• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
{
  "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 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 Russia Eurasia Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Power, Pathways, and Policy: Grounding Central Asia’s Digital Ambitions

    Central Asia’s digital ambitions are achievable, but only if policy is aligned with the region’s physical constraints.

      Aruzhan Meirkhanova

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    The Afghanistan–Pakistan War Poses Awkward Questions for Russia

    Not only does the fighting jeopardize regional security, it undermines Russian attempts to promote alternatives to the Western-dominated world order.

      Ruslan Suleymanov

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Moldova Floats a New Approach to Its Transnistria Conundrum

    Moldova’s reintegration plan was drawn up to demonstrate to Brussels that Chișinău is serious about the Transnistria issue—and to get the West to react.

      Vladimir Solovyov

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    After Ilia II: What Will a New Patriarch Mean for Georgia?

    The front-runner to succeed Ilia II, Metropolitan Shio, is prone to harsh anti-Western rhetoric and frequent criticism of “liberal ideologies” that he claims threaten the Georgian state. This raises fears that under his leadership the Georgian Orthodox Church will lose its unifying role and become an instrument of ultraconservative ideology.

      Bashir Kitachaev

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Lukashenko’s Bromance With Trump Has a Sell-By Date

    Lukashenko is willing to make big sacrifices for an invitation to Mar-a-Lago or the White House. He also knows that the clock is ticking: he must squeeze as much out of the Trump administration as he can before congressional elections in November leave Trump hamstrung or distracted.

      Artyom Shraibman

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Carnegie Russia Eurasia logo, white
  • Research
  • Politika
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.