Iran supplying electricity to Pakistan, despite domestic shortage

According to a Dawn newspaper report, Federal Minister for Energy Hammad Azhar thanked the Iranian ambassador to Pakistan on Friday for “normalizing” electricity supply to the bordering districts of Baluchistan.

“I am grateful to the Ambassador of Iran in Pakistan for promptly accepting my request and normalizing the flow of electricity to the Makran division,” he said in a tweet.

Gwadar, Turbat and Makran have been facing extensive power cuts for more than a week. These areas are not part of the national grid and, therefore, rely on electricity imported from Iran. The neighbouring country curtailed electricity supply as it faces a shortage of hydel power generation.

 “In the meanwhile, we are also bringing forward the timelines of the project that seeks to connect these areas to the national grid,” said Azhar.

A local source told Dawn that electricity supply from Iran hasn’t been restored fully as many affected areas continue to face hours-long power outages.

Pakistan imported 514GWh from Iran in 2019-20, which was less than 0.4 per cent of the country’s total electricity generation in the same year, according to the power regulator.

The country’s electricity generation capacity exceeds demand as the last government commissioned new power plants of almost 7,000MW in its five-year term. However, vast areas in Baluchistan still remain disconnected from the national transmission network. Azhar has vowed that these areas will be connected to the national grid within two years.

Earlier, in a conversation with Dawn, independent energy consultant Najam ul Hassan Farooqi said the recurring problem can only be solved once the 300MW imported coal-based power plant currently under construction in Gwadar comes online.

 “It’ll take at least three years to set up a 700-kilometre transmission line from Gwadar to Karachi,” he added.

One of the major reasons is the “procedural delay” in the allocation of gas to Habibullah Coastal Power, a 140MW gas-based power plant located near Quetta.

The only power plant in the area sufficient to meet the local demand stopped producing electricity in September 2019 when its gas supply agreement with the government-owned Sui Southern Gas Company expired after 20 years.

The company’s power purchase agreement, however, is valid until 2029. Its validity was pegged with the reallocation of gas. The plant has been shut for 21 months as the formal summary has yet to be moved to the Economic Coordination Committee (ECC) for the allocation of gas.

Can US$3.4 billion helicopter sale to Israel be stopped?

A US$735 million precision-guided weapons sale to Israel caused a firestorm on Capitol Hill earlier this year amid a two-week military conflict between Israel and Hamas in which more than 200 Palestinians were killed. 

Progressive Democrats in the House and Senate introduced resolutions to block the sale, but the congressional review period had already lapsed, dooming those efforts from the start. 

In a fresh bid, the State Department has approved selling Israel up to 18 CH-53K heavy-lift cargo helicopters in a deal estimated to be worth US$3.4 billion. “The United States is committed to the security of Israel, and it is vital to US national interests to assist Israel to develop and maintain a strong and ready self-defense capability. This proposed sale is consistent with those objectives,” the notice from the Defense Security Cooperation Agency said.

In addition to the Lockheed Martin-made helicopters, the deal would include related equipment including up to 60 General Electric-made engines, up to 36 navigation systems, communication equipment, .50 caliber machine guns and more, as well as technical and logistical support.

The sale would help the Israeli Air Force’s “capability to transport armored vehicles, personnel and equipment to support distributed operations,” the notice said.

“Israel will use the enhanced capability as a deterrent to regional threats and to strengthen its homeland defense,” it added.

The notice kicks off a congressional review period in which lawmakers could vote to block the sale if they wanted.

Progressive Democrats in the House and Senate introduced resolutions to block the sale, but the congressional review period had already lapsed, dooming those efforts from the start.

Can United States use water related riots in Iran against Ebrahim Raisi?

Reportedly, more than 300 cities—nearly a fourth of all municipalities—face water shortages and drought. Protests erupted in southwestern Khuzestan province in mid-July and then spread to several other provinces.

It is being said that water shortage was due to governmental mismanagement and neglect. The riots that started from Khuzestan province have now spread across various cities including Tehran, Karaj and Tabriz.  

According to the western media, Iranian people are now putting a spotlight not only on their unmet needs, but also their unfulfilled aspirations for respect for human rights, rights to which individuals the world over are entitled.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) sent tens of water tankers to the Dasht-e Azadegan area of Khuzestan, Brigadier General Hassan Shahvarpour said. “Another group of tankers are on the way and will help to address the people's water problem. Basij (volunteer forces) and the IRGC, along with the provincial officials, are standing by people with all their power,” he added.

President-elect Ebrahim Raisi expressed concern about Khuzestan’s water crisis and pledged that his government would work to address the problem. “In order not to waste time until the formation of the new government, we convened this meeting to find operational solutions to solve the problems of the province and to implement everything possible from now,” he said in a special meeting on the issues of Khuzestan province. 

The US State Department condemned Iran’s crackdown on peaceful protests sparked by a water shortage. “We support the rights of Iranians to peacefully assemble and express themselves, without fear of violence and detention by security forces,” Spokesperson Ned Price said. Following are the excerpts from his narrative.

We condemn the use of violence against peaceful protestors.

We support the rights of Iranians to peacefully assemble and express themselves, without fear of violence and detention by security forces.  We are also monitoring reports of internet slowdowns in the region.

The Iranian people have a right to voice their frustrations and hold their government accountable, but we have seen disturbing reports that security forces fired on protesters, resulting in multiple deaths,

We urge the Iranian government to allow its citizens to exercise their right to freedom of expression and to freely access information, including via the Internet. 

State Department Deputy Spokesperson Jalina Porter said that the United States supports the rights of Iranians to voice their frustrations and hold their government accountable. She said Washington was closely following reports of internet shutdowns and use of deadly force by security forces.

“We urge the Iranian government to allow its citizens to exercise their universal rights of freedom of expression as well as freely access information online,” she told reporters.

Michelle Bachelet, the UN High Commissioner for human rights, called on Iran to address the water crisis and criticized the crackdown on protests. “The impact of the devastating water crisis on life, health and prosperity of the people of Khuzestan should be the focus of the Government’s attention, not the protests carried out by people driven to desperation by years of neglect,” she said.

“I am extremely concerned about the deaths and injuries that have occurred over the past week, as well as the widespread arrests and detention.” Bachelet also warned that “shooting and arresting people will simply add to the anger and desperation.”

Amnesty International reported that security forces had killed at least eight protesters and bystanders in seven different cities since 15th July 15.

Using live ammunition against unarmed protesters posing no imminent threat to life is a horrifying violation of the authorities’ obligation to protect human life.

Protesters in Iran who take to the streets to voice legitimate economic and political grievances face a barrage of gunfire, tear gas, and arrests,” said Diana Eltahawy, Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa.

 

 

Water scarcity making Middle Eat more vulnerable

The Middle East is one of the driest regions in the world. The scarcity of water has often been touted as a source of national and interstate disputes in the area. Some scholars have predicted for some time the possibility of deadly national altercations and regional clashes over the distribution of water resources in parts of the region.

Although no full-blown war has erupted so far, two current episodes illustrate this point: 1) public protests in the Iranian province of Khuzestan and the growing discord between Ethiopia, Egypt and Sudan over water dispensation from the River Nile. With climate change causing more droughts, the potential for conflict over water cannot be underestimated.

In recent days, the oil-rich southwestern province of Khuzestan, has experienced public protests over a shortage of water as the province and all of Iran have been hit by one of the worst droughts in modern times. 

The protests have rapidly spread into other parts of Iran, which has come on top of the damage wrought by Covid-19 and US sanctions. The security forces’ The treatment of the protesters by security forces has resulted in several deaths, with many injured and scores arrested.

