In the previous chapter of this study, we constructed a model for the pursuit of U.S. interests in the Middle East which is consistant with the Nuechterlein model for the analysis and articulation of national interests, and with the goal of furthering Middle East peace, a goal which it was argued was not only consistant with American moral values but with U.S. interests as well. In the earlier chapters we presented a model for the analysis of national interests, and applied it to the problem of the Middle East.
We did not fully analyse all the implications of the Nuechterlein grid, or of similar conceptual models. We argued the case for levels and types of interest, but did not actually attempt to show how leaders might determine where a given interest might fit. We argued, for example, that the U.S. interest in Arabian Gulf oil is less than a survival interest, but of such great economic importance as to justify its classification as a "vital" interest. We noted that core interests typically correspond to survival interests, vital interests to economic concerns, major interests to world order concerns, and peripheral interests to ideological concerns.
But not every economic interest is "vital;" only those economic interests which have a general and crucial bearing on the health of the economy. Other economically based interests might be "major," or only "peripheral." How these questions are judged has not been addressed in any major way in this study.
We have, however, attempted to show that the framework for the analysis of national interests is valid, and that certain specific interests and objectives for U.S. policy in the Middle East are legitimate and objective. It is hoped that we have done so. What we have not done, however because we cannot is show that actual U.S. policies in the Middle East are consistant with either the Nuechterlein framework for the analysis of national intere...