A 2011 analysis from William Lind, the American strategist proponent of "4th Generation warfare" concept.
He points the fact that the major risk of Middle-East events for external powers such as the USA (& others) is the dissolution of existing States into cesspots of non-State entities the Somali or Iraqi way, with risks to the continued orderly exploitation of oil.
Definitely still a relevant analysis...
Some extracts:
Disagreeable, and somewhat of an exaggeration... but partly true, at least for some Middle-Eastern countries.The likelihood of any of the countries in the region becoming thriving, secular democracies is about equal to the probability we will balance the federal budget with bars of gold brought by flying monkeys. In the Middle East as in most of the world, the two options are tyranny and anarchy. When tyranny fails, anarchy moves in.
And Lind's prescription to America given existence of that risk:the worst possible outcome of revolutionary events in the Middle East is the disintegration of states and their replacement either by statelessness—as we see in Somalia—or by fictional states, as in Iraq and Afghanistan. Within the territories that were formerly real states, power devolves to many non-state entities. Internally, war becomes a permanent condition, while externally there is no one with whom other states can deal. In the case of oil-producing areas, the flow becomes erratic at best.
(...)
Where the quest is for legitimacy, nothing is more corrosive than being seen as the servant of a foreign power, especially one that is widely hated. Bush’s invasion of Iraq and the endless war in Afghanistan made America into the “Great Satan” in the eyes of Muslims everywhere. At the same time, successive American administrations have openly given orders to our “allies” in the region and forced their compliance. We not only let the strings show, we painted them red, white, and blue. Now, in terms of legitimacy, America has the reverse Midas touch.
Most of Lind's prescriptions are well taken, but the one about closing bases in Gulf Arab countries is seriously flawed: Middle-East produces ~40% of global oil and includes >60% of remaining reserves, while global oil production has now reached a plateau and should begin to decrease with few years. Remembering that world economy depends on transportation & logistics, for which liquid fuels will remain for long the only practical option, descent into anarchy of main ME oil producers is just absolutely unacceptable for all external powers.What should our policy toward new entities in the Middle East be? If we understand we have the reverse Midas touch, we will also understand we should assume the lowest of profiles. First, remove the irritants. End the war in Afghanistan, close the American bases, shrink the embassies, and stop legitimizing Likud’s expansionism. Then work to have what happens in the Middle East stay in the Middle East. Lower the profile of our relationship with Israel. Be careful whom we admit within our own borders, including as refugees. (There may be millions.) Reduce our dependence on imported oil by raising the gas tax and using the revenue to bring back passenger trains.
In short, come home and close the gate. Leave our good Muslim friends to wage jihad on one another.
Still, with the really crucial countries concentrated around the Gulf, with Iran which is not presently threatened by anarchy and a series of Arab statelets whose population is small enough for them to be able to buy social peace, it is quite possible that anarchy will not spread there, therefore not threaten the oil flow. So on this particular issue of oil continuity the picture painted by Lind I think is too pessimistic.
In case the Gulf states descended into anarchy, threatening continuity of oil production, foreign (mostly US) intervention would be a given. The strings would not only be visible, they would be all that is left.
Small population size would make continued occupation for 30 / 50 years of these lands a far more practical proposition than continued occupation of Iraq was.
But it would be a very sorry solution indeed...