The protests, at which ‘death to the Supreme Leader’, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has been loudly chanted. Khamenei has now called on the security forces to be more understanding of the protestors and the outgoing moderate and reformist President Hassan Rouhani has joined him in that message.

The task will soon fall on president-elect Ebrahim Raisi, when he assumes office in early August. Since Raisi shares Khamenei’s conservative Islamic platform, he can use his position to be innovative.

While Iran is unlikely to go to war over water with any of its neighbors, the same cannot be firmly said about some of those downstream on the River Nile —the second longest, if not the longest, river in the world, yet with a relatively small reservoir capacity.

Ethiopia has been getting closer to a serious dispute with Egypt and Sudan ever since Addis Ababa decided in 2011 to build what it calls the hydroelectric Grand Renaissance Dam for securing more water for developmental purposes.

Egypt, which regards the Nile River as its ‘lifeline’, and Sudan, which has concerns about the security of its own supply, has seriously objected to Addis Ababa’s unilateral start of the second phase of the dam project.

The filling of the reservoir of the second phase over a period of two years will affect the amount of water to which Egypt claims to be entitled.

Under a bilateral Egypt–Sudan agreement in 1959, the two sides agreed to increase Egypt’s share to 55.5 billion cubic meters and Sudan’s to 18.5 billion. But the agreement isn’t recognized by Ethiopia. It has refused to budge on its determination to go ahead with the second phase, irrespective of serious objections by Cairo and Khartoum.

US mediation in 2020 and ongoing similar action by the African Union have failed to produce any result. In early July 2021, the issue was put to the United Nations Security Council to consider one submission by Ethiopia and another by Egypt and Sudan for a resolution. But a conclusion couldn’t be reached.

One of the council’s permanent members claimed that the body didn’t have sufficient expertise to deal with the issue. The council as a whole urged the three parties to avoid unilateral action and reach a negotiated settlement. In a recent article, former Egyptian foreign minister and ambassador to the US Nabil Fahmy warned that ‘sooner or later confrontation seems inevitable, unless we see a sudden and unexpected change in Ethiopia’s position’.

Fahmy has echoed a view that a number of scholars have held about the future possibility of war in the Middle East over water rather than oil.

Miriam Lowi’s 1995 book, Water and power, is very telling. The Khuzestan and Ethiopian dam episodes raise another issue that adds to volatility in the Middle East while the tragedy of climate change remains unaddressed.

Iranian exports to India up 240% during March-June 2021 quarter

According to Iranian Trade Promotion Organization (TPO), the value of country’s exports to India has risen 240% during March-June 2021 quarter, as compared to the same period last year.

Reza Seyed Aqazadeh, the Director General of the TPO’s Asia and Pacific Office, said, “In the first quarter of the current year, India was our fifth largest export market, accounting for about 3.2% of our exports. In terms of imports, India was the sixth largest supplier to the Iranian market, accounting for 2.5% of the Iran’s imports.”

“In the previous year, when the coronavirus outbreak led to the closure of roads and the semi-closure of offices, this situation affected trade between Iran and India and reduced our trade relations; but in the first quarter of this year communication increased dramatically, compared to the first quarter of the past year as the roads were closed”, he added.

Regarding the preferential trade agreement between the two countries, he said, "The most important issue that we are working on within the framework of the TPO’s plans in order to increase and develop trade is the preferential tariff agreement.”

“Many of the goods we export to India have a very good capacity in this country; there is good demand and we can have a good development in increasing exports to India”, the TPO official said, adding, “In general, it can be said that there is an export capacity of more than US$25 billion to India.”

Back in early May, during an online meeting between TPO Head Hamid Zadboum and Indian Ambassador to Tehran Gaddam Dharmendr, the two sides had expressed dissatisfaction with the current levels of trade between the two countries and called for serious measures to be taken for reviving the mutual economic exchanges.

Speaking in the meeting, Zadboum stressed the need to remove barriers to mutual trade and find new ways to develop trade relations between the two countries.

The official noted that the two sides should resume discussion on the preferential trade agreement and exchange the list of commodities that are going to be included in this agreement. He also noted that the necessary measures should be taken to bring back petrochemical, industrial, and steel commodities into the basket of Iranian exports to India.

In this regard, the two sides agreed to work on the raised issues and implement them as soon as possible.

The officials also concluded to make necessary coordination for officials of health, customs and standards organizations of the two countries to meet through video conference in near future to resolve problems and enhance mutual cooperation.

At the end of the meeting, the two sides stressed the two countries' determination to develop and improve economic and trade relations and agreed to discuss and implement the issues through video conferencing, to prepare the condition for face-to-face meetings after the pandemic is over.

India is the only foreign country that is currently participating in a major development project in Iran despite the US sanctions.

The Chabahar Port development project is the anchor for the expansion of economic relations between the two nations.

India is going to install and operate modern loading and unloading equipment including mobile harbor cranes in Shahid Beheshti Port in Chabahar.

The strategic port in southeastern Iran is the only ocean port on the Makran coast and it has a special place in the country's economic affairs.

Cyber Attack at South African Ports

A devastating cyber attack at South Africa’s state-owned ports and freight-rail operator that hobbled trade at key container terminals led the company to declare its second force majeure this month.

Transnet took the measure after a 22nd July security breach that forced the company to manually process container shipments at affected ports. It covered the Port of Durban, sub-Saharan Africa’s biggest container hub, as well as the Ngqura, Port Elizabeth and Cape Town harbors.

Transnet said Tuesday it’s made “significant progress” in restoring its computer systems, though companies including manganese producer Assmang maintained force majeures of their own that were first declared after deadly riots erupted on 10th July and temporarily shut key logistics arteries.

The port disruptions are hurting citrus farmers in the country, which is the world’s biggest shipper of the fruits after Spain, in the middle of their export season. They’re also weighing on shipments from the auto industry, which accounts for about 14% of South Africa’s total export value.

The Port of Durban handles 60% of South Africa’s shipments and also transports goods and commodities to and from nations in the region as far north as the Democratic Republic of Congo. The disruptions are likely to shave “quite a few” percentage points off southern Africa’s economic output, said Mike Schussler, chief economist at economists.co.za.

Transnet declared force majeure on a vital rail line earlier this month after the unrest, looting and arson affected its operations. Investigators are still trying to determine the source of the cyber attack and the extent of the damage it caused.

Israel accused of war crimes in recent Gaza war

According to an AP report, Human Rights Watch on Tuesday accused the Israeli military of carrying out attacks that “apparently amount to war crimes” during an 11-day war in May against the Hamas militant group. 

The international human rights organization issued its conclusions after investigating three Israeli airstrikes that it said killed 62 Palestinian civilians. It said “there were no evident military targets in the vicinity” of the attacks.

“Israeli forces carried out attacks in Gaza in May that devastated entire families without any apparent military target nearby,” said Gerry Simpson, Associate Crisis & Conflict Director at HRW.

He said Israel’s “consistent unwillingness to seriously investigate alleged war crimes,” coupled with Palestinian rocket fire at Israeli civilian areas, underscored the importance of an ongoing investigation into both sides by the International Criminal Court (ICC).

In a statement, the Israeli army said its attacks were aimed at military targets and that it took numerous precautions to avoid harming civilians. It said Hamas is responsible for civilian casualties because it launches attacks from residential areas.

“While the terror organizations in the Gaza Strip deliberately embed their military assets in densely populated civilian areas, the IDF takes every feasible measure to minimize, as much as possible, the harm to civilians and civilian property,” it said.

