Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
I noticed that few of the comments on Brandon Zuffini's post addressed Ron Paul's historical claims or attempted to place them in a broader context. Probably just as well, because to do so would require a doctoral-length dissertation.
Fortunately, I just happened to have one in my basement. You can now buy it on Amazon, and since you've all been so kind in encouraging me to promote my work here, so long as it's topical, I'll promote it--and this is topical, oddly enough.
I'm trying to put out a Kindle version, too, but having some technical problems; if I succeed, I'll let you know. And I'm sorry it's so expensive. The length of it makes it impossible to sell it for less: Amazon won't let me.
Now, fair warning, this isn't a fun read. It's a doctoral dissertation. It sat, unread by anyone, in Oxford University's Social Science Library for nearly a decade. I know this, because I went once to see how many people had checked it out, and discovered to my horror that not one single soul had signed the check-out slip. Not one.
Think about that: four years of work in the archives, four years of the chronic, low-grade anhedonia of graduate student life. The ivy turns green, gold, rust and then green again, year in and year out, as other people move on with their lives and careers; as other people buy homes and start families; as other people live real lives; and there I am, still, in the archives, surrounded by photocopies and drafts and vaguely asthmatic from the dust and the moss, still trying to finish the dissertation.
At last, finally, just as I am at risk of being swallowed by the ivy entirely, it is done, submitted, approved! I am Dr. Berlinski--at last! And then no one ever read it. Ever.
However. I think, at long last, that this research may be of broader interest to Americans. When items like this are in the news--US announces Saudi arms deal amid Gulf tensions--and when Ron Paul discusses our military relationship with Saudi Arabia as if it emerged ex nihilo following the invasion of Kuwait, I really do think that the research I did might help people to put these events, and these claims, in context. Likewise, the controversy that surrounds our military assistance to Egypt and to Israel is almost always discussed without reference to the history of these programs, and it just doesn't make sense absent reference to that history.
Moreover, if anyone wants to evaluate the claim that our policy in the Middle East is or has always been driven by a powerful Jewish lobby, powerful oil companies, or the military-industrial complex, I think this dissertation would be worth your time. It's not a short, dramatic video; it's not even a slightly tedious documentary; it's sure not a page-turning thriller. But it is a serious answer to the question, "Are any of those claims true, and if so, to what extent, and if not, why not?"
Here's the abstract:
In the two decades following the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, the United States exported a vast compass of conventional weapons to the states directly involved in the Arab-Israeli conflict. This thesis establishes the reasons for these decisions and identifies the agencies and individuals within the United States government by whom arms policy was constructed and sustained.
The forces that shaped the United States' policy may be viewed as falling along a continuum. One side of this continuum represents pressure from competing domestic groups, the other the strategic consideration of maintaining power globally, particularly with respect to the Soviet Union. The evidence presented here suggests that arms transfer policy emerged from considerations on the latter side of this continuum, for it was designed in agencies of the executive branch, such as the Defense Department, whose employees were chiefly preoccupied with the threat posed to American interests by Soviet activities. The programs instigated by the executive branch, for reasons structurally endemic to the arms transfer process, were unusually shielded from domestic pressure and resistant to revision in Congress.
The thesis finds that as the motivation for arms policy, domestic politics, particularly the activities of ethnic interest groups, have been overstated in the secondary literature. While contributing in some part to the refinement of policy, these pressures failed to determine its essential shape. Instead, anticommunism—a governmental conception of the American national interest defined not as the aggregate demands of the United States' constituent interest groups, but in strategic opposition to a geographic and ideological rival—provided the fundamental impetus to the United States' behavior.
Brandon, there are a lot of answers to Ron Paul in there for you. To thank you for your service to our country, I'd be happy to send you a free copy.
But if you'd rather I just bought you a drink next time we see each other, I'll understand.
- Comment (36)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Jul '10
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Make it into a comic book ala Catstantinople and we'll talk.
Oct '11
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Oh man, now I want a Kindle copy of Our common enemy and Catstantinople (how did I not know about this?) get to it Claire! ... Just teasing you, I'm facing a similar struggle myself- digital distribution is great but all the reformatting still has to be done while new materials are being created... the trials of being a one person operation.
