I'm going to start occasionally linking to my stories, since I get the sense from reading some of the comments that readers of the blog may not be seeing some of our work about the Middle East on other parts of the website.

Here's one from today, about the spread of the new Cold War between Russia and America to the Middle East.

--ALB/Beirut

All eyes are on Joe Biden as he gives his speech to the Democratic National Convention. Denver will be thick with party backslapping. Barack Obama put him on his Democratic ticket partly because he'll appeal to the white-male/blue-collar voters Obama has trouble attracting. Another key aim is to counter Obama's own lack of foreign policy experience by offering America a vice presidential candidate who's been a pillar of the Washington foreign policy establishment for more than two decades. After eight years of Bush's U.S.-triumphing, terrorist-killing, region-redesigning fantasies, anybody interested in the Middle East is tempted to shout hooray when a grown-up like Biden--chairman of the Senate foreign relations commmittee-- finally appears on the scene.

Yet, here's a question: Is being experienced the same as being smart? What I like about Biden is his realism and pragmatism. In that respect, he and Obama make a good pair. Biden has been a persistent, constructive critic of Bush's inept planning and handling of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He's been an advocate of working with American allies and the U.N. Biden has supported diplomacy for resolving differences and conflicts. He has backed Obama's courageous initiative to open talks with Iranian leaders without preconditions--and to end the nonsense about overthrowing the Islamic regime in Tehran. Biden is rightly in favor of pushing democracy in the Middle East, but is mindful to limit his ideas to building institutions rather than quick, radical and ultimately disastrous change. Unlike so many American politicians, Biden seems aware that many of Washington's policies have needlessly and counterproductively inflamed anti-American sentiment in the Middle East. He's in favor of shutting down Guantanamo Bay.

So far, so good. Biden's eyes-open attitude hints at the kind of fundamental change in approach that is required if the U.S. is to play a constructive role in the region. But when it comes to this part of the world, Biden also exhibits some of the mentality associated with the Bush-Cheney crowd that has helped make the Middle East the dangerous mess that it is today. Biden has work to do on breaking out of his Beltway mindset--as Obama, an outsider, has done to a great extent--if his experience in foreign policy is to actually lead to a valuable role in the next four years.

1. America knows best. Washington's ignorance of or lack of concern about the political and social dynamics of the Middle East is a big problem. Biden has been a major supporter of American propaganda tools like the Arabic satellite channel al-Hurra, hinting at a conviction that the problem isn't Washington's policies so much as the packaging of those policies. Biden's 2006 "partition plan" for Iraq is another worrying sign of his Middle East shortcomings. Although he denies advocating partition per se, that's effectively what it is when he proposes dividing Iraq into Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish autonomous regions. If provided with foreign support rather than interference, Iraqis are capable of strengthening their multiethnic nation state around mutually acceptable values and principles. Promoting sectarianism is more likely to fan fear and suspicion and institutionalize warlordism. Carving up a major modern state in the heart of the Middle East would also set a dangerous precedent that could encourage separatism in nearly every other country in the culturally rich region. If there is to be a Kurdish mini-state in Iraq, why shouldn't the Kurds in Iran and Turkey have their own mini-states, too? If Iraqi Shiites govern themselves, why shouldn't their co-religionists in Saudi Arabia's oil-rich Eastern Province agitate for the same treatment? If Iraq is formally divided into Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish zones, why shouldn't Lebanon be similar dismembered into Shiite, Sunni and Maronite enclaves?

2. America shall be the "victor". Reading Biden's Iraq plan, it's hard to escape the conclusion that it's not really a blueprint to help Iraqis build a brighter future as it is one to orchestrate an "honorable" American withdrawal from the Iraq quagmire. U.S. involvement in the Middle East will never be constructive if it is based on zero-sum, black-white, victor-vanquished calculations. If Washington consistently does right by people who are seeking universal rights for themselves, America will not have to worry about being the loser.

3. Crusade against dictators and terrorists. Is Biden too trigger-happy? He was one of the gutless Democrats--among them Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, too-- who voted for the October 2002 Iraq war resolution that effectively gave Bush the approval he sought to invade Iraq five months later. Twenty-one of the 40 voting Democrats opposed the resolution, including Robert Byrd, who warned against the "blank check." Biden brags that he's "one of the nation's leading experts on terrorism," but his focus is more on hunting down the bad guys than addressing underlying causes like the unresolved Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

4. Take the easy road, blame the Palestinians. Biden, a strong supporter of an air-tight U.S.-Israeli partnership, co-sponsored the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006 banning U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority after the Hamas faction won control over the PA in democratic elections. As in Iraq, this American stick hardly resulted in the intended consequences. The embargo was followed by a dire humanitarian crisis, Hamas's military takeover of the Gaza Strip from the U.S.-backed Fatah faction and Hamas's escalation of kidnapping and rocket attacks against Israel. Biden seeks to "isolate" Hamas, showing the same blinkered wishful-thinking that he criticizes the Bush administration for displaying in its fantasies about regime change in Iran. In contrast, last year a bi-partisan group of American "wise men" advocated that the U.S. participate in starting a "genuine dialogue" with Hamas. Otherwise, the group said, "prospects that they will play a spoiler role [in peace negotiations] increase dramatically... By the same token, a comprehensive cease-fire or prisoner exchange is not possible without Hamas's cooperation."

--By Scott MacLeod/Cairo