It is no secret that the Obama Administration, and also future U.S. Administrations, may want to stay distant from the constant Middle East conflicts. This U.S. approach is not surprising. The Middle East has oil and in the past, the U.S. always wanted to ensure that the supply of oil to the U.S. flowed freely. However, soon, the U.S. may no longer be dependent on oil from the Middle East. The International Energy Agency recently reported that the U.S. will become the world’s top producer of natural gas in 2015 and oil in 2017, surpassing production levels in Russia and Saudi Arabia. So the U.S. energy dependence on the Middle East is fast dissipating. But there are geopolitical reasons for the U.S. to retain the Middle East on its foreign policy radar, albeit using a more standoffish strategy. And the U.S. is maintaining this standoffish approach by having Israel as its strategic partner.

Paradoxically though, as the U.S. seems eager to stay on the sidelines in the recent Gaza/Israel conflict, its State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland asserted that Israel had the right to defend itself. Former President George Bush said the same thing three years ago, thus: “instead of caring about the people of Gaza, Hamas decided to use Gaza to launch rockets to kill innocent Israelis. Israel has obviously decided to defend herself and her people.”While Bush was not on the sidelines then, Obama seems determined to rethink new foreign policy priorities in Asia and the Pacific, and to use quiet diplomacy for the Middle East conflicts. Nonetheless, muttering that Israel had the right to defend itself in the latest Gaza/Israel conflict is not consistent with taking a neutral stand or staying on the sidelines. If Obama is keen on staying on the sidelines in this conflict, then a more neutral remark exhorting both sides to reach a peaceful settlement vis-a-vis using Turkey or/and Egypt to lead the way toward a ceasefire.

Egypt did play a significant role in brokering a ceasefire between Gaza and Israel. The U.S. expected Egypt to do what it has done; and so all the more reason the Obama Administration’s remark that Israel had the right to defend itself was unwarranted. What is clear from all of this is that while the U.S. may very well want to stay aloof from Middle East conflicts, Israel is still its most solid ally in that region, and it will have to shore up Israel whenever that becomes necessary. For instance, since World War II, Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign aid; at this time, Israel is the recipient of $115 billion in aid from the U.S. in bilateral assistance, mainly for military purpose; again, all military aid for Israel is delivered within the first 30 days of the fiscal year; other countries receive U.S. aid in installments (Congressional Research Service). In this context, it is not too difficult to understand how Israel has become the strongest military force in the Middle East.

Author’s note: This topic will be expanded further in next week’s column