• Research
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie India logoCarnegie lettermark logo
AI
{
  "authors": [
    "Marina Ottaway"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "MEP",
  "programs": [
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Middle East",
    "Iran",
    "Israel",
    "Iraq",
    "Lebanon",
    "Palestine",
    "Syria",
    "Qatar",
    "Saudi Arabia",
    "Yemen"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Democracy",
    "Security",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Diplomacy in the Middle East: Arab Allies Push Their Own Agendas, December, 22, 2008

Arab regimes that have long been friendly to the United States are increasingly reluctant to follow Washington’s lead on any issue. They are not enemies of the United States, but they are not faithful allies, either. Rather, they follow the policies they believe best protect their interests, regardless of what the United States wants.

Link Copied
By Marina Ottaway
Published on Dec 22, 2008

Source: Harvard International Review

During the Cold War, countries of the Middle East, like most around the world, were divided into allies of the United States and allies of the Soviet Union. US allies sought Washington’s security protection and in general followed its lead except in policy toward Israel—on that topic, even the most staunchly pro-US countries diverged sharply from Washington. Countries aligned with the Soviet Union followed Moscow’s lead and were hostile to both the United States and Israel.

Today the alignment of the Middle East is quite different, but not in the way the United States envisaged after the disappearance of the Soviet Union. The number of Arab governments truly antagonistic to the United States dwindled to almost none once Saddam Hussein was removed from power in early 2003 and Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi renounced the pursuit of nuclear weapons and turned to the West later that year. Even Syria and the Sudan would like to establish better ties to the United States. However, regimes that have long been friendly to the United States are increasingly reluctant to follow Washington’s lead on any issue. They are not enemies of the United States, but they are not faithful allies, either. Rather, they follow the policies they believe best protect their interests, regardless of what the United States wants.

Click here to read the full article.

About the Author

Marina Ottaway

Former Senior Associate, Middle East Program

Before joining the Endowment, Ottaway carried out research in Africa and in the Middle East for many years and taught at the University of Addis Ababa, the University of Zambia, the American University in Cairo, and the University of the Witwatersrand in South Africa.

    Recent Work

  • Article
    Reactions to the Syrian National Initiative

      Marina Ottaway, Omar Hossino

  • Article
    Slow Return to Normal Politics in Egypt

      Marina Ottaway

Marina Ottaway
Former Senior Associate, Middle East Program
Marina Ottaway
Political ReformDemocracySecurityForeign PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesMiddle EastIranIsraelIraqLebanonPalestineSyriaQatarSaudi ArabiaYemen

Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie India

  • Article
    India’s Oil Security Strategy: Structural Vulnerabilities and Strategic Choices

    This piece argues that the present Indian strategy, based on opportunistic diversification and utilization of limited strategic reserves, remains inadequate when confronting supply disruptions. It evaluates India’s options in the short, medium, and long terms.

      Vrinda Sahai

  • Article
    What Could a Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement Do for U.S.-India Ties?

    India and the United States are close to concluding a Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement (RDPA) that will allow firms from the two countries to sell to each other’s defense establishments more easily. While this may not remedy the specific grievances both sides may have regarding larger bilateral issues, an RDPA could restore some momentum, following the trade deal announcement.

      Konark Bhandari

  • Commentary
    India Signs the Pax Silica—A Counter to Pax Sinica?

    On the last day of the India AI Impact Summit, India signed Pax Silica, a U.S.-led declaration seemingly focused on semiconductors. While India’s accession to the same was not entirely unforeseen, becoming a signatory nation this quickly was not on the cards either.

      Konark Bhandari

  • Commentary
    The Impact of U.S. Sanctions and Tariffs on India’s Russian Oil Imports

    This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.

      Vrinda Sahai

  • Article
    Military Lessons from Operation Sindoor

    The India-Pakistan conflict that played out between May 6 and May 10, 2025, offers several military lessons. This article presents key takeaways from Operation Sindoor and breaks down how India’s preparations shaped the outcome and what more is needed to strengthen future readiness.

      Dinakar Peri

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
Carnegie India logo, white
Unit C-4, 5, 6, EdenparkShaheed Jeet Singh MargNew Delhi – 110016, IndiaPhone: 011-40078687
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.