American foreign policy and Persian Gulf oil interests, 1988–2010

American Foreign Policy Towards the Persian Gulf

Between 1988 and 2010, American foreign policy in the Persian Gulf was focused on achieving a number of different objectives. As, there was an emphasis on maintaining stability in the region by: supporting regimes and governments that were friendly towards U.S. interests. Part of the reason for this, was because there was a focus on ensuring that the continuous flow of oil remained in place. This is based on the fact, that this natural resource was a vital commodity that the West and the United States needed to continuously receive to maintain economic growth. Otherwise, the odds increased that there was a possibility that there could be some kind of major recession. Some good examples of this can be seen in the 1970's with: the Arab oil embargo that was based on U.S. support of Israel and the dependency that the nation had on the supplies coming out of Iran when the Shah was deposed in 1979. In both situations, this sent shockwaves around the globe that had a major impact on the U.S. economy by forcing it into a recession. (Crane 1 -- 16)

As a result, the foreign policy of the nation towards many countries in the Persian Gulf was to ensure that the continuous flow of oil. This has shaped these kinds of decisions by: focusing all the different administrations on achieving this objective in one way or another. (Crane 1 -- 16) This is significant, because this approach has caused the U.S. To engage in a number of different actions are designed to support this goal at any cost. To fully understand the impact that this is having on U.S. foreign policy in the region, we will examine how this has been the driving force for a host of activities that were support by: different Presidents from 1988 into 2010. Once this occurs, it will provide the greatest insights as to how oil production has been influencing these decisions over the years.

Literature of Similar Studies

To corroborate the views that oil is the main driver of U.S. foreign policy in the Persian Gulf. We will look at a number of different pieces of literature on the subject. This will illustrate how this has played a major role in determining the foreign policy actions that were taken during that time. At which point, we will have a more precise comprehension of the role that oil is playing in any kind of strategic decisions that are made inside Washington between: 1988 and 2010.

The first piece of literature on the subject can be found with Oystein (2007); he discusses how hostile nations such as Iran and Iraq (prior to the U.S. invasion 2003) were considered to be the biggest threats to U.S. oil interest in the region. This is because, both countries engaged in terrorism and other activities that were designed to increase their influence throughout the Middle East. This is problematic, because if they were able to gain any kind of influence this would have a dramatic impact on the flow of oil into the United States. As a result, the U.S. has been focused on supporting allies that may not practice Western ideals (i.e. The protection of human rights and democracies). However, they are in favor of ensuring that there is a continuous supply of crude oil and do not like nations that are trying to interfere with these objectives. This is important, because during the Iran -- Iraq War the U.S. took a position of neutrality by playing the two sides against one another. As, they were happy to see these two adversaries fight each other, based on the fact that it limited their ability to gain any kind influence in the region. At which point, the U.S. could continue to receive steady oil exports from the Persian Gulf. (Oystein 52 -- 101)

Moreover, the piece of literature that was written by Askari (2006), talks about how U.S. foreign policy in the region has been historically shifting. Yet, it has always remained in place to ensure that oil exports will continue to flow uninterrupted. This has influenced the United States' role in the region, as they will often take military actions to prevent a nation that is hostile to the U.S. from gaining control of this supply. Some examples that he discusses are: the 1991 Gulf War, the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and preventing Iran from acquiring any kind of nuclear technology. At the same time, they are also supporting regimes in places such as: Qatar, Saudi Arabia and other gulf states that are known to have repressive governments. This has caused the foreign policy to be based on finding and helping counties that will support this objective. While at the same time; taking either covert or direct military action to prevent hostile nations from being able to have some kind of strategic advantage. (Askari 8 -- 52)

Research Questions and Hypothesis

The various pieces of literature that we are looking at are a major factor in illustrating the overall approach of U.S. policy in: supporting different regimes that are friendly towards American interests. This is significant, because it is highlighting how this is a major strategic advantage that this is offering American authorities tremendous amounts of leverage in achieving this long-term objective. To determine if this kind of approach is the main driver of foreign policy in the region we will look at a number of different research questions including:

What are the actions that were taken by the U.S. To support these long-term goals?

