Picking the Right Middle East Policy Makers

It’s 6:00 a.m. in Washington, DC, and the texts are already rolling in. Another question about a potential appointee for Middle East policy in the next administration. This time, it’s a suggestion for someone who’s spent their career on the think-tank circuit. The sender asks, “Would they make a good deputy assistant secretary?” The urgency of the decision-making process is palpable. My first thought: Maybe, if the job is giving panel discussions. But for actually handling the complexities of the region? Not so much.

Welcome to the world of presidential transitions, where everyone tries to staff up for success—or at least avoid catastrophic mistakes. Having been through this process a few times, I’ve learned that getting the right people into key Middle East policy roles is about more than just résumés. It’s about finding the right balance of experience, instincts, and temperament to manage a region where every day feels like a high-stakes game of chess played on shifting sand.

Here’s how it should be done.

Step 1: Focus on Practitioners, Not Theorists

Regarding the Middle East, theory can only take you so far. It’s a region that defies tidy solutions and textbook answers. Yet, time and again, administrations turn to candidates who look great on paper—degrees from top universities, stacks of journal articles—but have little to no practical experience. That’s a mistake.

The ideal policymaker has been tested—not just in the classroom but in real-world situations where decisions have consequences. They’ve worked on the ground in places like Baghdad, Cairo, and Jerusalem. They’ve negotiated with stakeholders who don’t see the world through the lens of Washington consensus. They know the difference between what’s ideal and what’s possible.

Someone who’s spent their career in think tanks or academia might have impressive ideas, but they’re not enough unless those ideas have been tested in practice. It’s one thing to write a paper about Gulf security. It’s another to sit across from a foreign minister and convince them to commit to a shared objective. Middle East policy requires more than knowledge—it requires execution.

Step 2: Balance Hawks with Pragmatists

Presidential administrations often lean one way or the other on foreign policy. Some come in with a hawkish stance, ready to confront adversaries head-on. Others favor diplomacy, preferring carrots to sticks. But neither approach works in isolation. A strong team, diverse in its perspectives, includes both hawks and pragmatists. This diversity is crucial in a region as complex as the Middle East.

The Middle East isn’t a region where unilateral thinking succeeds. You need hawks who understand when to exercise restraint and pragmatists who know when pressure is necessary. This balance ensures that decisions are not just bold but also realistic, providing a sense of reassurance to the decision makers.

Consider a national security advisor with a strong defense background. Pairing them with a deputy who has years of diplomatic experience ensures that policy decisions are robust and nuanced. The best teams challenge each other, pushing for better solutions rather than settling into ideological ruts.

Step 3: Keep Politics Out of Critical Roles

Let’s be honest: every administration appoints political allies to key positions. It’s how Washington works. However, regarding Middle Eastern policy, this is dangerous territory. The stakes are too high for political appointees who lack the necessary expertise. These critical roles must be filled by professionals who understand the region’s dynamics, not donors or campaign loyalists looking for a résumé boost.

This isn’t the region where someone can learn on the job. Decisions made in the Situation Room ripple out to allies and adversaries alike, and the margin for error is razor-thin. That’s why these roles must go to professionals who understand the region’s dynamics, not donors or campaign loyalists looking for a résumé boost. This emphasis on professionalism should make the politicians feel secure about the competence of the policy team.

Political appointments have their place—ambassadorships in less volatile regions, for instance—but roles like Special Envoy or Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs require a level of knowledge and credibility that partisanship can’t provide.

Step 4: Prioritize Ground-Level Experience

The best policymakers don’t just understand the Middle East—they’ve lived it. They’ve worked on the ground, dealt with the realities of regional politics, and built relationships with key players. This perspective is invaluable when crafting U.S. policy, and should instill confidence in the president about the policy team’s understanding of the region.

It’s easy to think of the Middle East as a monolith from the safety of a Washington office. But anyone who’s spent time in the region knows how different the challenges in Yemen are from those in Lebanon or Iraq. Policymakers with ground-level experience bring this understanding to the table. They’ve seen firsthand how policy decisions play out on the streets, not just in meeting rooms.

During one transition, I recommended a candidate whose primary experience was humanitarian work in conflict zones. Some questioned whether this background was relevant to U.S. foreign policy, but their understanding of the region’s realities proved invaluable. They could anticipate how policies would affect governments and the people living under them—a perspective often missing in top-level discussions.

Step 5: Include a Wild Card

Every administration needs at least one unconventional pick—a candidate who doesn’t come from the usual pipeline but brings a fresh perspective. Wild cards are risky, but they’re often the ones who challenge stale thinking and push for creative solutions.

In one instance, a journalist with years of reporting experience in the region was brought into a policy role. Their deep knowledge of on-the-ground dynamics and ability to cut through bureaucratic jargon made them an invaluable asset. While not a traditional pick, they brought insights that shaped decisions in a way no one else could.

Wild cards remind us that effective policy isn’t just about credentials. It’s about understanding, creativity, and the ability to adapt to a constantly shifting region.

The Stakes Are High

Mistakes in the Middle East can cost lives, destabilize allies, and erode U.S. credibility. Getting the right people into the right roles isn’t just about building a strong team—it’s about ensuring that the administration can handle the unexpected crises that will inevitably arise.

A successful policy team isn’t a collection of résumés—it’s a group of people who bring expertise, balance, and judgment to one of the most challenging regions in the world. The decisions made now, during the transition process, will determine whether the administration can navigate the complexities of the Middle East or gets bogged down in its pitfalls.

If there’s one lesson I’ve learned from my time in this space, it’s this: hire the best. Not the loudest or most connected, but the ones who know how to deliver results. Everything else is secondary.