A Changing of the Guard: US policy change in the Middle East

As the saying goes, the biggest export for America is freedom, and with thousands of US military personal and years of involvement, no other region has been on the receiving end of more American "freedom" than the Middle East.  However, this exporting has gotten extremely unpopular at home and abroad.  This change in opinion combined with the dramatic political changes in the region over the past two years has left many wondering what the new role for the United States is in this volatile region of the globe. The implications of our policies are huge, with the billion dollar question being who steps up to be the power player if the US goes into retirement.

One player who seems eager to step up to the Broadway stage is Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi.  Recently elected after the fall of the formerly US backed Mubarak regime.  He has been shrewd thus far, balancing his base in the Muslim Brotherhood and as a leader in the predominantly Muslim Middle East but also extending a more friendly hand to Israel to balance western interests. But just days ago, he announced that his decisions would be immune from review by law, a power grab that is angering citizens whose experience of Mubarak are fresh in their minds.  Also, how well will the US be able to work diplomatically with Egypt, as conservative members at home consider the Muslim brotherhood to be a terrorist organization.  

Mohamed Morsi

With respect to sovereign governments, the US needs to stop it's double standard of committing on face value to the pillars of democracy while blatantly controlling the governments.  Instances such as the installation of the shah in Iran in 1953 lead to future hard feelings.  The US needs to instead back the right of self determination for all people.

That being said, the US should not necessarily stand by, though we should not get overly involved.  Overextended empires fail, so we cannot over commit resources to unnecessary problems.  Using our own interests as a measure for criteria,  we then can use our diplomatic bargaining power to look out for our interests without compromising the integrity of a sovereign government.  If we get too involved in a country, we might break it, and if we break it, we own it.  That is one of the problems setting us back in Afghanistan:  we're stuck if we leave and we're stick if we don't.

The United States needs to adopt a foreign policy that is more in tune with the times we are in.  We should opt for engagement, instead of containment  and use diplomatic means whenever possible.  We should avoid overextending our resources and seek to empower other nations instead of setting up democracy for them.  If we maintain an open and inclusive foreign policy, perceptions on the United States might, over time, change for the better, and we can better work with other nations to make the world a better place.  This policy change is incredibly important, especially in dealing with an area as volatile as the Middle East.

Comparing Economic Freedom

In our world, there is extraordinary disparity in the degree of economic freedom.  While some countries, like Australia, Ireland, and the United States have very high economic freedom, others are widely classified as repressed.  Here's a world breakdown of economic equality:

If we measure economic freedom versus economic productivity, we can see the benefits of creating a free-market economy:

These two graphics, with a bit of extra information, can provide us with a few lessons.  First of all, the greatest growth in economic freedom has been occurring in emerging markets, which bodes well for these countries trying to grow.  China and India, also, have in fact gained on the scale in economic freedom.  Latin America has seen small improvement too.

The obvious takeaway is that the more restrictions a country puts on businesses, consumers, and investors, the more they will struggle financially.  While some regulation can be good, to much restriction clearly limits growth.

Another takeaway concerns the Middle East.  Many of the Middle Eastern and African countries are solidly in red or orange.  These closed societies are not only breeding grounds for terrorism and intolerance, but they also offer little economic opportunity to their citizens.  This is especially dangerous, for oppressive societies in poverty are likely to stay oppressive, and young people trying to avoid terrorist organizations will have little options and opportunity