2013 Middle East and North Africa Year in Review
Numerous incidents in 2013 forced the United States to make important and divisive policy choices, from whether to cut-off assistance to one of the top recipients of U.S. aid (Egypt) to whether to arm the rebels fighting Syrian president Bashar al Assad. As we move through the first month of 2014 and start to think about what this year might bring us, we want to take a step back to highlight a few events that make it to the top of our list for 2013. Below is such a roundup, which highlights events that in one way or another influenced US security policy and/or security assistance toward the region in 2013.
Top U.S. Security Assistance Stories from 2013
U.S. Security Assistance to Egypt:
Following the Egyptian military’s ouster of President Mohamed Morsi in July, uncertainly emerged as to whether U.S. security and economic assistance to Egypt would be suspended. U.S. law prohibits distributing assistance “to the government of any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup d'etat or decree or ... a coup d'etat or decree in which the military plays a decisive role.” However, the Obama administration refused to label the military’s actions as a coup and, at first, denied reports that it had secretly suspended assistance.
Nonetheless, over the summer, President Obama delayed the delivery of four F-16 fighter jets and cancelled the biennial Bright Star exercises with Egypt’s military, stating “our traditional cooperation cannot continue as usual when civilians are being killed in the streets and rights are being rolled back.” Ultimately, in October, the State Department partially suspended aid to Egypt, announcing its intention “to recalibrate our assistance to Egypt to ensure that it’s being effectively used to advance all of our objectives.” Specifically, State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki said the U.S. would “continue to hold the delivery of certain large-scale military systems and cash assistance to the government,” though “we will continue assistance to help secure Egypt’s borders, counter terrorism and proliferation, and ensure security in the Sinai.”
The question of whether to suspend U.S. assistance also divided Congress, with some members arguing that the U.S. should have immediately halted assistance, and other members praising the military’s actions and pushing for assistance to continue. Even before Morsi’s removal many in Congress wanted to adjust the U.S. aid package to Egypt, so that in 2013 dozens of bills, resolutions and amendments were offered on the subject. The most recently proposed bill, the Egypt Assistance Reform Act, was co-sponsored by the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. The bill permits the resumption of U.S. assistance to Egypt on a number of conditions and weakens the requirement to cut assistance following a coup d’etat.
U.S. Training of Libyan Security Forces:
In November, the Defense Department announced its intention to train 5,000 to 8,000 soldiers of the newly established Libyan General Purpose Force in a U.S.-run institution in Bulgaria. Though conducted over a number of years, this engagement would make Libya one of the largest annual recipients of U.S. military training in the Middle East. This training is just one element of the United States’ security assistance package to Libya, while other European and Middle Eastern countries have also committed to train Libya’s growing police and military forces.
Libya’s prime minister, Ali Zeidan, requested international assistance for the country’s security forces multiple times last year, as his government has struggled to solve Libya’s militia problem. However, this same militia problem may also impact the U.S. training program, as the U.S. tries to assure none of the trainees had committed human rights violations as members of an armed group. The head of U.S. Special Operations Command, Admiral William McRaven, admitted that while the trainees will undergo extreme vetting, “there is probably some risk that some of the people we will be training with do not have the most clean records.” Moreover, a number of experts interviewed about the U.S. plan warned that the General Purpose Force must be seen as all inclusive and ethnically diverse, otherwise it may become yet another self-interested, armed group.
U.S. Arm Sales to the Gulf and Israel:
In 2013, the Defense Department announced tens of billions of dollars worth of arm sales to Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) member states, largely with the aim of strengthening their military power vis-à-vis Iran’s. During Secretary Hagel’s first trip to the Middle East in April, the Defense Department unveiled agreements for over USD 10 billion in arm sales to Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. In announcing the agreements together, the Pentagon signaled its regional approach to combating Iran’s nuclear program, even when dealing with disparate partners like Saudi Arabia and Israel. The deal included a number of firsts for the U.S., such as the first sale of the V-22 Osprey to an international partner (to Israel) and the first sale of long-range missiles to Saudi Arabia and the UAE. In addition to the April agreements, the DOD announced numerous other deals in with GCC states, with sales to Saudi Arabia easily exceeding ten billion dollars.
Arming the Syrian Rebels:
During 2013 the U.S. government significantly increased its support to the moderate Syrian rebel coalition, the Supreme Military Council (SMC). In February, Secretary Kerry announced that the SMC would receive direct, non-lethal support from the U.S. for the first time, which includes food, medical supplies, communication equipment and vehicles. Moreover, after determining that the Assad regime used chemical weapons against the Syrian population, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes indicated in June that the U.S would begin to distribute assistance with a “military purpose” to the SMC. Following this statement, media outlets reported that the administration approved the plan to arm the Syrian rebels. These arms only began reaching Syria in September, however, as the two Congressional intelligence committees blocked funding for the weapons due to concerns that the arms would fall into hostile hands and skepticism as to whether the plan would significantly alter the situation on the ground. Furthermore, the U.S. recently suspended the delivery of the non-lethal assistance to the SMC after Islamic rebel groups seized bases and equipment belonging to the SMC.