The war erupted on May 10 after Hamas fired a barrage of rockets toward Jerusalem in support of Palestinian protests against Israel’s heavy-handed policing of the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, built on a contested site sacred to Jews and Muslims, and the threatened eviction of dozens of Palestinian families by Jewish settlers in a nearby neighborhood. Israel has said it struck over 1,000 targets during the fighting.

In all, some 254 people were killed in Gaza, including at least 67 children and 39 women, according to the Gaza Health Ministry. Hamas has acknowledged the deaths of 80 militants, while Israel has claimed the number is much higher. Twelve civilians, including two children, were killed in Israel, along with one soldier.

The HRW report looked into Israeli airstrikes. The most serious, on May 16, involved a series of strikes on Al-Wahda Street, a central thoroughfare in downtown Gaza City. The airstrikes destroyed three apartment buildings and killed a total of 44 civilians, HRW said, including 18 children and 14 women. Twenty-two of the dead were members of a single family, the al-Kawlaks.

The Israeli military said the attacks were aimed at tunnels used by Hamas militants in the area. The airstrikes unexpectedly caused nearby buildings to collapse, leading to “unintended casualties,” it said.

In its investigation, HRW concluded that Israel had used US made GBU-31 precision-guided bombs, and that it did not warn residents to evacuate the area ahead of time. It also found no evidence of military targets in the area.

“An attack that is not directed at a specific military objective is unlawful,” it wrote.

The investigation also looked at a May 10 explosion that killed eight people, including six children, near the northern Gaza town of Beit Hanoun. It said the two adults were civilians.

In its statement, the Israeli military said the casualties were caused by errant rocket fire launched by militant groups, not Israeli airstrikes. It released aerial photos of what it said was the launch site, some 7.5 kilometers (4.5 miles) away, and the landing area. It also said it did not carry out any strikes in the area at the time of the explosion.

But based on an analysis of munition remnants and witness accounts, HRW said evidence indicated the weapon had been “a type of guided missile” used by Israel.

“Human Rights Watch found no evidence of a military target at or near the site of the strike,” it said.

The New York-based group said that Israel refused to allow its investigators to enter Gaza. Instead, it said it relied on a field researcher based in Gaza, along with satellite images, expert reviews of photos of munitions fragments and interviews conducted by video and telephone.

The third attack HRW investigated occurred on May 15, in which an Israeli airstrike destroyed a three-story building in Gaza’s Shati refugee camp. The strike killed 10 people, including two women and eight children.

Israel said the target was a group of senior Hamas officials hiding in an apartment, and that the civilian deaths were unintended and “under review.”

But Human Rights Watch said it found no evidence of a military target at or near the site and called for an investigation into whether there was a legitimate military objective and “all feasible precautions” were taken to avoid civilian casualties. HRW investigators concluded the building was hit by a US made guided missile.

The May conflict was the fourth war between Israel and Hamas since the Islamic militant group, which opposes Israel’s existence, seized control of Gaza in 2007. Human Rights Watch, other rights groups and U.N. officials have accused both sides of committing war crimes in all of the conflicts.

Early this year, HRW accused Israel of being guilty of international crimes of apartheid because of discriminatory policies toward Palestinians, both inside Israel as well as in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. Israel rejected the accusations.

In Tuesday’s report, HRW called on the United States to condition security assistance to Israel on it taking “concrete and verifiable actions” to comply with international human rights law and to investigate past abuses.

It also called on the ICC to include the recent Gaza war in its ongoing investigation into possible war crimes by Israel and Palestinian militants. Israel does not recognize the court’s jurisdiction and says it is capable of investigating any possible wrongdoing by its army and that the ICC probe is unfair and politically motivated.

In Gaza, Hamas spokesman Bassem Naim called for Israeli leaders to be brought before “international tribunals.” He also claimed that the Hamas rocket fire was a “legitimate right to resist the occupation.”

 

Iran claims arresting Mossad agents with weapons

According to Fars News Agency, Iranian Intelligence Ministry claims arresting a network of Mossad agents and seizing a heavy shipment of weapons and ammunition after they entered Iran through its western border.

The Ministry stated that the Mossad network in the area was hit hard after Iran managed to thwart the alleged sabotage attempts.

The Intelligence Ministry thanked the people of Iran for their constant vigilance and called on all citizens to be more vigilant and aware of suspicious offers, especially on the Internet.

The seized weapons included pistols, grenades and shotguns, according to the Ministry, which added that some of the weapons have been used to provoke clashes during protests.

The Ministry claimed that the alleged agents intended to use the weapons during the ongoing protests taking place throughout Iran in order to carry out assassinations and that Israel attempted to carry out acts of sabotage in various places during the recent presidential elections.

The announcement comes as protests continue across Iran for a third week in light of a severe drought and water crisis in southwestern Iran, and the day after anti-government protests broke out in Tehran.

A video shared on social media showed protesters marching down the streets of the capital on Monday shouting slogans such as “Death to the dictator” and “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon: I will sacrifice my life for Iran.”

Additionally on Tuesday, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) announced that it had killed two terrorists and captured another in the West Azerbaijan province in northwestern Iran. The IRGC claimed that the three member team planned to carry out sabotage and anti-security measures, according to Fars.

Three additional suspects who intended to protect the terrorists were also arrested, according to the report.

A “considerable amount” of weapons, ammunition and explosives were seized in the arrest, according to Fars.

On Monday, the Judiciary Office in the Fars Province announced that 11 members of a terrorist-takfiri group controlled by leaders located outside of Iran were arrested in the Fars Province.

An additional 25 individuals connected to the group were arrested in other provinces in a coordinated operation, according to the announcement.

“Takfiri” is a term used by Iran and pro-Iranian groups to refer to hard-line, Islamist militants.

The Judiciary Office added that the group had released a number of video clips on the Internet to spread terror and declare their existence. The office did not state what the name of the group was or where exactly its leaders are located.

“The group intended to carry out simultaneous terrorist operations in several provinces of the country which was plotted with the intelligence and financial cooperation of two intelligence services of the European countries and certain regional states but they were thwarted, thanks to the vigilance of judicial officials,” said the head of the Judiciary Office, according to Fars.

US military involvement in Afghanistan was a mistake

Americans are evenly divided on whether the war in Afghanistan was a mistake, as the withdrawal of US troops from the region nears completion. Gallup reported on Monday that 47% of Americans believe US military involvement in Afghanistan was a mistake, while 46% support the mission.

President Joe Biden announced in April that all US troops would be withdrawn from Afghanistan by 11th September 201, the 20th anniversary of the attacks on twin towers, resulting in the longest war in American history.

Earlier this month, Biden moved up the target date for pulling all troops from the region, revealing that the US military mission would end by 31st August.

More than 2,400 US service members have died in Afghanistan, according to Gallup. The war, which has cost the US more than US$2 trillion, has left around 20,000 US troops injured.

The poll, conducted between 6th to 21st July was the second time in history that fewer than half of Americans said US involvement in Afghanistan was not a mistake, according to Gallup.

Support for sending troops into Afghanistan was high in October 2001, shortly after the US sent troops into the country, with 80% of Americans supporting the move, and 18% opposed.

Support for the war increased the next year, with a record-high 93% of Americans saying it was not a mistake to deploy troops to the country.

In 2014, backing for the war slipped. That year was the first time US adults were as likely to say it was a mistake to send troops into Afghanistan as they were to say it was not, Gallup reported.

Of the Americans polled that year, 49% said the US made a mistake sending troops into Afghanistan, while 48% said it was not a mistake.

