# Why is it the USA's responsiblity in MidEast?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-the-usas-responsiblity-in-mideast/114482>\
**Category:** The BBQ Pit\
**Created:** [June 17, 2002, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-the-usas-responsiblity-in-mideast/114482 "2002-06-17T06:35:13Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\
**Post date:** [June 19, 2002, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-the-usas-responsiblity-in-mideast/114482/21 "2002-06-19T01:32:34Z")

</div>

I understand why the EU doesn’t have leverage - too many cooks. I understand why Germany might want to maintain a low diplomatic profile.

> [@](#):
>
> Let’s keep in mind that one of the key factors in being able to play a role in international affairs is being able to exert your will in matters. Malta doesn’t exactly have the money or military or any sort of leverage to MAKE people do what they say. You need to have a stick to make people do things sometime, people on the national level don’t listen to reason… Economic embargoes won’t work, and as Coldfire said, sending their F16’s wouldn’t work either.

What I don’t understand is how military and economic power translate automatically into diplomatic responsibility.

Why? Because nobody is seriously saying that the US should bomb either the Israelis or the Palestinians. Ditto for economic sanctions. Now, I suppose the US could lower its aid to Israel. But I doubt that would happen, frankly. And a contribution totaling to 1%? of GDP doesn’t allow you to just dictate. So the US, in practice, isn’t going to MAKE anybody do anything.

Yet the participants in the conflict say, “The US should push the Arafat/Sharon to do XYZ.” Ok. XYZ may be in the US’s interest. If so however, it’s probably in the Netherlands’ interest as well. The fact that the latter have fewer bombs and exports is borderline irrelevant.

A better example might be Denmark. Their WWII experience might give them credibility in Israel and their general humanitarian stance might give them negotiating credibility with the Palestinians. But for some reason, the US is suppose to play the role of the mediator. (Heck, shouldn’t a mediator be a _disinterested_ party anyway?)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\
**Post date:** [June 19, 2002, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-the-usas-responsiblity-in-mideast/114482/22 "2002-06-19T01:38:36Z")

</div>

Hm. There is a point that bears aknowledgement. The US has been involved in the region for a long time, and with that comes a certain level of expertise and expectations.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-the-usas-responsiblity-in-mideast/114482.md?page=1)