The Trump administration has appointed a new Middle East policy chief in the Pentagon who believes the US should scale down its military presence in the region.
Michael DiMino, a former CIA analyst, was sworn in on Monday as the deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East. Before taking the job, DiMino was a fellow at Defense Priorities, a think tank that calls itself the “hub of realism and restraint” and advocates for a less interventionist foreign policy.
Jewish Insider reported that DiMino’s appointment has alarmed pro-Israel Republicans due to his views on the region. The report cited comments DiMino made during a webinar last year where he said the Middle East does “not really matter” for US interests.
“Vital or existential US interests in the Middle East are best characterized as minimal to non-existent. And I think if you look at America’s experience as the primary security broker for the region … it has not rendered any lasting political, economic, or security benefits in service of US interests or the American people,” he said.
DiMino has opposed attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities and war with Iran in general and has repeatedly called for the withdrawal of US troops in Iraq and Syria, citing their vulnerability to attacks.
When President Biden launched a bombing campaign against Yemen’s Houthis in January 2024, DiMino opposed it and suggested the US should consider putting pressure on Israel to improve conditions in Gaza since the Israeli onslaught was the reason for the Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping.
“Any multi-billion-dollar effort to fight a war in Yemen would render no political, economic, or security benefits to the United States. Strategies like ‘buck passing’ and diplomatic engagement are perfectly viable, would do the US no harm, and could resolve the crisis. Continued military action in Yemen, by contrast, presents dubious prospects for success,” DiMino wrote in Responsible Statecraft.
The US bombing campaign against the Houthis only escalated the situation in the Red Sea and did not deter the Yemeni group at all. Now that there is a ceasefire in Gaza, the Houthis, officially known as Ansar Allah, have said they will stop their attacks as long as Israel abides by the truce.
DiMuno is indicative of Trump's policies. Anyone who says Trump is a zionist tool is here just to make noise. The zionists hate the cease fire agreement. Trump has attacked Netanyahu several times, justifiably. No one else in DC had the guts to do that.
“No one else in DC had the guts to do that.”
In your imagination, perhaps.
In the real world, AOC — among others — publicly called him a war criminal and publicly objected to him being allowed to address Congress.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6006f00896a7357ef8eeca82bed56a3b9eb3acbc2a07411b99debb35091b70b4.jpg
Since no one else did it, and had years to do it, you are the one that is delusional.
This is about real action, not your rhetoric.
Only in the mind of a distorted leftist are the words of AOC taken seriously. She has staged events several times, including her border skits.
I agree. AOC is just a younger female Trump.
Wasn’t it her and her cronies that withdrew some milktoast letter to Biden about using diplomacy rather than military power?
Even Schumer had a moment of clarity. It wasn't for the right reasons, but still.
Lol… ;-/
Easily done from her safe perch in Westchester. Trump, though, walked into the belly of the beast telling a bunch of Zionist fanatics what they didn’t want but needed to hear. Israel is losing the war of World opinion and needs to get out of Gaza.
He turned those words into action by siccing his attack dog on Bibi just before he took office.
Give credit where it’s due, Trump delivered.
No one? I guess you never heard of Bernie Sanders. If you are going to make pro trump propaganda statements at least make them plausible.
Ok I will yield to you on that, to a degree. Did Sanders ever propose legislation on that, or just talk about it?
I was referring to someone in a leadership position not reciting the zionist line.
You folks are here to attack Trump. Each time Trump shows the ability to be objective in the Middle East, you folks get angrier, because, you have less to complain about. You want the conflict forever.
Anyone that follows matters knows Trump wants a reduced US presence. That is a goal which supercedea DC's worship of Israel.
Bernie who?
Adelson! What does Mrs. Adelson think of all this?! She will be the one dictating regional policy in fact.
I will take whatever good news I can find on America's horrific West Asian warmongering and double-dealing. Good luck, Mr. DiMino. The generals and troops likely will support you, but the MICIMATT will have their long knives out.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/01/saudi-crown-prince-vows-invest-600-billion-us/
Nearly $600 billion in US Treasury proceeds will purchase a sizeable chunk of rural acreage along America's East Coast and the Southwest.
It makes no sense to roll over US Treasuries.
Operation Tripwire aborts.
"Vital or existential US interests in the Middle East are best characterized as minimal to non-existent. And I think if you look at America’s experience as the primary security broker for the region … it has not rendered any lasting political, economic, or security benefits in service of US interests or the American people,” he said."
Honestly like that goan get hisself FIRED.