Support rose again in 2015 and 2019. This year, it is back on par with the results from 2014, according to the polling organization.

As the US withdrawal effort nears the completion concerns are growing about the stability of the Afghan government once American forces vacate the country, particularly as the Taliban continues to make gains in the region.

Gallup polled a random sample of 1,007 adults in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Remove Ashraf Ghani immediately, if peace can be established in Afghanistan without him

According to an Associated Press report, Taliban say there will not be peace in Afghanistan until President Ashraf Ghani is removed and there is a new negotiated government in Kabul.

Taliban spokesman Suhail Shaheen said the insurgents would end their fighting when a negotiated government that agrees with all sides of the conflict is established in Kabul, and Ghani's government is removed. 

“I want to make it clear that we do not believe in the monopoly of power because any governments who (sought) to monopolize power in Afghanistan in the past were not successful governments,” Shaheen said.

 “So we do not want to repeat that same formula.”

Shaheen dismissed Ghani's right to govern, calling him a warmonger and accusing him of using his speech on Eid-al-Adha to assure an offense against the Taliban.

Shaheen also brought up allegations of widespread fraud regarding Ghani's win. Ghani has said that he will remain in office until new elections determine the next government, which his critics, including the Taliban, say is only a method for him to remain in power. 

Last week, the Executive Officer of the country, Abdullah Abdullah, led a high-level group of representatives to talk with Taliban leaders, according to the AP.

While Shaheen said those talks were good at first, the government’s repeated demands for a cease fire without the removal of Ghani were similar to a Taliban surrender. 

“They don’t want reconciliation, but they want surrendering,” Shaheen said.

Before the Taliban can agree to a cease fire, there must be a new government “acceptable to us and to other Afghans,” he said. Only then will there be no war, according to Shaheen. 

Shaheen said the new government would allow women to work, go to school, participate in politics and walk freely without a male relative. However, they will be required to wear a hijab or headscarf. 

However, many reports from captured Taliban districts dispute this claim, as there are many harsh restrictions imposed on women, including setting fire to schools, according to the AP. 

Shaheen said that the capture of those districts was done through negotiation, not fighting. He said that some Taliban commanders ignored the leadership's orders against repressive and drastic behavior.

“Those districts which have fallen to us and the military forces who have joined us ... were through mediation of the people, through talks,” he told the publication. “They did not fall through fighting. ... It would have been very hard for us to take 194 districts in just eight weeks.”

Is Bennett being trapped by non-state actors?

On last Sunday it appeared that Prime Minister Naftali Bennett had just erased a 54-year policy banning Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount. Had Bennett actually made such a policy change, it likely would have started a religious war between Jews and Muslims, due to vehement opposition to Jewish prayer at the site. 

Domestically it would have collapsed his coalition and set Israel hurtling back into another election cycle.

It’s a move that could have severed Israel’s ties with its neighbor Jordan and complicated relations between Amman and Washington on the eve of US President Joe Biden’s first meeting there with King Abdullah the next day, particularly given that the Hashemite Kingdom has a special custodial relationship to the Temple Mount.

At issue was a line in a tweet sent out by the Prime Minister’s Office in the aftermath of clashes at the Temple Mount, also known to Muslims as al-Haram al-Sharif.

Initially it looked like a simple message, letting the public know that Bennett had spoken “with Public Security Minister Bar Lev and Israel Police Insp.-Gen. Shabtai and thanked them for managing the events on the Temple Mount with responsibility and consideration.”

This could have been termed the most innocuous statement in the world, the Prime Minister’s Office added that this was done “while maintaining freedom of worship for Jews on the Mount.”

The Prime Minister’s Office continued the Twitter thread, stating that Bennett had emphasized that “freedom of worship on the Temple Mount will be fully preserved for Muslims as well, who will soon be marking the fast of the Day of Arafah and the Eid al-Adha.”

Not exactly the type of notice one issues when setting a policy change. Except that a policy – known as the status quo – worked out in the aftermath of the Six Day War in 1967 between Israel and the Wakf Islamic religious trust allows members of all faiths to visit the site, while banning anyone but Muslims from praying there. Jews in particular are expected to pray at the nearby Western Wall.

Bennett backtracked, with his spokesman Matan Sidi clarifying that there was no change to the status quo. Sidi’s words appeared to extinguish potential sparks, but the timing could not have been worse.

US airstrikes in Afghanistan

During this past week, the US military launched several airstrikes in support of Afghan government forces fighting Taliban, including in the strategically important province of Kandahar. It must be kept in mind that at present United States has no airbases in Pakistan or Central Asian countries.

These strikes demonstrate the US intentions to continue supporting Afghan forces with combat aircraft based outside the country, at least until the scheduled conclusion of the US military withdrawal by 31st August 2021.

The US has a variety of combat aircraft based in the Middle East within range of Afghanistan, including warplanes aboard an aircraft carrier in the region and fighters and bombers in the Persian Gulf area.

These are the first known US airstrikes in Afghanistan since Gen. Scott Miller, the top US commander in the country, relinquished his command and left the country. The authority to launch airstrikes against the Taliban has since been in the hands of Gen. Frank McKenzie, the commander of US Central Command, who oversees US military involvement in the greater Middle East.

The United States conducted a total of more than four airstrikes in support of Afghan forces. At least two of the strikes were to destroy military equipment, including an artillery piece and a vehicle that the Taliban had taken from Afghan forces. The Afghans requested those strikes, as well as those targeting Taliban fighting positions, including at least one strike in the southern province of Kandahar.

At a Pentagon news conference Wednesday, Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the Taliban now control about half of the 419 district centers in Afghanistan, and while they have yet to capture any of the country’s 34 provincial capitals, they are pressuring about half of them. As the Taliban seize more territory, the Afghan security forces are consolidating their positions to protect key population centers, including Kabul, he said.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said that after 31st August the main focus will be on countering threats to the US homeland from extremist groups inside Afghanistan. He added that the administration will provide financial and other kinds of support to Afghan defense forces, even with no combat troops or strike aircraft based there.

 

Can joining Quad help India fight Himalayan war against China?

The ambiguity over officially announcing China as its adversary, the lack of overlap between the geographies or the issues of its members with China, and the military disadvantages before a well-prepared Chinese puts a question mark over Indian inclusion in the Quad.

India has maintained that it perceives the Quad as not aimed against anyone, “denied it is an Asian NATO”, stressed on broader issues from vaccine collaboration, to resilient supply chains, and framed its language that avoids irking China. But the belated adoption of broader goals such as climate change and vaccines in the 12th March Quad Leaders’ Summit, to make it more acceptable to other countries, suggested that the target is Beijing.

Only India and Japan have territorial disputes and are geographically close with China, while the US and Australia’s opposition stems from Great Power contest, China’s socio-political system and policies in Xinjiang, Hong Kong, the South China Sea and Taiwan.

The only tangible dispute Australia has with China was the trade war where the latter’s tariffs cost Australia US$3 billion ‑ themselves in response to Australia backing a global inquiry into the COVID-19 origins in April 2020.

While India’s territorial disputes with China are in the Himalayas, Japan contests the Senkaku Islands (or Diaoyu in Chinese) in the East China Sea. Thus, the lack of a contiguous land or maritime geography with China does not allow a ‘united front’ per se — like Egypt and Sudan against Ethiopia, or Egypt, Greece and Cyprus in the Eastern Mediterranean against Turkey. Moreover, Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga on 22nd April refused intervening in a Chinese invasion of Taiwan itself, while clarifying 17th April joint statement with Biden in the Japanese Parliament.