Both would be great to have though.
Jul '11
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Well Dr Berlinski, I have a sneaking suspicion that 100 years from now someone will own a copy of this and all you're published works.
Aug '10
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
One of my buddies mentioned that he placed a $20 in the pages of his dissertation in order to reward the 1st reader. It was still there when he checked a decade later.
Regarding the price required by Amazon, why not divvy the dissertation into more manageable chunks and sell it as volumes - personally, I prefer ebooks, but I won't buy them if they are
I have to read expensive non-fiction as part of my day job - I won't read it for leisure purposes unless it is particularly compelling.
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
This doesn't really lend itself to serialization. People who are really, really interested in US foreign policy in the Middle East will find it interesting and maybe buy it. But if they're not, they won't make it past the third page, and they definitely won't buy installment two.
I realize I'm not doing a good job of selling it. I actually find this subject fascinating--that's why I spent so many years studying it--and I do think it would be interesting to anyone who wonders, "Just how did we get where we are in the Middle East, and why did we prop up so many unpleasant regimes?"
Nov '10
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Balliol--Lord Peter's college!
OK, back to sad reality now.
Aug '10
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
This all probably means Yasser Arafat was not the Palestinian George Washington as he was so lionized by the press ? Yesterday I tried to bring up the secret deal that removed our nukes from Turkey as part of the Kennedy mythology ala " Cuban Profiles in Courage" series , but no one would bite other than one admonition not to dig up old bones. Perhaps your serious approach will bear the bitter fruit of vindication, however musty. Speaking of musty , Dr Paul embodies that creaky , damp space in my mind. Keeps one from venturing further. So...short of reading your piece , did the Russians predict Islamofascism or ignite it ?
May '10
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Dr. Berlinski,
Thank you for directing our attention to this subject. Your topic cuts to salient points in today's events from the Middle East to Iowa to St. Louis. I teach 7th grade geography and sometimes struggle to find interesting points directly relating to students' lives or those like theirs. The Saudi arms deal as seen through the St. Louis Post-Dispatch provides a good example of how this sort of event garners support among locals depending on the Boeing plant for a living. My own area has experienced layoffs like many others and it's something kids can relate to (when I can get their adolescent attention for a few minutes). It's remarkable when one contemplates how a kid in Riyadh and a kid in St. Louis are more connected than one would think. It's the sort of real life that follows in the wake of the points on your continuum. I attach no huzzah or objection to the deal, only observation.
Godspeed and Happy New Year.
Edited on December 31, 2011 at 2:21pmRe: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Everybody should read this because not only does Claire know everything about the subject but she wrote it, which means it'll be about as entertainingly written as it's possible for a dissertation to be.
Now, Claire, how did you physically get this onto Amazon? Do you have a digital copy that you sent to CreateSpace? Did you scan your hard copy? Use OCR? What?
And anybody feel like reading 50,000 words on The Active Defense Paradox: Israeli Strategy and Tactics During the 1948 War?
Aug '11
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Ivy turns gold? Not here.
Jan '11
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Well, Dr. Berlinski, the thing to have done, 10 years ago, would be to publish your dissertation in one or more parts in a relevant peer reviewed journal(s).
That's not only the best way to test the findings and presumptions of your thesis, but to stimulate others to take the baton, as it were, and continue to run with them.
Dissertation Abstracts works to get the news out, but not as well as the published material.
Sep '11
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Possibly. Is it available? How much? I would browse it rather than read every word, so price is important.
May '10
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
I would love to read it.
I'm not sure if your thesis, once proven (as I'm sure you have done), necessarily answers Ron Paul.
One of my complaints is that many of our policies started in the Cold War have had negative effects, but we deemed any possible blowback to be worth it given the reality of our enemy (the USSR and the spread of Communism). I generally agree with this cost/benefit conclusion--though there were some policies that probably should never have been done (ever). If we agree that the fall of Communism was due more to economic realities than military pressure (and I know many would contend against that thesis), then a strong argument could be made, Reaganites notwithstanding, that the U.S. did too many questionable activities that bypassed both Congress and the American people.
