From the 1999 IBDP History paper 2 Exam
The impact of the Cold War on the Middle East is profound and lasting, a geopolitical labyrinth characterised by ideological confrontations, superpower rivalry, and regional ambitions. It is within this framework of political tension and power dynamics that the Middle East was drawn into the broader currents of Cold War politics, its regional complexities amplified by the overarching East-West contest. The Cold War influenced the Middle East through the shaping of political ideology, the generation of proxy wars and the alteration of regional alliances. The reasons for this were multiple and interconnected, comprising strategic imperatives, ideological motivations, and the inexorable logic of power politics.
The shaping of political ideology in the Middle East serves as a significant method through which the Cold War affected the region. To understand this fully, one must appreciate the superpowers' interest in exerting influence over the Middle East. Soviet interests in the Middle East primarily revolved around a desire for geopolitical advantage, with an aim to exploit decolonisation and nationalism to expand their sphere of influence. Soviet leaders like Khrushchev believed the Arab world was ripe for socialist revolution, hoping to leverage this to weaken the West's influence in the region, a point of view famously elaborated by Gaddis. On the other hand, the US pursued a policy aimed at containing the spread of communism, encapsulated in the Truman Doctrine and the Eisenhower Doctrine. The Eisenhower Doctrine in particular, which explicitly extended containment policy to the Middle East, was a major instrument of American foreign policy during this period, as explained by LaFeber. It offered military and economic aid to Middle Eastern countries threatened by communism, significantly affecting the region's political landscape. Nasser's Egypt, which assumed a leading role in the region during this period, provides an illustrative example. Nasser adopted a policy of positive neutralism or non-alignment, aiming to balance between the US and USSR to extract the maximum benefit for Egypt. He nationalised the Suez Canal, provoking a crisis that brought the Cold War to the region in a dramatic fashion, as outlined by Yaqub. The crisis ended in humiliation for Britain and France, while Egypt, the US, and the USSR emerged strengthened. The Suez Crisis was not merely about control of a strategic waterway; it represented the demise of colonial powers and the rise of new players, inextricably tied to the broader dynamics of the Cold War.
The aftermath of the Suez Crisis led to an increase in Soviet influence in the region. Nasser's relationship with the USSR was bolstered by the latter's support during the crisis. He obtained Soviet funding for the Aswan High Dam after American and British financing was withdrawn, which deepened the ties between Egypt and the USSR. Additionally, Nasser's anti-imperialist and nationalist rhetoric resonated with the anti-colonial principles championed by the USSR, fostering a shared ideological basis. Nasser's ideology of Pan-Arabism also gained traction during this period, fuelled by the perceived victory over colonial powers during the Suez Crisis. This potent combination of nationalism and socialism appealed to many in the Arab world, leading to the short-lived union between Egypt and Syria to form the United Arab Republic, and to Iraq's bloody 1958 coup, inspired by Nasser's ideals. This era marked a significant shift in regional dynamics, demonstrating the degree to which the global ideological struggle of the Cold War influenced political ideology in the Middle East. Conversely, American efforts to contain communism led to the formation of the Central Treaty Organisation (CENTO) as detailed by Kuniholm, comprising Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. The US aimed to create a unified front against the potential spread of communism into the strategically crucial Middle East. This added a new layer to the complex web of alliances in the region, further entrenching the Cold War divide. However, the inability of CENTO to prevent conflict between its members (as evidenced by the Iran-Iraq War) revealed the limitations of the American strategy, as it failed to account for regional nuances and rivalries. Despite these limitations, the US's policy of containment significantly impacted the political ideology and alliance formation in the region.
A second way in which the Cold War affected the Middle East was through the generation of proxy wars. This was a characteristic feature of the Cold War, as direct confrontation between the superpowers could risk nuclear escalation. As such, the Middle East, like other regions globally, became an arena for these indirect conflicts. The Arab-Israeli conflict, in particular, is a poignant illustration of this dynamic, exacerbated and perpetuated by Cold War tensions. The establishment of the state of Israel in 1948 led to a protracted conflict with its Arab neighbours. The superpowers initially adopted somewhat balanced positions. However, as the Cold War intensified, the conflict increasingly assumed the character of a proxy war, with the US and USSR backing Israel and the Arab states, respectively, a point extensively analysed by Shlaim. From the 1960s onwards, the US became the principal supporter of Israel, providing it with extensive military and economic aid, partly due to strategic considerations, but also influenced by domestic political dynamics. Israel was seen as a bulwark against Soviet expansion in the region, sharing a commitment to democratic values with the US. Conversely, the USSR, having lost its influence in Israel with the ascendance of right-wing parties, turned to the Arab states, supplying them with arms and supporting their cause at international forums. The Six-Day War of 1967, as chronicled by Oren, underscored this proxy dynamic. The war resulted in a decisive Israeli victory, altering the regional geopolitical map. However, it also highlighted the extent to which the Arab-Israeli conflict had become entwined with the Cold War, with both superpowers rushing to the United Nations Security Council to prevent the conflict from escalating further. While the war was fundamentally a regional conflict, the implications for the global balance of power were significant, demonstrating the inextricable link between the regional and global during the Cold War.