India is not likely to join Quad members to collectively confront China in the South China Sea, as China can be expected to retaliate with severe backlash in Ladakh. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is already limiting the disengagement only to the Pangong Tso, with the standoff becoming a year old.

Beijing initiated the standoff because of India’s rising military dalliance with the US and tacitly joining former US President Donald Trump’s COVID-19-origin charge in early 2020. China perceived it as a threat to its sovereignty and India and US exploiting its vulnerability. Moreover, India’s reconciliatory statements at the beginning of the standoff reflected an unwillingness to go to war.

Giving up the Kailash Range plateau that had stunned the Chinese, has also left India with little military options. Add to it its obsolete military equipment and structure, India can only fight a defensive war. In the South China Sea against the US Navy that is stretched thin, the Chinese have a home advantage.

In the Indian Ocean Region (IOR), the Peoples’ Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) knows it faces the ‘away’ disadvantage and, therefore, will not challenge the Quad or India.

Retired US Navy Admiral Dennis Blair also discredits the ‘String of Pearls’ theory, saying it is “not possible for any navy to encircle a country (like India) with a few ports.” Since international law would permit India to strike regions it faces attacks from, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka or Pakistan will not host Chinese military facilities aimed at India.

A China policy independent of the US geopolitical rivalries that objectively addresses Indian issues with Beijing and avoids the destabilization that Washington’s military alliances effect would inspire a positive response from China. Moreover, banking on military alliances against China would harm the current government’s muscular, nationalistic image.

Remembering King Abdullah I of Jordan

The year 2021 marks 70 years of assassination of King Abdullah I of Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. He was assassinated on the Temple Mount, while visiting Jerusalem to meet Israeli officials amid his efforts to reach a settlement with Israel. 

Abdullah was assassinated at the age of 69 as he was exiting al-Aqsa Mosque after Friday prayers with his grandson Hussein.

The assassin, Mustafa Shukri Ashshu, was associated with Mufti of Jerusalem Amin al-Husseini, who sparked riots against Jews in Mandatory Palestine and was close with Adolf Hitler during World War II. Those associated with the Mufti were often termed "bitter enemies" of Abdullah, as the Mufti supported the establishment of a Palestinian state, which Abdullah seemed to have thwarted by annexing the West Bank, according to a Guardian article from the day after the assassination.

A few days before the assassination, Riad al Sohl, the first prime minister of Lebanon, was also assassinated in Jordan. Ali Razmara, Prime Minister of Iran, and Abdul Hamid Zanganeh, former Education Minister of Iran, were also assassinated in the months before Abdullah's assassination. The assassinations were seen as a sign of increasing instability in the region.

Abullah was succeeded by his son Talal, who was forced to abdicate about a year later due to mental illness. Talal was succeeded by Hussein, who ruled until 1999, when he was succeeded by the current king of Jordan, Abdullah II.

King Abdullah I was known for his efforts to reach at least some form of peace with Israel, although he was assassinated 43 years before a peace treaty between the two nations was finally signed.

Abdullah met with Reuven Shiloah, the first Mossad director, and Golda Meir in a number of discussions from 1949 to 1950. The king made extensive efforts to get other Jordanian officials to support reaching a settlement with Israel, but faced intense opposition from both officials and the Jordanian and Palestinian public.

Abdullah had been set to meet with Shiloah and diplomat Moshe Sasson in Jerusalem the day after he was assassinated, according to Avi Shalim, an Israeli-British historian.

In Lion of Jordan, Shalim's biography of Abdullah's grandson, Hussein, Abdullah is quoted as having told Sasson "I want to make peace with Israel not because I have become a Zionist or care for Israel’s welfare but because it is in the interest of my people. I am convinced that if we do not make peace with you, there will be another war, and another war, and another war, and another war, and we shall lose all these wars. Hence it is the supreme interest of the Arab nation to make peace with you"

Elias Sasson, Moshe's father, wrote shortly after Abdullah's assassination: "King Abdullah was the only Arab statesman who showed an understanding for our national renewal, a sincere desire to come to a settlement with us, and a realistic attitude to most of our demands and arguments... We as well as some of the Arabs and foreigners are going to feel for a long time to come his absence, and to regret more than a little his removal from our midst," according to Shalim's biography.

By the time of his assassination, Israeli officials had largely lost hope that Abdullah's efforts would ever lead to an actual peace due to continuing opposition by Arab and Jordanian officials.

At the time of his assassination, a newsreel by the British Pathé News described Abdullah as "the one man who might have brought peace to the Middle East."

Winston Churchill expressed deep regret after hearing of Abdullah's assassination, saying "I deeply regret the murder of this wise and faithful Arab ruler, who never deserted the cause of Britain and held out the hand of reconciliation to Israel," according to The Guardian.

Fervent protests in Indian Parliament over spyware scandal

There was lot of huge and cry in the Indian Parliament on Tuesday as opposition lawmakers accused government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi of using military-grade spyware to monitor political opponents, journalists and activists. 

The session was disrupted repeatedly as opposition lawmakers shouted slogans against Modi government and demanded an investigation into how the spyware, known as Pegasus, was used in India.

“This is a national security threat,” an opposition Congress party official, Kapil Sibal, said at a news conference.

The protests came after an investigation by a global media consortium was published on Sunday. Based on leaked targeting data, the findings provided evidence that the spyware from Israel-based NSO Group, the world’s most infamous hacker-for-hire company, was used to allegedly infiltrate devices belonging to a range of targets, including journalists, activists and political opponents in 50 countries.

In India, the list of potential surveillance targets included senior Congress party leader Rahul Gandhi, at least 40 journalists, a veteran election strategist critical of Modi and a top virologist, according to the investigation.

Newly appointed Information Technology Minister, Ashwani Vaishnaw dismissed the allegations on Monday, calling them “highly sensational,” “over the top,” and “an attempt to malign the Indian democracy.”

Minutes after his statement in Parliament, India’s independent The Wire website ‑ part of the media consortium ‑ revealed that his name also appeared on the list as a potential surveillance target in 2017. He was not a member of Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party at that time.

NSO Group has said it only sells its spyware to “vetted government agencies” for use against terrorists and major criminals. The Indian government has so far dodged questions over whether it is a client of the group.

A list of more than 50,000 cell phone numbers was obtained by the Paris-based journalism nonprofit Forbidden Stories and the human rights group Amnesty International, which was then shared with 16 news organizations.

Journalists were able to identify more than 1,000 individuals in 50 countries who were allegedly selected by NSO clients for potential surveillance, including 300 verified Indian numbers, The Wire reported.

In India, the investigation fueled a slew of angry reactions from officials.

Home Minister Amit Shah called the investigation an attempt to “derail India’s development trajectory through their conspiracies” and said it was “timed to cause disruptions in Parliament.”

The former IT minister, Ravi Shankar Prasad, said there was “not a shred of evidence linking Indian government or the BJP” to the allegations. Prasad called it an international plot to defame India.

Rights groups say the findings bolster accusations that not just autocratic regimes but also democratic governments, including India, have used the spyware for political ends.

It has also intensified concerns of a democratic backsliding and erosion of civil liberties under Modi. Recently, the Washington-based Freedom House downgraded India, the world’s most populous democracy, from “free” to “partly free.”

Rahul Gandhi, the most influential Indian name revealed so far, was Modi’s main challenger in the 2014 and 2019 general elections. Two of his phone numbers used between mid-2018 and mid-2019, in the runup to the election, appear on the list.

