US policy repeatedly wrecked democratic movements and installed dictators in MENA

Evidence

In the context of the Arab uprisings of 2011, the Obama administration at first supported its dictatorial allies (such as Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, a personal friend of the Clinton family). When it became clear that they were going to be swept from power, Obama embraced the Arab Spring, at least in public, while at the same time supporting counterrevolutionary forces around the region. The United States continued to fund the Egyptian military, the key source of counterrevolution in that country. Elsewhere the Obama White House stayed silent—such as when Saudi Arabia not only repressed its Shi’a rebellion but also sent troops to Bahrain to crush the uprising in that country. Had Obama wanted to intervene on the side of the prodemocracy demonstrators in Bahrain, he could have used the Fifth Fleet, which is stationed there. Instead, he opted to support pro-Western forces in Libya and Syria as a means of replacing inconsistent allies and deflating movements demanding real democracy and social change. — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 580 (#exemplifies, via linked claim)

All of this illustrates that the United States has frequently chosen alliances with regimes and parties in the Middle East that have thwarted democracy. — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 297 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

More fundamentally, I never would have supported Saddam Hussein in the first place. He was, of course, a darling of the United States for many years, using not just chemical weapons but American-made munitions against his own people. Franklin D. Roosevelt is reported as having referred to Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza as “a son-of-a-bitch, but he’s our son-of-a-bitch.” It is precisely this approach that for so long has characterized (and continues to characterize) U.S. foreign policy and that invites all kinds of present and future disasters. Instead, the United States ought to pursue policies that fulfill the legitimate aspirations of peoples around the world, while protecting essential human rights and preserving the use of force only for when it is absolutely necessary for self-defense. — Moustafa Bayoumi, How Does It Feel to Be a Problem? Being…, 1208 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: US policy in the MENA region consistently favored its geopolitical interests over democratic outcomes — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of…, 367; Women’s rights in MENA vary with socioeconomic conditions, not Islam — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of…, 289; US policy has consistently wrecked democratic movements in the MENA region. (+9 more)

Broader Connections

• US policy backed dictators and counterrevolution against the Arab Spring #exemplifies (0.95) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 580
• US Middle East alliances have repeatedly thwarted democracy #corroborates (0.95) — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 297
• U.S. foreign policy has long tolerated brutal friendly dictators #corroborates (0.92) — Moustafa Bayoumi, How Does It Feel to Be a Problem? Being…, 1208
• Supporting dictators harms the United States as much as host nations #corroborates (0.85) — David Vine, Base Nation_ How U.S. Military Bases…, 311
• Liberal-modernization racism blamed Arab political culture for autocracy while US elites backed dictators #corroborates (0.85)
• U.S. support for repression creates a cycle preventing democratization #expands (0.85) — David Vine, Base Nation_ How U.S. Military Bases…, 310
• US officials racialized Muslims as incapable of democracy while arming their dictators #corroborates (0.82) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 368
• US regional support for democracy served only to displace old colonial powers #qualifies (0.75)
• Trump replaced global economic stewardship with nationalist unilateralism yet kept MENA hegemony #qualifies (0.72)