The US business interest groups grew in influence. Licorice root, tobacco, carpets, nuts, figs, and petroleum products were the major trading goods that America exported from the Middle East, and the likes of Forbes and McAndrews flourished trading in them. Remember, the Middle East had yet to discover its oil reserves underground, and the oil companies in the US were exporting oil to the Middle East. The only use of oil during the initial years was the kerosene to light lamps.
Parallel to all the above, the Arab nationalist movements were taking root as the people aspired for democracy and self-rule. These movements destabilised the Ottoman Empire. From the 16th century onwards, Christian nobility was a powerful group within the Empire. Corruption and economic distress accelerated the problems the Empire was facing. It fought many battles with its European foes amid these difficulties at home. The Young Turk Revolution and the army mutiny of 1909 changed the political fabric of the Empire, pushing it into further chaos and weakness. Eventually, in the First World War, the Empire collapsed. From it emerged a much less powerful republic of Turkey under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. After the war, the French and the British controlled the Middle East. The US did not accept the offer from the British to be a beneficiary of the spoils of the Ottoman Empire. In 1956, when Egypt nationalised the Suez Canal and Britain and France attacked Egypt, consequently, the US decided not to intervene.
The Beginning of the Change in the US Policy Towards the Middle East
In 1917 came the Balfour Declaration endorsing the Zionist project of a Jewish nation in Palestine. US President Woodrow Wilson officially recognised the new Nation. The US thus became the first country to recognise Israel. All the same, the US also supported the national movements in the region against France and Britain after the Second World War.
During World War II, the US sent troops to Iran to protect Iranian oil facilities from the enemy and to help Britain with military supplies. The then US President Harry Truman pressured the Soviet Union to pull its troops back from Iran and strengthened NATO by persuading Turkey to join it. The US also developed a good relationship with Iran's ruler, Reza Shah Pahlavi. Gradually, the US political influence in the region was on the rise.
The USA supported the UN partition plan of Palestine into two nations in 1947. For Truman, it only took 11 minutes to recognise Israel when it was formed as per this plan. Then came the Lebanon military action. Since the military intervention in Lebanon in 1958, the US has waged many wars in the Middle East. The major one was with Iraq, and the world hated America for it. The US has also constantly been just short of a conflict with Iran. In the Palestine issue, the US pays lip service to the Palestinian cause and expresses humanitarian concerns but always supports Israel strongly, providing financial and military aid.
Has the US Interest in the Middle East Dwindled?
As Israel invades Lebanon again, America also might join this war. 2024 marks the 66th year of US military action in the Middle East. During the one year of the Israel-Gaza war, the US had adopted a strategy based on trying to secure a ceasefire, bring about the release of the hostages in Gaza, and avoid the war escalating into a regional conflict. America has also fully supported Israel's so-called "self-defence." Yet, it has remained an external actor so far and exercised moderation.
Does that mean that the US has no self-interest in the region anymore rather than protecting Israel? The American stand on the Israel-Gaza war has been described as reactive only. Most experts agree that the strategy of the Biden administration towards the war between Israel and Gaza has failed to achieve any of its proclaimed goals.
From 2000 onwards, America has become energy self-sufficient by its discovery of new oil and the resulting hike in production of shale oil and natural gas. However, the Middle East remains the largest market for its weapon trade. The reason has changed but the story remains unchanged. Whoever thinks that the world has transformed into a better place in the last 50 years needs to look closely at the history of the Middle East and Lebanon and how America has been meddling and continues to do so.
References
Beirut 1958: How America’s Wars in the Middle East Began, Bruce Riedel, 2019, Brookings Institution Press.
Comments
Post a Comment