Look at this Wall Street Journal title: “Obama's Mideast
Vacuum”. Now look at this subtitle: “The Saudis invade Yemen as the
Sunni-Shiite war escalates.” The two sayings belong to one and the same article
– actually an editorial of the Journal that was published on March 27, 2015.
The editors are saying that the Saudis are now in Yemen but
they consider the place to still be a vacuum because America is not there ...
in fact, America was there, they go on to say, but President Obama is pulling
out because he no longer wants to remain in Yemen.
Beginning with this premise and the mentality that goes with
it, the editors try to make a case for America to continue being where it
has failed. They make this argument because, in their view, it is better to
perpetuate the misery of American failure than to give a chance for someone
else to succeed at something. But what is that something? In fact, the editors
do not even attempt to define success in the way that sane people do. That's
because they have already defined it as America being there and everywhere,
filling a vacuum whether or not the vacuum has already be filled by someone.
The situation that is unfolding at this time in Yemen started a
few days ago when the pro-Shiite Houthi militias entered the capital San'a and
seized it. That's when Mr. Obama ordered the withdrawal of the American
personnel who were there conducting the drone air war against the militias –
formerly named terrorists. Upon this withdrawal, the Saudis launched their own
air war against the same “enemy,” a move that prompted the editors of the
journal to declare that Obama's vacuum “produced a region on fire,” asserting
that the situation “is becoming a broad Sunni-Shiite war”.
The editors go on to speculate the following: “What had been
a proxy war is in danger of becoming a direct Saudi-Iran conflict.” They assert
that this potential development was caused by Obama's decision to withdraw
because “the Saudis [have] given up on the U.S.
as a stabilizing force in the Middle East .”
But right after that, the editors go on to say something
that attests to a mentality which values American failure more than Saudi
success. Are you ready for it? Here it is: “This resembles their [Saudi]
intervention into Bahrain
in 2011 to put down a rebellion by its Shiite majority against the Sunni
government.” Well, this has been the Saudi success that the editors of the
Journal cannot stomach, preferring to see a repeat of America 's fiasco in Yemen ,
Libya and Iraq . They call
America 's performance in
these cases “a stabilizing force” whereas Bahrain , in their view, remains a
risk.
However, unable to ignore the stability that has reigned in
Bahrain during all these years with no sign that it will fail anytime soon, the
editors make the point that “Tehran probably won't intervene directly, but …
will try to bleed the Saudis and their allies for as long as possible.” And
this is why they recommend that “Mr. Obama should do what it takes to help an
ally win.” Commendable, isn't it? But wait a minute, how do they say Obama
should help that ally?
This is how the editors put it: “a warning to Iran that the U.S.
will assist in stopping Iranian flights that arm the Houthis … Iran needs to
be told its flights run the risk of being shot down.” This means the editors
still wish to see America
get involved to “fill a vacuum” if only partially. Whereas they speculate
everywhere as to what the future may hold, they now say nothing about what will
happen when escalation will result, as surely as it will, and lead to a mission
creep with consequences that will duplicate the murderous days of “shock and
awe.”
But perhaps this is what they dream about because they leap
at this point to a discussion about the nuclear deal with Iran . This is a
subject about which they made clear for years that they wish to see America
take the option on the table, and shock and awe the Iranians.
They accuse Obama of being obsessed with making a deal that
“seems increasingly out of this world” and go on to say that America 's
allies in the region fear he wants to cast them aside and create a new
U.S.-Iran alliance.