Seeker Blog

Brookings scholar Kenneth M. Pollack on the Middle East windfall — how it could lead to even more instability.

You might think that $140 per barrel oil would be good for at least one part of the world, the Middle East. It’s too soon to tell for certain, but the region may well turn out to be the part of the world that suffers the most.
An Indian labourer stands under futuristic Dubai skyline buildings

As painful as the current (or coming) oil-driven recession will be for Americans, it does seem to be convincing us to make the sacrifices necessary to diminish our reliance on oil. Over the long term, that could prove a huge boon for our economy, our environment and our national security.

In the Middle East, the situation may be reversed. Right now, the region is experiencing an economic boom, creating the opportunity to address the deep-seated political, economic and social problems that have spawned terrorist groups like Al Qaeda. That’s certainly what the people of the region hope.

The danger is that the way that the rising revenues are being spent will more likely worsen the region’s instability over time.

And that’s a problem, because problems in the Middle East have a bad habit of becoming big problems for the rest of the world. The Middle East isn’t Las Vegas: what happens there doesn’t stay there.

For those who don’t follow the Middle East closely, Pollack is a former Clinton National Security Council staffer, and the author of The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq. The book was highly influential among the policy community and remains today the best modern history of Saddam and the available policy options circa 2003. Pollack concluded that invasion was “the least worst choice” amongst a list of very unpleasant options.