Bilateral relations between the United States and the Arab countries are good in general, especially on the commercial level which is registering a major surplus in favor of the Americans, despite the cost of the energy they import. However, political ties, and despite the eloquence of the official statements, are no match for the commercial ones. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan generated American-Arab convergence on all levels in order to face it, and the Arab Gulf countries employed all their capabilities to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan, which is a strategic goal. This political-military-financial convergence depleted the Soviet giant and hastened its withdrawal until its collapse. In other words, American-Arab cooperation, alongside Pakistan which constituted a rear base and passageway for all the elements of the battle, achieved a historical mission – according to its two parties – i.e. end the Soviet Union. Ever since this exemplary cooperation in Afghanistan which achieved its goal with distinction, the American calculations parted from their Arab counterparts on almost all regional affairs. Today, we are seeing the consequence of this divergence on more than one file, after it was among the reasons which led to division in the Arab countries. At the top of the files that contributed to the American and Arab calculations growing apart is probably the settlement file with Israel, knowing that the orphan initiative presented by the George Bush Sr. administration to exchange land with peace did not result in any progress towards settlement. It is even suspected that the Madrid conference was the symbolic price granted to the Arabs in exchange for their participation alongside the American troops in the ousting of Saddam Hussein's troops from Kuwait. And during Bill Clinton's term, the Americans collaborated with the Israelis to turn the comprehensive peace process into bilateral negotiations, which is why the current peace process is limited to the Palestinian course – although the Arabs presented a comprehensive peace initiative which earned international acceptance. Still, the United States is obstructing the transformation of this initiative into a negotiations mechanism on all courses, including the land for peace formula. President George Bush Jr. invaded Iraq in the context of a political process which did not take into account the Arab positions towards Saddam Hussein's regime. He immediately started dismantling the Iraqi state and its basic structure, which has placed and is still placing the issue of the country's unity at stake. This also made the calculations diverge, considering that the Arab regime, which wanted to get rid of Saddam Hussein, was saying at the same time that the Iraqi state should not be linked to the fate of the defeated dictator. As a result, and because the Americans did not take the Arab concerns into consideration, Iraq was divided and torn apart between fighting sectarian entities. Until now, the situation in Iraq is still controlled by the sectarian parties that came from or are allied with Iran, which is increasing and deepening the Arab fears, without the American trying to alleviate them by pressuring the side monopolizing power. The Arab-American calculations parted at this point, amid concerns that are still surrounding sectarian hegemony over Iraq. And while Arab officials, especially in the Gulf, are expressing worries over Washington's and Tehran's signing of a deal at some point without taking into account the Arab interests in the Gulf, the divide affecting the Arab and American calculations in regard to the Syrian file is still wide, and is maybe among the reasons why the conflict is expanding and the killings, destruction and displacement are ongoing, without there being signs of a solution on the horizon. The United States' calculations are based on its interest in exercising its authority, and clearly, the Arabs are the ones mainly paying the price for this American policy that has been the object of numerous complaints and demands for it to take the Arab interests into account. And at a time when Washington holds pressure tools that can be used on the Arab side, the Arabs voluntarily relinquished theirs. The slogan related to the oil weapon was issued in specific circumstances that might not apply during the current stage, but the Arabs should push towards a formula that would link the tense political relations to the flourishing commercial ones.