Gandhi no longer has the devices so it was not possible to analyze them to determine if they had been hacked, The Wire reported. They also found at least nine numbers of people in Gandhi’s circle.

The list also included Gangandeep Kang, a top virologist, Prashant Kishor, a longtime political strategist who helped Modi to power in 2014 but is now one of his strongest opponents, and Ashok Lavasa, a former top official in India’s Election Commission.

Phone numbers of a Supreme Court staffer who accused the former Chief Justice, Ranjan Gogoi, of sexual harassment in 2019, also appeared in the data just days after she recorded her allegations. Gogoi was later cleared of the allegations, which he had denied.

US occupation has caused enormous damage to Afghanistan, says Ali Akbar Velayati

Ali Akbar Velayati, Secretary General of the World Assembly on Islamic Awakening, on Monday expressed regret at the enormous damage caused by the US military invasion of Afghanistan. He reiterated Iran’s commitment to supporting the Afghan nation on the path of peace, security, and development.

Addressing a virtual conference on Afghanistan hosted by the World Assembly of Islamic Awakening, Velayati warned that despite the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, the Americans were still maliciously trying to create divisions among Afghans.

He also commended the Afghan people for their courageous struggles with the Western and Eastern occupiers and invaders over the past decades.

Afghans fought the invading Soviet Army in the 1980s, forcing the Kremlin to leave the country in disgrace. After the 11^th September 2001, the United States also invaded Afghanistan and also leaving the after 20 years shamefully. 

Addressing the conference entitled “Afghanistan, Sustainable Peace, and Security”, the veteran politician noted that the United States occupied Afghanistan for 20 years by deploying thousands of soldiers and spending billions of dollars, resulting in severe damage and significant disasters in Afghanistan.

Despite the initial delusion, the United States is humiliatingly withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, although it is still trying to destroy what is left in Afghanistan, regretted Velayati who was Iran’s foreign minister from 1981 to 1997.

The Iranian politician also warned that the United States is engaged in atrocious provocations to create discord among the noble people of Afghanistan.

“However, the elite and educated individuals in Afghanistan are aware of their evil intentions and will thwart these conspiracies,” he pointed out.

Velayati attributed the bloody wars between various ethnic groups in Afghanistan over the past 40 years to foreign provocations and called for vigilance to strengthen brotherhood between all parties that have lived in friendship and peace for thousands of years.

On 8th and 9^th July, the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs presided over a round of intra-Afghan negotiations. Representatives of the Afghan government and the Taliban took part in the talks.

The meeting was also attended by high-level figures supporting the Afghan republic.

At the end of two-day Afghan internal talks six statements were released. All parties participating in the meeting recognized the threat of a protracted war in Afghanistan and its damage to the country. In their statement, they also agreed that war is not the solution to the Afghan problem and called for collective efforts to achieve a peaceful and political solution.

Delegations from the Afghan government and the Taliban said in a joint statement on Sunday that they will meet again and plan to expedite peace negotiations after two days of inconclusive talks in Doha.

The negotiators from the rival sides, who have been in Doha since Saturday, said, “The two sides are committed to continue negotiations at a high level until a settlement is reached.”

Afghan evacuees to be housed at Virginia base

The Biden administration plans to send the first group of Afghans - who are being evacuated amid threats to their lives for helping US troops during the war - to a military base in Virginia, a congressional aide notified about the plans confirmed Monday.

Spokespeople for the State and Defense Departments later also announced the plans to send the first group of Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) applicants to Fort Lee, Virginia.

"These are brave Afghans and their families, as we have said, whose service to the United States has been certified by the embassy in Kabul, and who have completed thorough SIV security vetting processes," State Department spokesperson Ned Price said at a news briefing. "They will be provided temporary housing and services as they complete the final steps in the special immigrant process."

According to the plan up to 2,500 Afghans who are in the "very final stages" of applying for SIVs are expected to be sent to Fort Lee while they wait for "final medical screenings and final administrative requirements," Pentagon press secretary John Kirby said at separate briefing. That includes 700 SIV applicants, while the rest are their family members.

Because they are near the end of the process, the Afghans are likely to only stay at the base for "several days or so," Kirby added.

Some of the 2,500 may also be sent to other military bases inside the United States in addition to Fort Lee as the Pentagon continues to look at options to house SIV applicants, Kirby said.

The first news reported by Reuters, came after the Biden administration last week formally announced “Operation Allies Refuge,” which officials said would start evacuations at the end of July.

Sending the Afghans to Fort Lee represents a shift from the administration’s initial statements on looking to send them to third countries or US facilities outside the continental United States.

But the Pentagon last week did say it also started looking at facilities within the continental United States in order to give the State Department, which is leading the operation, as many options as possible.

The Pentagon is continuing to look into overseas facilities to house Afghans who are less further along in the visa process than the group coming to Virginia and so need "additional security vetting," Kirby said Monday.

Plans are underway to relocate about 4,000 applicants and their family members outside the United States, Price said.

This group has passed the “chief of mission screening” process, Price said, but has yet to complete the more vigorous security clearance vetting process to come to the United States, which can take several months. 

For those coming to Fort Lee, the Pentagon will provide food and water, "appropriate medical care" if needed and "as much comfort as we can provide," such as providing access to religious facilities, Kirby said. The department will not need to build new housing for them on the base, he added.

Asked why Fort Lee was chosen as the initial site to house the Afghans, Kirby said the base "just made a lot of sense for a lot of different reasons."

Kirby declined to say when the first group would arrive at Fort Lee, citing security concerns.

The Biden administration has faced extensive pressure from lawmakers and advocates to evacuate Afghans who served as interpreters or otherwise helped the US military during the war as the United States nears its final exit from Afghanistan after nearly 20 years. The pullout from America’s longest war is about 95 percent done, with President Biden setting an official deadline of 31st August 2021 to complete the withdrawal.

Great Game Begins in Afghanistan

The latest Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) meeting of Foreign Ministers in Dushanbe, the Tajik capital, may have been an under-the-radar affair, but it did reveal the contours of the big picture of Afghanistan.  

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi laid out the basic road map to his Afghan counterpart Mohammad Haneef Atmar. While stressing the Chinese foreign policy gold standard – no interference in internal affairs of friendly nations – Wang established three priorities:

1. Real inter-Afghan negotiations towards national reconciliation and a durable political solution, thus preventing all-out civil war. Beijing is ready to “facilitate” dialogue.

2. Fighting terror – which means, in practice, al-Qaeda remnants, ISIS-Khorasan and the Eastern Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM). Afghanistan should not be a haven for terrorist outfits – again.   

3. The Taliban, for their part, should pledge a clean break with every terrorist outfit.

Atmar fully agreed with Wang. And so did Tajik Foreign Minister Sirojiddin Muhriddin. Atmar even promised to work with Beijing to crack down on ETIM, a Uighur terror group founded in China’s western Xinjiang. Overall, the official Beijing stance is that all negotiations should be “Afghan-owned and Afghan-led.”

It was up to Russian Presidential envoy Zamir Kabulov to offer a more detailed appraisal of the Dushanbe discussions.  

The main Russian point is that Kabul and the Taliban should try to form a provisional coalition government for the next 2-3 years, while they negotiate a permanent agreement. Talk about a Sisyphean task – and that’s an understatement. The Russians know very well that both sides won’t restart negotiations before September. 

Moscow is very precise about the role of the extended troika – Russia, China, Pakistan and the US – in the excruciatingly slow Doha peace process talks: the troika should “facilitate” (also Wang’s terminology), not mediate the proceedings.  

