US Hegemony & Islam

Islamic Terror is Good for US Hegemony

My argument, to put it crudely, is simple: US Middle East Policy
is based on escalating the Arab-Israeli conflict and creating a climate
of hate and violence.  With the decline of US hegemony in the past
couple of decades, the US has resorted to creating a religious
social movement (Islam) to pose as a threat to "world stability."

Yes, a conspiracy theory is what I'm proposing.  The Islamic hype
has become a resource for the US to create and produce instability
in the Middle East for the purpose of selling itself not only to the Arab
regimes, but to Japan and Europe (Unlike the US, these countries
receive most of their energy sources from Islamic states).

It is the classic case of "protection rent."  The only difference here
is that the protector renting his service is also, ironically, producing
the source of instability that calls forth the demand in the first place.

The US is projecting itself as THE only power capable of protecting
the international community from such a terror.  When it comes to
the Middle East, it continuously demands unilateral diplomacy in the
most obsessive manner, insuring that no other powers enter into
the region.  Such scenarios are permitted only under the umbrella
of a US led mission.  This goes not only for UN investigation of
Israeli human rights violation, but for all and every case imagined.

Think also about the following:

1) Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban:  Many of the key players
of the organizations that the US has defined as "terrorist," and who
are now operating in the Middle East, originally received support
(militarily and economically) directly from the CIA.  Indeed, when
the United States bombed Afghanistan in 1998, the military base
that was destroyed by the missiles was originally built by the
United States.  

2) Israeli-Palestinian conflict: I recently attended an exceptional talk
by Stephen Zune who made the argument that on many occasions
the US took a more reactionary line towards the Palestinians and
Lebanese than even right wing Zionist figures like Netanyahu.  In
one instance, Netanyahu was attempting to convince the US that
Israel should pull out of southern Lebanon, only to be urged by
the US to maintain their military presence there.  Zune's also
argued that in one instance Netanyahu wanted to negotiate with
the Palestinian Authority the issue of Jerusalem, only to be again
urged not to do so by the US.  

3) Iraq and sanctions:  The US, as most of you know by now, is having
some difficulty maintaining the sanctions over Iraq.  Indeed, even the
biggest Arab puppet states of the US are looking for ways to pull out.
There have been cases, for example, that both the Saudis and the
Kuwaitis have asked the US to ease up on the issue, only again
to get the cold shoulder from the US.

These kinds of examples, I believe, point to the fact that it may
be a US policy to maintain a level of conflict between Israel and
the Arabs and Palestinians in order to retain its coercive hold
over the region and important sectors of the international
community.  

What do you think?  The argument needs some work and more
research, but I think it raises points worth thinking about seriously.
Does anyone know of any sources on the theme of how chaos
and decline in world hegemony leads to the types of scenarios
I am talking about?

Khaldoun Samman