Quick; replace him with Brian Kilmeade! Add more FOX host, hawks, to the Administration. We must silence all voices of restraint.
One man against the entire Z-Congress…!
He doesn’t stand alone though. There is a significant faction – maybe a plurality of MAGA that would gladdly throw Israel under a bus.
As if Trump gives a tinker’s dam what MAGA thinks. They’ve routinely rolled over for his 180-degree flip-flops for nearly 10 years now and there’s zero evidence that’s about to change.
Sure that must be why they reelected him.
Well, I'll believe that one when I see it.
"… there are no existential or vital U.S. national interests at stake in Yemen, and very little is at stake for the U.S. economically in the Red Sea", wrote DiMino.
I heard somewhere that this guy is dumb. Now I understand why.
Well, what is our stake? We can ship to Europe and Asia without the need to transit the Red Sea.
It’s more like China’s problem, no?
Is the USA going to pull out from the Persian Gulf and renounce to the oil-backed dollar that Nixon forged half a century ago? All the wars fought since the early 90s will be for nothing?
1st Iraq War was meant to secure Saudi Arabia.
2nd Iraq War was meant to secure Iraq and contain Iran.
This Gaza Genocide war was fought so there are trade routes between Israel and the Persian Gulf (the Ben Gurion canal seems forfeited but Netanyahu’s UN show map stands as the US project for the region, especially now that Syria has been (quite precariously) “NATO-ized” by Turkey.
Will all that be forfeited to China on a whim? Seriously…
We didn’t need to go to war to secure Saudi Arabia.
The second Gulf War, far from containing Iran made a gift of Iraq to it.
The genocide was an ongoing extermination of Palestine kicked into overdrive and left the US even more isolated than ever…
We’ve got oil, we export oil.
Let the rest of the world worry about how to get theirs.
Not sure if “you needed” but that’s what George Bush Sr. did: to lay a trap to Sadam Hussein so he went to war with Kuwait, so the USA got a pretext to “heroically” defend the Saudi tyranny… and get permanent military bases there (and also expand other bases in the region). Until then Saudia had been hostile to US military presence and their Wahabi ideological backbone considered any such “heathen” presence sacrilege.
You can only export shale oil IF oil is overpriced (as it is now). IF the barrel falls to near $30, then the USA can’t produce or export shale oil: it’s just not profittable.
My question remains: will the USA pull out from the Persian Gulf and in general their, now consolidated, Middle East mega-protectorate? If the answer is “no”, then the Red Sea route connecting those bases to the US province of Europe, where most of their imperial deployment is, is absolutely essential.
My answer is yes and the Empire is not essential but toxic to the Republic.
Very debatable. Empire is irreversible by now anyhow, it’s been there since 1898 (Philippines, Guam, interventions in China, Guano islands, Panama, etc.) and more consistently since the 1940s.
In those days the US think tanks calculated the self-sufficiency of the European empire of Nazi Germany (incl. European USSR, which was then almost conquered) and compared it to the joint US and British empires, including the whole of the Americas. They came to the conclusion that Germany had a significant advantage and that they needed China to stay ahead, else the “American way of life” would collapse and they would have to either resort to fascism or to go socialist. Thus they decided to go to war against Japan for the control of China (Japan of course became aware and acted preemtively at Pearl Harbor, etc., but those are details). In the end the USA could not get China but got most of Europe instead, and then proceeded to fight the USSR (because fighting communism is something that was always in the agenda, no matter how friendly Stalin tried to be).
While the USA is relatively big, it’s not big enough (even with Canada and Greenland) to guarantee the suckling of 25% of global wealth without an active empire, without controlling at least significant chunks of Eurasia and Africa, where most of the population and resources of Earth are.
If the USA would only get its fair share of c. 4% of global wealth, and especially if the oligarchy is not toppled and wealth redistributed more or less equally (socialism or communism), US citizens would become even poorer and your old glory Republic could never stand.
I am anti-imperialist, of course, but I try to understand the causes of Imperialism, which are no other than Capitalism (Lenin 1916).
THIS is a LIE!!!!!!!
Then WHY is THIS MONSTER being built in Lebanon???
What the Hell is That?
"The United States is building a massive megastructure in Lebanon, a country with the area and population of Yorkshire or Connecticut and just a tenth of the economy. It is called an Embassy but plainly it is not. No western media is doing this kind of reporting from the Middle East. We urgently need financial support to bring you independent, on the ground reporting. Or we will have to quit and return home.