That's something to argue about, for sure. What I don't understand is the idea that we must maintain, even increase exponentially, our Cold War activities against an enemy largely created by our Cold War activities.
All in saying, I want to read your thesis, and perhaps Diane could help arrange the logistics of that.
Edited on December 31, 2011 at 6:18pmRe: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Gaby Charing
Possibly. Is it available? How much? I would browse it rather than read every word, so price is important.
Right now it's only in the Bodleian gathering dust, but if I can figure out how to get a physical book into a computer file, I'll happily put it up on Amazon. I'll let you know.
Sep '10
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
I don't know how the process works, but have you considered asking Oxford University Press to publish this as a monograph? (I freelance for them through an international communications entity based in India and know no one in New York or Oxford.) Their website has a "contact an editor" link that might provide an inlet, if you'd be so inclined. Your subject matter would seem to be very timely and suitable as a university press publication (though finding an unbiased acquisitions editor could be difficult).
Jun '10
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Brandon Zaffini:
...
What I don't understand is the idea that we must maintain, even increase exponentially, our Cold War activities against an enemy largely created by our Cold War activities.
...
Please explain what you mean here, Brandon. You tout your military experience as informing you on these political issues but this sentence seems to come from the Academy. Where did you pick up this meme?
May '10
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Larry Koler
Brandon Zaffini:
...
What I don't understand is the idea that we must maintain, even increase exponentially, our Cold War activities against an enemy largely created by our Cold War activities.
...
Please explain what you mean here, Brandon. You tout your military experience as informing you on these political issues but this sentence seems to come from the Academy. Where did you pick up this meme? · Dec 31 at 9:33am
I thought it was very clear, so perhaps you should explain what you want explained.
There's nothing wrong with the Academy. If you remember, I said serving overseas makes one intuitively grasp something, and this intuition spurs on knowledge (or perhaps I should say the pursuit of knowledge.)
I serve in the Infantry, which is the meat and bones of the military. I also scored the highest score possible on the Asvab (which ostensibly tests what you know and your vocational aptitude). I still joined the Infantry because I wanted to fight for my country (not merely write for my country).
But I'm not a meat-head. And one need not be a snot-nosed intellectual, either, simply because one goes to the Academy.
May '10
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Larry Koler
Brandon Zaffini:
...
What I don't understand is the idea that we must maintain, even increase exponentially, our Cold War activities against an enemy largely created by our Cold War activities.
...
Please explain what you mean here, Brandon. You tout your military experience as informing you on these political issues but this sentence seems to come from the Academy. Where did you pick up this meme? · Dec 31 at 9:33am
I should also note that one of my favorite current scholars (as in still alive) is Dr. Thomas Fleming (gasp).
Still, I think you would find most of my studies respectable enough for your narrow tastes.
Edited on December 31, 2011 at 6:46pmAug '10
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Slightly off-topic, but Claire, I like the way you don't flaunt your PhD after your name, as some folks do--for example, Bill Cosby ("An Integration of the Visual Media Via 'Fat Albert And The Cosby Kids' Into the Elementary School Curriculum as a Teaching Aid and Vehicle to Achieve Increased Learning") and Monica Crowley ("Clearer than truth: Determining and preserving grand strategy. The evolution of American policy toward the People's Republic of China under Truman and Nixon"). It always amuses me that the credits of Bill's sitcom list "William H. Cosby, Jr., PhD" and that Monica's chyron on Fox News always includes the Three Letters. You just know that in both cases it was an ego thing that they insisted upon.
Jun '10
Re: Ron Paul, Foreign Policy, and the History of US Engagement in the Middle East
Brandon, if you believe that blowback is an expected cost that must be endured for the greater good that comes from entering the Cold War fray (which I agree with) then you must mean that you are only concerned with the fact that we are "maintain[ing] our Cold War activities." Is that the case?
Because we vanquished one enemy, if more enemies are "created" then they are still our enemies, aren't they? But, I guess you are saying that we had a legitimate reason to foray out of our national boundaries for the Cold War but not for the present engagements. Is that it?
One final thing: you say that we created these enemies by our Cold War activities. I say we didn't do it by ourselves. The Cold War was an honorable conflict. All of the results of this conflict have to be dealt with in descending order of priority.