The impending debt crunch and pullback from the Middle East I 

Brian M Downing

In coming years, probably no more than fifteen years, the national debt will reach a crisis point. Debt servicing, the amount of money the government expends simply to pay off the interest, will near $1 trillion a year. This will force spending cuts – large ones. The crisis was made inevitable when a GOP Vice President assured the nation that deficits don’t matter. Both parties and the public eagerly accepted his counsel.

Emerging cultural changes and demography suggest a consensus will form to make serious cuts in defense spending rather than social programs. The US will have to pull back from the globalism that it adopted, and had thrust on it, after World War Two.

There are three main regions – East Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. As noted previously, the first two regions are economically vital and share democratic beliefs. The Middle East, however, isn’t economically vital or democratic. Recent wars indicate that the region’s militaries have little strategic value.

Commerce

US trade with Europe and East Asia is strong – hi-tech, designer clothing, automobiles, military hardware, and agricultural products. The US will be exporting large amounts of oil and gas to both regions in coming years, which will nudge out Saudi and Russian oil sales – much to the irritation of king and tsar. 

The Middle East used to supply immense amounts of oil to the US. No more. What little comes in now is not from need but from the orders of Saudi-owned refineries in Texas and over 5,000 affiliated gas stations. 

The mainstay of US-Saudi commerce is now armaments. It brings in tremendous amounts of money and secures well-paying manufacturing jobs. There are unattractive consequences. The Saudis and their Sunni allies are able to pressure the US into defending them and fighting their wars. Hence the US’s predominant position in liberating Kuwait in 1991 and battling ISIL over the last five years. Hence, the growing involvement in Yemen and Iran.

Military value

Alignments are usually made to increase security by coordinating the militaries to perform strategic missions. NATO against the Soviet Union, the Warsaw Pact against the West, the Triple Entente against the Triple Alliance, and so on. 

Member nations should have professional armies that are capable of performing strategic missions. The militaries of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the Emirates, and other Sunni monarchies are large and well-equipped. They march crisply and salute smartly. However, they’re not effective fighting forces.

 In the 1991 Gulf War, the Saudi army performed badly. In the wars against ISIL and the Houthis of Yemen, Saudi troops skillfully avoid fighting, though both conflicts are just across their borders. Sunni armies are plagued by nepotism in the officer corps and fissures in the ranks based on tribe and clan. Small-unit cohesion, upon which combat effectiveness relies, is lacking. The princes are able to use their influence in the capitals of major powers to take up the burden. A war against Iran is looming.

The armies of Britain, France, and Germany are professional, effective fighting forces. The same can be said of East Asian armies of Japan, S Korea, and Taiwan. The US has trained with all these armies and conducted large-scale joint exercises. The generals know and trust one another. 

European and East Asian armies would of course need American support in any sizable conflict, perhaps more than Washington would like, but they are far more reliable than counterparts in the Middle East. And there isn’t the sneaking suspicion that their soldiers despise Americans and would train their rifles on them if the opportunity presented itself.

© 2019 Brian M Downing 

Brian M Downing is a national security analyst who’s written for outlets across the political spectrum. He studied at Georgetown University and the University of Chicago, and did post-graduate work at Harvard’s Center for International Affairs. Thanks as ever to Susan Ganosellis.