American foreign policy has been torn between engagement and isolationism on the global stage for over 100 years. The United States has embraced periods of ‘splendid isolationism’ and aggressive interventionism. Much of the rationale behind these mood swings have been linked to access to markets, natural resources, strategic infrastructure, and international trade routes. Very seldom has it been primarily principle-based.

The United States used to be good at occupation policy. After the post-WWI fiasco during the 1920s and 1930s, it seemed to have learned lessons from the tragedy of WWII and global totalitarianism. The occupation of Germany, Austria, Italy, and Japan during the Marshall Plan period was a huge success story. American intervention in the Middle East North Africa, as well as Central Asia stretching from Iran to Afghanistan, is more reminiscent of the horrific failings of Southeast Asia during the 1960s than the glory days of the early Cold War.

More than ever, US policy in the MENA seems to be tied to expediency rather than principles. Can the new Biden global policy, moving from ‘Relentless War to Relentless Diplomacy’, reestablish the American smart global reach of the 1940s and 1950s? Will it lead to tragic failures like those in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos; Chile, Nicaragua, and El Salvador? The challenges of the international energy market, the pandemic, and global warming could force American policymakers, as in the period of the Marshall Plan, to think smart and invest in the future. The impact of US decisions, to either re-engage in the MENA or wash their hands of responsibility, will have immediate implications for Lebanon.