American elites talk about the War on Terror as a failure. Whether their diagnosis was an overabundance of compassion or brutality , goals that were too   ambitious or too   limited , the U.S. political class tends to see their country’s twenty-year intervention in the Middle East as a regrettable episode. Even those who defend continued U.S. military presence call it the least- bad option, something that America “ can’t escape ,” rather than pointing to any positive vision. But the War on Terror did succeed on its own terms. Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State have been too shattered to threaten American and European publics. Governments that opposed the United States have either collapsed or are weakened beyond repair. The Middle East has been transformed forever in ways that entrench U.S. military, economic, and cultural power. America won. Americans’ regret comes from their catastrophic success. The war was supposed to create a permanent military empire, a Damocles sword over Muslims’ heads. Of course millions   of   lives would be ruined in the process. And a massive military buildup was bound to redirect the rest of American society’s resources into defense contractors’ pockets . The biggest winners of the past twenty years have been Israel, a few oil-rich Arab monarchies in the Persian Gulf, and the class of Westerners who profit from serving those states. Tel Aviv and Dubai are now finance and tech boomtowns, partly because of the chaos in neighboring countries. Saudi Arabia, having made itself indispensable to U.S. policy, now forces Washington and Beijing to compete   for   its loyalty . “The Chinese involvement in the Middle East isn’t necessarily bad. It could be useful because it will compel the U.S. to stay here,” Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly    told lawmakers. Before the Bush administration started talking about democracy promotion, the stated    war aims were to scare the Muslim world out of tolerating anti-American violence. President George W. Bush told   American   troops to “take the battle to the enemy, disrupt his plans, and confront the worst threats before they emerge.” Civilian journalists phrased it a lot   more   bluntly : the United States needed to “pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall,” in order to tell Muslim publics to “suck on this.” Critics warned that heavy-handed military measures would only inflame   and   radicalize the region. They were right. After the U.S. invasion, Iraq radiated     violence outwards. A rogue's gallery of foreign fighters from around the world gathered there, built up their networks, and prepared to wage region-wide war. Repression elsewhere in the Muslim world wiped out the democratic   Islamist   alternative . Islamist rhetoric turned increasingly sectarian and apocalyptic . All to Washington’s benefit. Shi’a and Sunni Islamists were divided against each other. Whatever passive public support the jihadists had turned to active revulsion, and even democratic Islamists were tarred with the image of violent extremism. While every escalation in the violence tore up the Islamists’ societal support base, anti-Islamist forces could count on steady military and political backing from the West, which stayed relatively unscathed. While the War on Terror initially benefited Iran, by allowing Iranian agents to take   control   of   Iraqi politics , a vengeful United States eventually brought the hammer down. Washington repurposed the military     bases - and legal justifications - built up during the War on Terror to besiege Iran militarily. The U.S. economic sanctions established to fight   terrorism turned into a tool to isolate    and    damage the Iranian economy. The U.S. military has become a cornerstone of the region’s security architecture. Some states have welcomed its presence. Others, like Iraq and Syria, have been powerless to eject it. The U.S. retreat from Afghanistan was the exception that proves the rule: the rapid collapse of the Afghan republic after American troops left made other regimes more anxious to preserve    U.S. support . Iraqis who once took up arms against American troops now fear     the     Americans’ departure . Most Middle Easterners are not better off for these developments. The unluckiest countries have been plunged into civil war, or faced an economic crisis so punishing that it might as well have been war . Their neighbors muddle along, politically stable but hopelessly dependent on Western aid , with citizens who have few prospects of improving their lot in life. The malaise has afflicted everyone, those who resisted America and those who submitted, all the same. Except for Israelis and Gulf Arabs, who form the semi-Americanized upper crust of the region. Protected by a massive U.S. military presence, the Gulf has been able to present itself as the regional safe haven for trade and investment. U.S. bombs and sanctions have wiped out the competition - and crippled Israel’s potential challengers. When Israel and the Gulf states choose to join in the combat, they get a chance to advertise their “battle tested” defense industries to the global export market . The U.S. presence in the Middle East, which once had the goal of protecting Americans against terrorism, is now geared toward maintaining Israeli and Gulf Arab privilege. American politicians from both parties consider the Abraham Accords the crowning   achievement of U.S. policy in the Middle East and   beyond . U.S. diplomats are currently trying to negotiate the size    of    the    bribe    Saudi Arabia wants for joining the alliance. Washington needs some positive vision for its Middle Eastern empire, something to show for twenty years of bloodshed. No one seems to take democracy promotion in the Arab world seriously anymore, or even the idea that Israel is defending its own “ vibrant   democracy .” Instead, the United States focuses on nurturing elite cosmopolitan   bubbles . The dream of Iraqis lining up to vote has given way to the utopia of interfaith     prayers     in     the     Abu     Dhabi     airport lounge . That airport has plenty of Western guests. Every kind of elite Westerner, from Instagram influencers and academics to mercenary warlords and government   officials , has found a way to make money from Gulf politics. The resumes of Biden administration officials read like a guide to legally taking Saudi   and   Emirati cash . On the other side of the political spectrum, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates have plowed billions   of   dollars directly into the Trump   family business . And the World Cup in Qatar was a financial   bonanza for those willing to whitewash the Gulf’s human rights practices . The vast majority of Westerners have gained nothing from the new Middle Eastern order. And they have paid steep costs maintaining it. The U.S. government spent trillions   of   dollars on the War on Terror, not to mention thousands of American lives, while American society grew more polarized,   angry,   and   paranoid . European societies were already torn up over the issue of post-colonial immigration. War on Terror conflicts displaced another 38    million    people , many of whom see Europe as the safest refuge. As for the original problem of terrorism, better police   work by itself probably would have been enough to protect Western publics. “Where they make a desert, they call it peace.” That was how a Scottish tribe, quoted by the Roman historian Tacitus, described Rome’s empire. After 9/11, Americans set out to create a Roman peace. They were shocked and saddened to achieve that goal.

Written by

Matthew Petti