Another very important point is that once “substantive” intra-Afghan negotiations resume, a mechanism should be launched to clear the Taliban of UN Security Council sanctions.

This will mean the normalization of the Taliban as a political movement. Considering their current diplomatic drive, the Taliban do have their eyes on the ball. So the Russian warning that they should not become a security threat to any of the Central Asian “stans” or there will be “consequences” has been fully understood.

Four of the five “stans” (Turkmenistan is the exception) are SCO members. By the way, the Taliban have sent a diplomatic mission to Turkmenistan to ease its fears.  

In Dushanbe, a special meeting of the SCO-Afghanistan Contact Group, established in 2005, for the first time was held at the foreign minister level.

This shows that the SCO as a whole is engaged in making its “facilitate, not mediate” role the prime mechanism to solve the Afghan drama. It’s always crucial to remember that no fewer than six SCO member-nations are Afghanistan’s neighbors.

During the main event in Dushanbe – the SCO Foreign Ministers Council – the Russians once again framed Washington’s Indo-Pacific strategy as an attempt to deter China and isolate Russia.

Following recent analyses by President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, the Russian delegation explained to its SCO counterparts its view counterposing Moscow and Beijing’s effort to develop a polycentric world system based on international law, on the one hand, with the Western concept of the so-called “rules-based world order.”

The Western approach, they said, puts pressure on countries that pursue independent foreign policy courses, ultimately legitimizing the West’s “neocolonial policy.”

While the SCO was discussing the drive towards a polycentric world system, the Taliban, on the ground, kept doing what they’ve been doing for the past few weeks: capturing strategic crossroads.

The Taliban already controlled border crossings with Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Iran and Turkmenistan. Now they have taken over ultra-strategic Spin Boldak, bordering Balochistan in Pakistan, which in trade terms is even more important than the Torkham border crossing near the Khyber Pass.

According to Taliban spokesman Suhail Shaheen, “the Spin Boldak district in Kandahar province has been cleared of the enemy” – Kabul’s forces – “and the district is now under the control of the mujahideen.” The term “mujahideen” in the Afghan context means indigenous forces fighting foreign invaders or proxies.       

To have an idea of the importance of Spin Boldak for the Taliban economy during their years in power, see the third chapter of a series I published in Asia Times in 2010, here and here. Eleven years ago, I noted that “the Afghan-Pakistan border is still porous, and the Taliban seem to believe they may even get their Talibanistan back.” They believe that now, more than ever.

Meanwhile, in the northeast, in Badakhshan province, the Taliban are getting closer and closer to the border with Xinjiang – which has led to some hysteria about “terrorism” infiltrating China via the Wakhan corridor.

What’s way more relevant is that the Ministry of Public Works in Kabul is actually building a 50-kilometer road – for the moment unpaved – between Badakhshan province and Xinjiang, all the way to the end of the Wakhan corridor. They will call it the Wakhan Route. 

SCO member Pakistan remains arguably the key to solve the Afghan drama. The Pakistani ISI remains closely linked to every Taliban faction: never forget the Taliban are a creation of legendary General Hamid Gul in the early 1990s.   

At the same time, for any Jihadi outfit it’s easier to hide and lie low deep in the Pakistani tribal areas than anywhere else – and they can buy protection, irrespective of what the Taliban are doing in Afghanistan. Prime Minister Imran Khan and his circle are very much aware of it – as much as Beijing. That will be the ultimate test for the SCO in its anti-terror front.

China needs an eminently stable Pakistan for all the long-term Belt and Road/China-Pakistan Economic Corridor projects and to fulfill its goal of incorporating Afghanistan. Kabul would be bound to benefit not only from increased connectivity and infrastructure development but also from future mineral including rare earth exploration projects. 

Meanwhile, Hindu nationalists would love to outflank Pakistan and extend their influence in Kabul, encouraged by Washington. For the Empire of Chaos, the ideal agenda is – what else? – chaos, disrupting Belt and Road and the Russia-China road map for Eurasian integration, Afghanistan included.    

Added hysteria depicting Russia and China involved in Afghan reconstruction as but a new chapter in the never-ending “graveyard of empires” saga does not even qualify as nonsense. The talks in Dushanbe made clear that the Russia-China strategic partnership approach to Afghanistan is cautiously realistic.

It’s all about national reconciliation, economic development and Eurasian integration. Not included military component, hubs for an Empire of Bases, foreign interference. Moscow and Beijing also recognize, pragmatically, that fulfilling those dreams will not be possible in an Afghanistan hostage to ethno-sectarianism.    

The Taliban for their part seem to have recognized their own limits, hence their current inter-regional diplomatic drive. They seem to be paying close attention to the inevitable heavyweights – Russia and China – as well as the Central Asian “stans” plus Pakistan and Iran.

Palestinian-Jordanian crisis erupts ahead of Biden-Abdullah meeting

A senior Palestinian official has triggered a crisis between the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Jordan after stating that the Palestinians alone had thwarted former US President Donald Trump’s plan for Mideast peace. 

The Jordanians say that they also played a major role in derailing the Trump plan as they feared the plan was aimed at turning their country into an alternative homeland for the Palestinians.

The PA dismissed the Trump plan, which was unveiled in January 2020, as a conspiracy aiming to liquidate the Palestinian issue and Palestinian rights. The Arab League, including Jordan, also rejected the plan, saying it would not lead to peace or meet the minimum rights and aspirations of the Palestinians.

The crisis emerged on the eve of a meeting in Washington between Jordan’s King Abdullah II and US President Joe Biden.

It also comes two weeks after PA President Mahmoud Abbas and Abdullah agreed during a meeting in Amman to coordinate positions “on the interest of the Arab nation and its common cause, primarily the Palestinian cause,” according to the PA’s official news agency WAFA.

During the meeting, Abdullah reiterated Jordan’s support for the Palestinians “in achieving their just and legitimate rights and establishing their independent, sovereign and viable state on the June 4, 1967, lines, with east Jerusalem as its capital,” Jordan’s official Petra news agency reported.

The crisis erupted during a recent meeting of the Arab Parliament, the legislative body of the Arab League. A video of the rare public, heated discussion appeared over the weekend on various social media platforms, drawing sharp criticism from Palestinians and Jordanians alike.

The Palestinian official, Azzam al-Ahmed, a veteran member of the Fatah Central Committee, said in a speech before the parliament that the Palestinians alone had foiled Trump’s “Deal of the Century.”

“We are the ones who clashed with America,” he said.

Ahmed’s speech was interrupted by Jordanian parliament member Khalil Atiyyeh, who said, “Azzam, you were not alone in the field. Until now, we [Jordanians] are paying the price for our position over the ‘Deal of the Century’ and support for the Palestinians.

“There are conspiracies being concocted against Jordan and the king,” he said. “The Jordanian people are being starved because of their opposition to the plan.”

The head of the “Palestine Committee” in the Jordanian Parliament, Mohammed al-Zahrawi, expressed his appreciation for the position of Attiyeh and denounced the Palestinian official’s “failure to address Jordan’s firm position under the king’s leadership in defending the Palestinian cause and the rights of the Palestinian people.”

Zahrawi accused the Palestinian official of ignoring Jordan’s role in supporting the Palestinian issue. “Jordan confronted the ‘Deal of the Century’ and all schemes, and was subjected to pressure as a result of its firm stances, which Azzam al-Ahmed deliberately did not address in his speech,” he said.

Several Palestinians criticized Ahmed both for his speech and his participation in the Arab Parliament gathering.

In 2018, Abbas dissolved the Palestinian parliament, the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), which has been paralyzed since 2007 when Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip. In 2006, Ahmed was elected as a member of the PLC representing the area of Jenin as a Fatah candidate.