How have the foreign policy objectives of the Iran -- Iraq War, the Gulf War, Iraq War and Bahrain crisis been an example of this kind of focus?

What are the main reasons that are used by different President's to support the continuous flow of oil, while having more popular motivations for supporting a particular action?

These different questions are important, because they will help us to focus on supporting or refuting our hypothesis. At which point, we can be able more effectively understand the different reasons why the U.S. has supported its position and the way they are able to justify it to the general public.

As a result, we will be concentrating on looking at particular avenues for supporting the hypothesis that we will be examining that is listed below:

Since the Arab oil embargo of the 1970's and the downfall of the Shah of Iran, the United States has been increasingly focused on ensuring the continuous supply of oil. This principal objective has been accomplished through: supporting regimes that will help to ensure that this is a reality. While at the same time, it is engaging in direct or covert military actions that depose any kind of governments that are involved in interfering with this support. As a result, this has caused the U.S. To support governments that are known for being dictatorships, which have a spotty track record on human rights abuses. Over the course of time, this has increased the total amounts of instability throughout the Persian Gulf due these questionable practices.

This is important, because the ability to be able to support or refute this hypothesis will help us to see the underlying reasons for the different foreign policy actions taken by the U.S. since 1988.

Methodology to use for the research

The methodology that we will be utilizing to understand these trends that are taking place is qualitative research. This is when we are looking at a number of different primary and secondary sources to comprehend the overall big picture events that are occurring. The way that this is accomplished is through looking at these different pieces of information together .To see the various trends and how they have shaped a host of outcomes that have occurred. At which point, we can begin to make specific inferences about: how this has influenced U.S. foreign policy and what are the lasting impacts. (Denzen 43 -- 64)

Once this occurs, we will be able to objectively evaluate the underlying causes that have shaped U.S. foreign policy in the region. This is when we can begin to answer the different research questions that were addressed earlier. Then, we can support or refute the hypothesis that has been presented. This will make any kind of observations more accurate and it will identify any kind actions that have been taken to deal with a wide variety issues throughout the region. (Denzen 43 -- 64)

These elements are important, because they will help us to be able to objectively look at wide variety of events and to see how U.S. foreign policy has shaped them. This will tell us the motivations behind this approach and why it has been continually been utilized by a wide variety of Presidents since 1988. Once this take place, we will know if the hypothesis that was presented is accurate in understanding these various causes. (Denzen 43 -- 64)

Conclusion

Clearly, the research project is designed to identify the underlying causes as to why the U.S. has taken the kinds of action it did since 1988 in regards to its foreign policy. Where, our hypothesis is designed to illustrate how this has been geared towards supporting the continuous flow of oil out of the region. Part of the reason for this, is because United States has seen various price shocks from two major supply disruptions in the 1970's. This caused sudden spikes in the price of crude oil, which had a negative effect on economic growth.

To prevent this from occurring, the U.S. has engaged in policies that will achieve this objective at all costs by: supporting brutal dictatorships that have a questionable human rights record. While at the same time, they have been aggressively engaging in covert and conventional military actions to thwart those who are trying to disrupt the supply. To determine the effectiveness of the hypothesis that has been presented, we will be using the balance of power theory. This will help us to see the underlying motivations of U.S. foreign policy in the region. At the same time, it will allow us to identify if there are any kind of other reasons that are used to justify these programs to the general public. Once this takes place, we will be able to make specific inferences that will support or refute the hypothesis that was presented. This will allow us to be able to make accurate assessments as to the validity of the hypothesis through: the qualitative analysis that was conducted. These different elements are important, because they will help us to understand the overall reasons behind this doctrine and why the United States has engaged in such an unusual approach when it comes to this region of the world.