Marc Lynch

Why did Obama add Saudi Arabia to his itinerary?

 The Arab media is buzzing today over the announcement that President Obama will travel to Riyadh before arriving in Cairo for his big address to the Islamic world.   Why the late addition to his itinerary?   The first wave of response was a pure reflection of endemic inter-Arab rivalries.  The Saudis and their advocates are exultant, ...

 The Arab media is buzzing today over the announcement that President Obama will travel to Riyadh before arriving in Cairo for his big address to the Islamic world.   Why the late addition to his itinerary? 

 The first wave of response was a pure reflection of endemic inter-Arab rivalries.  The Saudis and their advocates are exultant, the Egyptians seem a bit deflated and defensive, and the "resistance camp" is alternately complaining about the concentration on the usual "Axis of Sunni Dictators" and egging on the Saudi-Egyptian sniping.

The Egyptians had been making much hay off of Obama's choice of Cairo for the speech, arguing that this vindicated Egypt's (deeply unpopular) foreign policy and signaled Egypt's return to the forefront of Arab leadership.  This seeming support for Egypt's (deeply unpopular) foreign policy was one of the reasons for my reservations about the choice of locale in the first place, although as with everything it depends on whether Obama endorses or challenges that approach in his speech.   With the Saudis now the American President's first port of call, the Egyptian claim to renewed leadership is weaker. 

 The Arab media is buzzing today over the announcement that President Obama will travel to Riyadh before arriving in Cairo for his big address to the Islamic world.   Why the late addition to his itinerary? 

 The first wave of response was a pure reflection of endemic inter-Arab rivalries.  The Saudis and their advocates are exultant, the Egyptians seem a bit deflated and defensive, and the "resistance camp" is alternately complaining about the concentration on the usual "Axis of Sunni Dictators" and egging on the Saudi-Egyptian sniping.

The Egyptians had been making much hay off of Obama’s choice of Cairo for the speech, arguing that this vindicated Egypt’s (deeply unpopular) foreign policy and signaled Egypt’s return to the forefront of Arab leadership.  This seeming support for Egypt’s (deeply unpopular) foreign policy was one of the reasons for my reservations about the choice of locale in the first place, although as with everything it depends on whether Obama endorses or challenges that approach in his speech.   With the Saudis now the American President’s first port of call, the Egyptian claim to renewed leadership is weaker. 

 After that inter-Arab rivalry business, Arabs are trying to puzzle out the greater political significance of the trip.  One group sees it as tied closely to the Israeli-Palestinian track, focusing on the Arab Peace Initiative and the coming unveiling of the Obama approach to Israeli-Arab relations.  Another sees it as tied more closely to Iran, preparing the Saudis for the coming engagement (or confrontation) with Tehran. 

 The key question for Obama’s trip the region, his speech, and his strategic approach both to Iran and the Israeli-Arab tracks is this:  will he reinforce or challenge the "moderates vs resistance" frame which he inherited from the Bush administration?   The Arab leaders he has been meeting, like the Israelis, are perfectly comfortable with that approach, dividing the region between Israel and Arab "moderates" vs Iran and Arab "resistance" groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.  That’s the easy path.  If followed it is likely to fail badly, destroy the hopes for change which his engagement policy has raised, and leave the region right back where Bush left it. But I think — and hope — that Obama will not fall into that trap. 

He has an opportunity over the next few weeks — with the unveiling of his approach to Israel and the Palestinians, the response to the Lebanese and Iranian elections, and his Cairo speech —  to break down those tired, dangerous, and unpopular lines of division. And if he chooses to do that, to really challenge the unsustainable status quo, then Riyadh and Cairo are the right place to start. 

Marc Lynch is associate professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University, where he is the director of the Institute for Middle East Studies and of the Project on Middle East Political Science. He is also a non-resident senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security. He is the author of The Arab Uprising (March 2012, PublicAffairs).

He publishes frequently on the politics of the Middle East, with a particular focus on the Arab media and information technology, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, and Islamist movements. Twitter: @abuaardvark

More from Foreign Policy

The Pentagon is seen from the air over Washington, D.C., on Aug. 25, 2013.

The Pentagon’s Office Culture Is Stuck in 1968

The U.S. national security bureaucracy needs a severe upgrade.

The Azerbaijani army patrols the streets of Shusha on Sept. 25 under a sign that reads: "Dear Shusha, you are free. Dear Shusha, we are back. Dear Shusha, we will resurrect you. Shusha is ours."

From the Ruins of War, a Tourist Resort Emerges

Shusha was the key to the recent war between Azerbaijan and Armenia. Now Baku wants to turn the fabled fortress town into a resort.

Frances Pugh in 2019's Midsommar.

Scandinavia’s Horror Renaissance and the Global Appeal of ‘Fakelore’

“Midsommar” and “The Ritual” are steeped in Scandinavian folklore. Or are they?