One Year of Obama in the Middle East: Have Transatlantic Differences Narrowed?

{
  "authors": [
    "Michele Dunne"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "MEP",
  "programs": [
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Democracy",
    "Security",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

In The Media

One Year of Obama in the Middle East: Have Transatlantic Differences Narrowed?

U.S. rhetoric has become more closely aligned with European positions on the Arab-Israeli peace process and democracy and human rights promotion in the Middle East, but there has not been a significant increase in transatlantic cooperation on these issues.

By Michele Dunne

Published on Feb 1, 2010

Source: FRIDE Policy Brief

One Year of Obama in the Middle East: Have TransatUnder the Obama administration, the United States has moved closer to European positions on the Arab-Israeli peace process and the promotion of democracy and human rights in the Middle East, at least at the level of rhetoric. There has been no significant increase, however, in transatlantic cooperation on these questions. The United States is still trying to keep the initiative on Arab-Israeli issues to itself, and has not engaged European partners so far in its evolving policy on democracy issues. The Obama administration is coming under increasing criticism in the United States and the Middle East for ineffective policies on both of these topics, which is likely to lead to some rethinking over the next six months and could open the way to closer cooperation or, alternatively, greater friction with Europe. Early indications suggest that President Obama might disengage from Arab-Israeli diplomacy for the present in favour of other priorities.

This report was written for FRIDE and presented at an event jointly hosted by FRIDE, CEPS and the Heinrich Boll Foundation.

About the Author

Michele Dunne

Former Nonresident Scholar, Middle East Program

Michele Dunne was a nonresident scholar in Carnegie’s Middle East Program, where her research focused on political and economic change in Arab countries, particularly Egypt, as well as U.S. policy in the Middle East.

Recent Work

Research
Islamic Institutions in Arab States: Mapping the Dynamics of Control, Co-option, and Contention
- +6
  Yasmine Farouk, Nathan J. Brown, Maysaa Shuja Al-Deen, …
Research
From Hardware to Holism: Rebalancing America’s Security Engagement With Arab States
- +8
  Robert Springborg, Emile Hokayem, Becca Wasser, …

Political Reform Democracy Security Foreign Policy Middle East

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
Could Nuclear Warheads Really Be Deployed to the Baltic States?
Latvia and Lithuania have been considering whether they could temporarily host NATO nuclear weapons in the event of war or a similar crisis.
Sergejs Potapkins
Commentary
Carnegie Politika
Vučić’s Downfall in Serbia Is Fatal to Russia’s Influence in the Balkans
The new Serbian leadership may have promised to keep on cooperating with Russia, but soon they will have to make a choice between fighting corruption and sealing lucrative deals with Moscow. The two are mutually exclusive, even if the new leaders in Belgrade haven’t yet realized it.
Maksim Samorukov
Commentary
Carnegie Politika
How Did Serbia Remove Vučić Without a Single Smashed Window?
Serbia’s electoral earthquake is an extremely rare example of an entire political system being defeated by street protesters who played by the rules.
Alexander Baunov
Paper
The Foundations of a Russian Dictatorship: The Kremlin’s New Ideology
The concept authored by Sergei Kiriyenko and his team can be considered not only an apologia for the Putin regime, but also a blueprint for Russia’s future configuration.
Andrey Pertsev
Commentary
Carnegie Politika
Putin’s Post-Election Reshuffle Advances Russian State Erosion
The pressures of war are gradually warping Russia’s system of governance, making it more vulnerable to a future crisis.
Tatiana Stanovaya

More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

Could Nuclear Warheads Really Be Deployed to the Baltic States?

Latvia and Lithuania have been considering whether they could temporarily host NATO nuclear weapons in the event of war or a similar crisis.

Sergejs Potapkins

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

Vučić’s Downfall in Serbia Is Fatal to Russia’s Influence in the Balkans

The new Serbian leadership may have promised to keep on cooperating with Russia, but soon they will have to make a choice between fighting corruption and sealing lucrative deals with Moscow. The two are mutually exclusive, even if the new leaders in Belgrade haven’t yet realized it.

Maksim Samorukov

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

How Did Serbia Remove Vučić Without a Single Smashed Window?

Serbia’s electoral earthquake is an extremely rare example of an entire political system being defeated by street protesters who played by the rules.

Alexander Baunov

Paper

The Foundations of a Russian Dictatorship: The Kremlin’s New Ideology

The concept authored by Sergei Kiriyenko and his team can be considered not only an apologia for the Putin regime, but also a blueprint for Russia’s future configuration.

Andrey Pertsev

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

Putin’s Post-Election Reshuffle Advances Russian State Erosion

The pressures of war are gradually warping Russia’s system of governance, making it more vulnerable to a future crisis.

Tatiana Stanovaya