“Is Azzam al-Ahmed still a member of the parliament?” asked Palestinian journalist Naela Khalil. “Didn’t the president dissolve the Palestinian Legislative Council?”

Another Palestinian journalist, Muath Hamed, commented on Ahmed’s speech in a post on Facebook by reminding him that he was not speaking on Palestine TV. “You are talking in front of Arab parliamentarians, not Palestine TV,” Hamed wrote. “This means that there are microphones and the attendees can reply to you on the spot.”

Some Jordanian social media users accused the Palestinians of being “ungrateful” and praised the Jordanian parliamentarian for “silencing” his Palestinian colleague.

Jordanian Professor Faiz Zoubi commented on Twitter, “Thank you Khalil Attiyeh for your firm stance in the face of Azzam al-Ahmed. The Jordanian people and their leadership have been looking after the Palestinian cause for 70 years. The king is now in the US for the sake of the Palestinian cause, and where are you [Ahmed]?”

The Trump peace plan, officially titled “Peace to Prosperity: A Vision to Improve the Lives of the Palestinians and Israeli People,” was authored by Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner.

Why Biden-Abdullah meeting termed eminent?

King Abdullah of Jordan is scheduled to meet President Joe Biden at the White House on 19th July 2021. He becomes the first Arab leader to be welcomed by the US president since he took office in January this year.

The official visit marks a crucial reset to US-Jordanian ties, which had suffered under President Donald Trump. The last time King Abdullah visited the White House was in June 2018.

Announcing the visit Jordan’s Royal Court said it will “cover strategic ties between Jordan and the United States and means of bolstering them across several sectors, as well as the latest regional developments.”

On 7th July, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said the visit will “highlight the enduring and strategic partnership between the United States and Jordan, a key security partner and ally of the United States. It will be an opportunity to discuss the many challenges facing the Middle East, and showcase Jordan’s leadership role in promoting peace and stability in the region.”

She added that President Biden looks forward to working with the king “to strengthen bilateral cooperation on multiple political, security, and economic issues, including the promotion of economic opportunities that will be vital for a bright future in Jordan.”

For King Abdullah it is vital that he renews US support for his role as guardian and custodian of Muslim holy places in East Jerusalem — an issue that had come under threat during the last months of Trump’s presidency.

In a bid to woo Saudi Arabia into concluding a separate peace deal with Israel, Western media reports suggested that Netanyahu and Kushner might have been ready to offer Riyadh custodianship of Al-Aqsa Mosque, replacing King Abdullah.

Saudi Arabia has repeatedly supported Jordan’s special role at the holy mosque. One thing is clear that President Biden supports the new détente between Israel and Jordan as exemplified by the recently unannounced visit by Bennett to Amman and the ensuing agreement to supply water-parched Jordan with an additional 50 million cubic meters of Israeli water.

In recent years Jordan had become increasingly dependent — to the anger of many Jordanians — on Israeli natural gas and water. Israel also agreed to allow Amman to increase its exports to the West Bank to US$700 million annually, from US$160 million.

Before he left Amman the king met with the Palestinian President, who, according to sources, authorized him to take any steps needed to convince the US administration to revive the peace process. Both Amman and Ramallah lost a lot of political sway during and after the recent Israel-Gaza war, when Hamas emerged as a key player in Palestinian politics at the expense of the Palestinian Authority.

Jordan has no formal ties with Hamas, while Abbas failed to reconcile with the movement, which controls Gaza. Following the death of a Palestinian activist, while in the PA’s custody in late June, protests broke out in the West Bank calling for Abbas’ ouster. The Palestinian leader, whose term as President ended almost a decade ago, has never been more unpopular among his own people. His own Fatah movement has splintered as he postponed legislative and presidential elections earlier this year.

For King Abdullah there are other issues that he would like to discuss with the Biden administration as well. Jordan’s economy is suffering with record unemployment and poverty rates and a soaring public debt. Public pressure is mounting on the government to provide socio-economic solutions — a key factor in a sedition plot involving the king’s half-brother and a former aide aimed at destabilizing the kingdom, which the Biden administration helped expose last March.

Behind closed doors the king, who is accompanied on the trip by Queen Rania and Crown Prince Hussein, will probably ask President Biden to find ways to exempt the kingdom from penalties under the Caesar Act regarding trading with Syria, Jordan’s northern neighbor. The war-torn country is in bad need of basic goods and materials that Jordan can provide, especially to southern Syria. The White House will almost certainly put pressure on the king to speed up the process of adopting genuine political and economic reforms while improving the kingdom’s human rights and freedom of speech records.

But from a strategic angle, the two countries are boosting their military and intelligence cooperation. Earlier this month the US announced that it was redeploying military assets and personnel from Afghanistan and Qatar to Jordanian bases. This comes after the two countries signed a controversial defense agreement last January that was not ratified by the Jordanian parliament.

As the two countries mark more than 70 years of bilateral ties, there is no doubt that the King, who will also meet senior administration officials; Congress leadership; members of the Senate Armed Services, Foreign Relations, and Appropriations committees; and members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, will return to Amman feeling much better about the future of this strategic relationship. The question is how will this relationship shape the future of Jordan in a fast changing region?   

Iranian dissidents visiting Israel to seek help for bringing regime change in Iran

A delegation of Iranian dissidents and expatriates plans to pay a solidarity visit to Israel next week with officials from the Trump administration.

The mission is being organized by the Institute for Voices of Liberty (iVOL), a policy institute dedicated to encouraging freedom, human rights and democracy in Iran.

The mission will include eight Iranian expats and four former officials and is meant to demonstrate support for Israel in light of the latest attacks by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, alleged to be Iranian proxies.

The delegation will meet with Foreign Ministry representatives, visit an IDF unit and hear from security experts. It plans to visit towns in the Gaza Strip periphery, as well as the northern border to learn about the threat from Hezbollah. The participants will also tour historic sites in Jerusalem.

The Abraham Accords show there is potential for greater peace, security and prosperity in the Middle East and that Iranians also deserve to take part, despite their hostile and antisemitic regime, former US Deputy National Security Advisor Victoria Coates was quoted as saying.

Coates cited an op-ed she and Len Khodorkovsky, a former senior adviser to the US special representative for Iran, wrote in The Jerusalem Post, calling for a “Cyrus Accords” between Israel and Iranians, named after Cyrus the Great, the Persian king who allowed Jews to build the Second Temple in Jerusalem.

“This iVOL mission is an important step towards realizing that vision; once the Islamic Republic joins so many other ruthless, authoritarian regimes on the ash heap of history,” Coates said.

Khodorkovsky is expected to join the delegation, as well as Ellie Cohanim, former Deputy Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism, who was born in Iran, and US Department of Defense strategist Adam Lovinger.

Most of the members of the group will be traveling to Israel for the first time. They will meet with Israelis of diverse backgrounds and religions during their visits to Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and other locations near the Gazan and Syrian borders targeted by the regime in Iran and its terrorist proxies.

The organization “exists to reflect the voices of freedom-seeking Iranians,” said iVOL Board Member Bijan R. Kian, an Iranian-American who was convicted of illegal lobbying connected with the investigation of former National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn.

“We organized this historic mission to Israel to show the solidarity of free Iranians with the people of Israel and to separate freedom-seeking people of Iran from the criminal, inept and corrupt regime that has forced itself upon them,” he said.

Iranian dissidents, Institute for Voices of Liberty, Israel, Iran, Cyprus Accord Middle East,