America is legitimately interested in oil prices. Is that interest rational? Manifold price increases in the 1970s actually increased Western competitiveness by promoting new energy-efficient technologies. Similar increases after the Iraqi war did not noticeably impair Western economies. Oil and other raw materials are simply insignificant in modern technological economies. American involvement in the Middle East is clearly counterproductive in terms of the price of oil: not only do the costs of active military policy vastly exceed any possible oil savings, but the Iraqi war increased oil prices. Any plan to control the price of oil would be unworkable, like any price controls. The economic system is too complex to be predictably (or even feasibly) adjusted by bureaucrats or politicians. American involvement in the Middle East exhibits no positive correlation with oil prices. If oil prices are the issue, outlawing OPEC would definitely be the most expedient measure.

Another reason for American intrusion in Muslim affairs is the threat that discontented Muslim populations pose to American security. Supporting Israel, the Jordanian monarchy, the despised Palestinians, and haughty Kuwait builds no goodwill toward America among Arabs. In their current cognitive framework, there can be no goodwill for America at all: it is a strong power to be feared, rather than loved. America must change the Muslim cognitive framework through ideological warfare, as it did with the Soviets, and convert them from Islam to consumerism. America need not involve itself in Arab-Israeli affairs.

America has betrayed Israel on several occasions. The US withdrew its UN vote in favor of establishing Israel in 1948, and embargoed weapons shipments to Israel in the War of Independence. In 1957, Eisenhower promised Israel he would interfere if Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran—in exchange for Israel abandoning Sinai, which it had conquered in the 1956 war. When Egypt closed the Straits in 1967, the US did nothing except to try to prevent Israel from preemption. Kissinger moved the US Administration to support Israel in a bid to counter Soviet influence in the Middle East, but the US fully neglects Israeli interests now. Not even Kuwait and Iraq, when they were American puppets, have signed peace treaties with Israel.

Does support for Israel prejudice American interests in the Middle East? I don’t see any support. America supplies much more weaponry to Arabs than to Jews, and gives Israel just a bit more aid than Egypt and Palestine. Politically correct America balances arms supplies to both sides, and that is detrimental to Israel, who can survive without the US supplies, while the Arabs cannot.

What are possibly the American interests in the Middle East? There are none. The Middle East’s oil constitutes about 15 percent of American fuel imports, and so is easily replaceable. Some kind of geostrategic stability? The Middle East has lacked geostrategic importance since the Portuguese discovered alternative trade routes. Besides, why should the US care about regional stability on the other end of the world? With the Soviets gone, there is no issue of containment, either.

American involvement in the Middle East stems mainly from three factors: bureaucratic and imperialist desire to expand the power umbrella, the moral idealists’ urge to enforce paradise and justice on others, and corruption of oil and military-industrial complexes. The real American interest is to forget about the Middle East. That would incidentally allow Israel to finish off her enemies.