【徹底解説】アメリカはなぜ中東の泥沼から抜け出せないのか？／冷戦終結後の歴代政権の戦略を大解剖／撤退路線のオバマ政権の実態／イラン核合意とは何か／トランプ第1期・第2期の最大の違い
Mizobuchi Masaki (Meiji Gakuin University) explains why the US cannot exit the Middle East, tracing each administration from Clinton through Trump 2.0 and the Iran strike.
- Clinton’s ‘dual containment’ of Iraq and Iran succeeded militarily but permanent US bases on the Arabian Peninsula fueled al-Qaeda’s core grievance and radicalization.
- Bush post-9/11 pivoted to unilateral military force; the Iraq invasion toppled Saddam but handed Iran its biggest strategic windfall by eliminating its primary regional threat.
- Obama’s 2011 ‘pivot to Asia’ and the 2015 Iran nuclear deal (capping enrichment near 3% in exchange for sanctions relief) were his only concrete Middle East achievements.
- Trump 1.0’s primary Middle East goal was to repudiate Obama: he withdrew from the Iran deal in 2018 and imposed maximum-pressure sanctions, while surrounding himself with pro-Israel figures including Jared Kushner, a close personal friend of Netanyahu.
- Biden attempted to revive the Iran deal and withdrew from Afghanistan, but alienated Arab autocratic allies over human-rights rhetoric while remaining unable to restrain Israel after October 7, leaving the US with no effective Middle East partners.
- Trump 2.0’s defining structural change is the replacement of experienced foreign-policy professionals with loyalists and yes-men, allowing Netanyahu to finally persuade a US president to strike Iran — something Netanyahu had been pushing for over 20 years.
- Netanyahu is widely described as having ‘found a foolish president in Washington who finally listens’; no senior official in Trump’s second cabinet existed to apply the brakes, unlike in the first term.
- Trump’s Iran strike is attributed to overlapping pressures: evangelical voter base (~25% of US electorate) viewing Israel support as God’s will, pro-Israel mega-donors, AIPAC-style lobbying, and possibly personal motives such as deflecting legal exposure.
2026-04-24 · Watch on YouTube