Security Assistance to Syria’s Neighbors:
The Syrian conflict also impacted U.S. security assistance to Syria’s neighbors. In June, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Martin Dempsey, indicated that the Defense Department intends to increase its training and equipping of Syria’s neighbors, particularly Lebanon and Iraq. As such, the Defense Department announced over USD 4 billion in arms sales to Iraq this year, largely in the form of air defense systems, which the U.S. is hoping would improve Iraq’s control over its airspace. Nonetheless, Congress continued to block the sale of Apache helicopters to Iraq over fear that the aircraft would be used unlawfully against the minority Sunni population, despite the administration’s claim that the Apaches are necessary for Iraq’s fight against terrorism.
Meanwhile, the U.S. deployed 1,500 troops to Jordan in 2013. These troops are operating Patriot defense missile batteries, F-16 fighter jets, and other related equipment the United States left in Jordan at the country’s request following the Eager Lion exercise in June.
Top U.S. Policy Stories from 2013
President Obama’s United Nations General Assembly Speech:
President Obama’s UN General Assembly speech in late September focused almost exclusively on the Middle East, outlining the broad U.S. approach to the region. Obama stated that U.S. diplomatic efforts in the region will concentrate on two issues: halting Iran’s nuclear weapons program and solving the Israeli-Arab conflict. Obama also promised that the U.S. will remain engaged in the region, even though he acknowledged that many of the sectarian conflicts plaguing the Middle East cannot be resolved by outside power. Ultimately, Obama firmly stated:
Indeed, as recent debates within the United States over Syria clearly show, the danger for the world is not an America that is too eager to immerse itself in the affairs of other countries or to take on every problem in the region as its own. The danger for the world is that the United States, after a decade of war -- rightly concerned about issues back home, aware of the hostility that our engagement in the region has engendered throughout the Muslim world -- may disengage, creating a vacuum of leadership that no other nation is ready to fill.
The United States Threatens Military Action in Syria:
Following the August 21stchemical weapons attacks in Damascus’ suburbs that the U.S. blamed on the Syrian government, speculation emerged that the Obama administration would take military action against the regime. Though France supported a potential military strike, other international allies opposed the idea, and many members of Congress demanded the administration put any military action to a vote. Ultimately, President Obama concluded on August 31st that the U.S. should conduct limited military strikes to hold the Syrian regime accountable for its actions, but he promised to ask Congress for authorization before undertaking this action.
But before Congress voted on these strikes, the United States and Russia agreed to a deal with Syria by which the military strikes would be averted if Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile would be destroyed by the middle of 2014. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons devised a plan (pdf) to oversee the destruction process, and despite recent delays, its head expressed confidence in meeting the mid 2014 deadline.
Interim Deal with Iran:
Throughout the fall of 2013 the U.S. and Iran intensified their efforts to reach a deal regarding Iran’s nuclear program. Following the October UN General Assembly, President Obama spoke with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani on the phone, a conversation that represented the highest-level discussion between the two countries since the Iranian Revolution in 1979. Negotiations in early November between the P5+1 and Iran came close to reaching a deal, and a few weeks later the two sides signed a six-months interim agreement (pdf) that froze key components of Iran’s program. In return, the deal provided Iran with USD 7 billion in sanctions relief and a promise that no new sanctions would be implemented during the duration of the agreement. However, a number of Congress members expressed skepticism about the deal, with some intent on introducing additional sanctions that would kick in if the interim deal fails.
The Gulf Cooperation Council Expressed Displeasure with U.S. Foreign Policy:
Despite the numerous arms sales agreements with the Gulf Cooperation Council states, a number of these countries expressed skepticism and frustration with U.S. policy in the region, particularly the warming relations between Iran and the U.S. and the U.S.’s refusal to take military action against Syria. Numerous U.S. officials traveled to the Gulf region in recent months to calm the tensions, and during a December trip to Bahrain Secretary Hagel reasserted the U.S. military’s commitment to the region. Hagel also outlined the military’s posture and deployments in the region, confirmed the planned expansion of the U.S. naval base in Bahrain, visited a previously classified U.S. base in Qatar, and detailed the U.S. intention to sell weapons to the Gulf Cooperation Council as a unit.