The proxy war dynamic further complicated attempts to broker peace in the region. The US-led Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt in 1978 marked a significant departure from this pattern. Yet, the Accords were less about fostering comprehensive regional peace than about securing strategic objectives, including the removal of Egypt from the Soviet sphere of influence, as argued by Quandt. The superpowers' role in fuelling the Arab-Israeli conflict is a clear example of how the Cold War generated and intensified proxy wars in the Middle East. This not only led to protracted and bloody conflicts but also significantly hindered peace efforts in the region, given the strategic and ideological stakes involved for the superpowers. The Afghan War, which began with the Soviet invasion in 1979, is another clear instance of a Cold War proxy conflict in the Middle East. Here, the roles were reversed, with the US, along with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, supporting the Afghan Mujahideen against the Soviet forces. The rationale was, again, grounded in the logic of containment - the US sought to prevent further Soviet expansion in the region, particularly given Afghanistan's proximity to the oil-rich Persian Gulf, as elucidated by Coll. The Afghan War had far-reaching consequences for the region. It not only led to significant human suffering and political instability in Afghanistan but also contributed to the rise of radical Islamist movements, with Mujahideen fighters later forming the core of Al-Qaeda. Furthermore, the war was a major factor in the decline of the Soviet Union, with Gorbachev's decision to withdraw Soviet forces in 1988 often seen as the beginning of the end of the Cold War, as detailed by Kalinovsky. Thus, the generation of proxy wars was another significant way through which the Cold War affected the Middle East, contributing to regional instability and shaping the geopolitical landscape in lasting ways.
Lastly, the alteration of regional alliances significantly demonstrates how the Cold War affected the Middle East. The superpowers' respective alliances and partnerships were fluid, largely determined by geopolitical considerations rather than ideological affinity. For instance, despite ideological differences, the US supported authoritarian regimes in Iran and Saudi Arabia due to their opposition to communism and their strategic location near Soviet borders, as noted by Yergin. The Shah of Iran, installed with CIA assistance in 1953, was a significant recipient of American military aid, transforming Iran into a regional power. Saudi Arabia, possessing the world's largest oil reserves, also became a vital ally, especially after the US's oil production peaked in the early 1970s. As the Cold War wore on, these alliances took on a new dimension, with both countries becoming central to the US's strategic doctrine in the region, articulated in the Carter Doctrine of 1980, which pledged that the US would use military force, if necessary, to defend its interests in the Persian Gulf. In contrast, the USSR's most enduring alliance in the Middle East was with Syria, a relationship that strengthened significantly after Hafez al-Assad's ascent to power in 1970. Syria's geopolitical location and its persistent confrontation with Israel made it an attractive ally for the USSR. The relationship was symbiotic - while Syria benefited from Soviet military aid, the USSR gained a foothold in the heart of the Middle East, as highlighted by Hinnebusch. The fluidity of these alliances was underscored when Egypt, once a Soviet ally, pivoted to the West after Sadat's ascension in 1970, culminating in the Camp David Accords and the subsequent peace treaty with Israel. This represented a major realignment in regional politics, revealing the strategic considerations that often superseded ideological affinity during the Cold War.
These strategic considerations continued to inform the relationships between the superpowers and their Middle Eastern allies, even as the Cold War waned. A case in point is the US's continued support for Saudi Arabia and Israel, despite mounting criticisms of these countries' human rights records. The maintenance of these alliances reflects the enduring strategic interests of the superpowers, beyond their Cold War imperatives. Moreover, the changes in these alliances had significant implications for the internal politics of the countries involved. In Iran, widespread dissatisfaction with the Shah's authoritarian rule and his perceived subservience to the US led to the 1979 Iranian Revolution, marking the end of the monarchy and the beginning of the Islamic Republic, a major shift in the regional balance of power as highlighted by Axworthy. This demonstrated that the alliances formed during the Cold War had profound impacts on the political dynamics within these countries, beyond the immediate geopolitical considerations. In conclusion, the Cold War had a significant and lasting impact on the Middle East, as evidenced by the altered political ideologies, the generation of proxy wars, and the changing alliances. The ideological struggle between capitalism and communism, played out in the region through the support of differing regimes and movements, fundamentally shifted the political landscape. The proxy wars, notably the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Afghan War, brought enormous suffering and instability but were also instrumental in shaping the political and ideological fabric of the region. Lastly, the alliances formed during the Cold War, dictated more by strategic considerations than ideological affinity, significantly influenced the internal and external politics of the countries involved. While the Cold War has ended, its impact on the Middle East continues to be felt, underscoring the lasting implications of this global ideological struggle.
