Curbing U.S. involvement abroad was a signal campaign promise of the new U.S. Adminis­tration. Anything that smacked of nation-building drew the sharpest criticism. The appeal to many voters of such disengagement is understandable and the view is woven into an evolving foreign policy.

Students protest at the American University of Cairo, demanding a cap to their tuition, in Cairo, Nov. 16, 2016. The demonstrations are the largest and longest-running at the elite institution in years. “When the economic crisis hits the elite, it means the suffering is all over the place,” said Malak Rostom, vice president of the student union. (David Degner/The New York Times)
Students protest at the American University of Cairo, demanding a cap to their tuition, in Cairo, Nov. 16, 2016. Photo Courtesy of The New York Times/ David Degner

The problem is that the Ameri­cans’ withdrawal will almost certainly foster a level of disorder likely to pull the United States back in later and at a greater cost, damag­ing American interests that can only be advanced by peace and stability.

Nowhere is that more clearly the case than in North Africa. From Egypt to Morocco, the region’s countries are struggling with terror­ism, radicalisation, socioeconomic stagnation, ineffective governance and corruption.

Obviously, building the resil­ience of those societies must be an indigenous effort first and foremost but the role of the United States is indispensable in supporting local, regional and international efforts to break existing and prospective cycles of violence. Even where local actors are most effective in driving changes that deter extremism, they generally lack the capacity to do so without international support, the cornerstone of which comes from the United States.

Libya’s collapse illustrates how an internal violent conflict can affect regional and international security.

As multiple militias and factions vie for power in the absence of a working central government, a safe haven opened for terrorists fleeing Iraq and Syria, who join extrem­ist groups in Libya. Although the Islamic State (ISIS) was largely sup­pressed by recent military action, this diverse array of militants is establishing a pattern of operations that seems designed to expand their activities beyond Libya’s borders, posing a threat to U.S. interests and counterterrorism efforts in Africa.

The lack of a focused U.S. invest­ment in Libyan politics, which predates the new administration, encourages Russia to bolster its existing diplomatic and military presence — and later, no doubt, an economic one. Just as Syria has provided a gateway for Russia’s re­turn to the Middle East, Libya may open the way to North Africa. Last, but not least, the military conflict in Libya will add to uncertainty in energy markets for the foreseeable future.

More uncertainty could arise from developments in Egypt, the primary supplier of natural gas to American ally Jordan, and Algeria, the world’s 18th largest oil producer. Both are on the verge of a metastatic instabil­ity. A laissez-faire policy towards the two countries will help precipi­tate their descent into communal violence. Expanding radicalisation, economic hardship and the divisive policies of authoritarian leaders are causing irreversible damage, fuel­ling grudges and deepening vertical social fractures.

This offers a golden opportunity to ISIS and other extremists. The conditions are in some ways similar to Iraq in 2014 when grievances of many ordinary Iraqis bred the perception of ISIS as a valid alterna­tive to a repressive government. Most Iraqis, of course, regretted tolerating ISIS but it was too late. The world is acknowledging the high price of ignoring early warn­ings persistently conveyed by many experts, agencies and civil society organisations in 2012-14.

Tunisia has taken a more positive and constructive path than its North African peers. Certainly, the country faces colossal political, economic and social challenges that feed the scourge of home-grown and transnational terrorism. However, Tunisia’s unique example in the Middle East and North Africa of an indigenous national dialogue dif­fusing a political crisis, as occurred in 2013, presents a model for how locally owned conflict-management mechanisms contribute to peace and security.

Likewise, Tunisia’s combined secular-Islamist government and parliament demonstrates the suc­cess of inclusive political settle­ments, a relevant lesson to coun­tries in North Africa and beyond on how to manage political, religious or ethnic diversity. Consistent and generous support for Tunisia’s ailing economy is crucial to the country in maintaining its political direction and its efforts to counter violent extremism.

In a country where 1.4 million of the 3 million citizens under 25 years of age are out of school and work, it is little wonder that thousands of young people have joined extrem­ist groups. Radicalisation is a social disease with multiple roots. It will take U.S. leadership of an interna­tional effort to support Tunisian strategies to cure it.

The challenge posed by North Africa’s instability and extremism leaves the United States with only one sound policy option to protect its interests: Increased, determined and steady political and economic support. The alternative is watching the region slip into chaos that may be impossible to reverse no matter what resources the Americans bring to bear.

Originally posted on Arab Weekly on March 26, 2017.

Related Publications

South Sudan’s Pitfalls of Power Sharing

South Sudan’s Pitfalls of Power Sharing

Friday, February 16, 2018

By: USIP Staff; Susan Stigant; Aly Verjee

This week, a new proposal for a power sharing government was tabled at the ongoing Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) High Level Revitalization Forum (HLRF) peace talks for South Sudan. An earlier, 2015 peace deal also contained a formula for power sharing; that arrangement failed and the civil war re-ignited a year later. Power sharing arrangements are appropriate if certain conditions are met, but not enough has been done to ensure the latest proposal will overcome the obstacles present in South Sudan, according to Susan Stigant, USIP’s director for Africa programs and Aly Verjee, a visiting expert at USIP and a former senior advisor to the IGAD mediation, who comment on the proposal and suggest how it could be improved.

Democracy & Governance; Fragility and Resilience; Global Policy

To Stabilize Iraq After ISIS, Help Iraqis Reconcile

To Stabilize Iraq After ISIS, Help Iraqis Reconcile

Sunday, February 11, 2018

By: USIP Staff; Nancy Lindborg; Sarhang Hamasaeed

An international conference opens in Kuwait Monday to plan ways to rebuild Iraq and secure it against renewed extremist violence following the three-year war against ISIS. A USIP team just spent nine days in Iraq for talks with government and civil society leaders, part of the Institute’s years-long effort to help the country stabilize. The Kuwait conference will gather government, business and civil society leaders to consider a reconstruction that Iraq has said could cost $100 billion. USIP’s president, Nancy Lindborg, and Middle East program director, Sarhang Hamasaeed, say any realistic rebuilding plan must focus also on the divisions and grievances in Iraq that led to ISIS’ violence and that still exist.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Violent Extremism

Understanding China’s Response to the Rakhine Crisis

Understanding China’s Response to the Rakhine Crisis

Thursday, February 8, 2018

By: Adrienne Joy

Following attacks on police posts by an armed Rohingya militia in August 2017, reprisals by the Burmese government have precipitated a humanitarian crisis. More than six hundred thousand Rohingya have fled to Bangladesh, where they face an uncertain future. Publicly stating that the root cause of conflict in Rakhine is...

Global Policy

View All Publications