Israel to push Biden on trade corridor connecting Israel and Gulf

“Corridors for Economic Integration”

A new highway and railway system throughout Israel, Jordan and Saudi Arabia could facilitate tens of billions of dollars in trade, according to a special paper prepared by the Finance Ministry ahead of US President Joe Biden’s visit to Israel.

The paper was drafted by Shira Greenberg, the ministry’s chief economist, under the direction of Finance Minister Avigdor Liberman. Government officials said that Liberman met in recent days with Prime Minister Yair Lapid to ensure that its main points would be brought up in talks with Biden during his visit to Israel, which begins on Wednesday and will end on Friday.

The paper – obtained by The Jerusalem Post and prepared in English so it could be shared with the Biden administration – pushes for a new plan called “Corridors for Economic Integration” that would create a regional transportation network including railways and highways linking Israel with Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf.

“By creating a direct connection between the Gulf and the Mediterranean, the network will allow for dramatically shorter shipment times between East and West,” the paper claims. “The project thus has the potential to facilitate trade on both a regional and global level, in addition to enhancing regional economic cooperation.”

Some sections of the network are already in stages of development, according to the paper. In Israel, a railway runs from the port of Haifa to Beit She’an, which is only 10 km. from the border with Jordan.

In Saudi Arabia, the North-South Railway links the east and center of the country with the north, all the way up to the border with Jordan.

In the Gulf, a railway under development there is being planned to connect those of all Gulf countries, in particular railways in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.

“By creating a direct connection between the Gulf and the Mediterranean, the network will allow for dramatically shorter shipment times between East and West.”

The distance, the paper said, of the “missing link” – between the Saudi-Jordanian border and the crossing between Israel and Jordan where the railway almost reaches – is just 200 kilometers.

The network, the paper claims, could facilitate trade between the Gulf, Europe, North Africa and the east coast of the Americas. “The existence of numerous relevant and significant trade flows is expected to provide the project with robust demand – as traders in all relevant countries will seek to take advantage of reduced shipment times and direct access to regional markets,” it says.

In the paper, the Finance Ministry calls on the Biden administration to take the reins of the initiative and to bring all of the relevant stakeholders together to facilitate its success.

“While preliminary analyses have shown the project’s potential, a full cost-benefit analysis carried out on behalf of all involved parties by an experienced international partner could also help the sides decide on the next steps,” it says. “We believe that the current positive atmosphere of regional cooperation will allow us the opportunity to move forward in these regards.”

 

 

 

Biden visit to Middle East: What is more important Israel or Saudi Arabia?

Forty-nine years since making his first trip to Israel, US President Joe Biden is scheduled to arrive in the country on Wednesday on the first leg of his first presidential visit to the Middle East.

For years he has regaled Jewish and Israeli audiences with an account of a meeting he had during that trip with then-prime minister Golda Meir, who told him that Israel’s secret weapon in dealing with Arab hostility was, “We have no place else to go.”

He later termed the meeting one of the most “consequential” of his life.

At that meeting, however, he complained to Meir about the Labor Party’s platform which he said was leading to “creeping annexation” of the territories. He also relayed to Meir that in Egypt he heard how the Egyptian officials believed in “Israel military superiority.” He concluded, as a result, that Israel should initiate the first step toward peace by unilateral withdrawals from nonstrategic areas.

A half-century breeds enormous changes. The US has changed dramatically, as has its position in the Mideast. Israel, too, has changed dramatically, as has its position in the world. But two things from that meeting remain constant, Biden is still opposed to Israel’s policies in the territories, and Israel’s sense that it has no place else to go infuses much of its strategic thinking – including Iran.

On Biden’s upcoming visit, both in Israel and in Saudi Arabia, Iran issue is going to take up much more room than the occupied territories.

Another issue, which came to the fore only a few months after Biden’s initial visit, will also feature prominently, oil. His visit in the late summer of 1973 came just before the Arab countries discovered oil as a strategic weapon, and began to use it.

Biden is the seventh sitting US president to visit Israel. It took 26 years before the first presidential visit to Israel, with Richard Nixon taking that leap in 1974. Since then, there have been 10 other presidential visits, including a one-day visit by Barack Obama in 2016 to attend Shimon Peres’s funeral. Nixon, Jimmy Carter and Donald Trump all visited once, George W. Bush and Obama visited twice, and Bill Clinton came here four times.

This will not be the first time a US president comes during an election campaign. Clinton came here in March 1996 – after organizing a “Summit of Peacemakers’’ in Sharm e-Sheikh – and made clear his preference for Peres, rather than the Likud leader running against him at the time, Benjamin Netanyahu.

Clinton’s support didn’t help, as Netanyahu eked out a razor-thin victory over Peres in elections held two months later. This should be a cautionary tale for Prime Minister Yair Lapid, who is hoping that Biden’s visit will give him a boost.

Historically, nods from US Presidents – though the optics are often powerful – have not necessarily translated into huge bonuses at the polls. Ask Netanyahu how much he was helped by the hug then-president Donald Trump gave him before the two elections in 2019, and the one in 2020. Trump was all-in for Netanyahu, yet Netanyahu didn’t get the votes he needed to form a coalition.

What Biden’s visit will do for Lapid is make him look prime ministerial. Photos of Lapid meeting and greeting Biden, and even audio of Biden praising the new acting prime minister, may help remove lingering doubt among those who believe that the onetime television journalist is not yet ready for the political prime time.

It is not, however, going to move voters from the pro-Netanyahu camp to the anti-Netanyahu camp headed by Lapid.

What is the goal? Beyond Lapid, what does Israel want from the Biden visit?

First of all, it just wants the visit itself. Presidential visits are still important for Israel because they reinforce the impression – an important one for Jerusalem in projecting power throughout the region and beyond – that its alliance with the US is steadfast and solid, and that it continues to enjoy a close and special relationship with Washington.

This not only deters those who might want to harm Israel, realizing that the US stands firmly behind it, but also encourages those who might want to get closer to Israel, because of Israel’s closeness to America. Presidential visits demonstrate that closeness.

Such a demonstration is especially important now, amid a constant drumbeat of stories about how Israel’s support in the US is on the decline, especially among Biden’s own Democratic Party, and especially among young voters in that party.

Secondly, Israel wants coordination on the Iranian dossier to come from this visit. It wants to coordinate with Biden regarding policy toward the Islamic Republic if there is no new nuclear agreement, and it wants to know what type of security architecture the US plans for the Mideast in that eventuality. Israel doesn’t only want to listen; it wants to give its input. Furthermore, Israel also wants to hear from Biden what the US plans to do if an agreement is signed, and Iran violates it.

Biden is scheduled to arrive Wednesday afternoon and will be leaving for Saudi Arabia on Friday. He will also be spending a few hours in the Palestinian Authority with PA President Mahmoud Abbas.

There, too, there will be meetings with interlocutors who want something. The Palestinians will want to hear Biden talk about a two-state solution, and provide concrete steps toward working toward a “diplomatic horizon.” They will want commitments regarding opening a consulate in east Jerusalem, reopening the Palestinian Liberation Organization’s office in Washington, and pledges of more financial support for the PA.

They are likely to be disappointed, as – unlike other presidents on trips to Israel and the Mideast – the Palestinian issue, resolving this issue, is nowhere near the top of the president’s agenda for this trip.

When discussions about a possible presidential visit became public a few months ago, Naftali Bennett was prime minister – the government was shaky, but still held. Even though the government has since fallen, a new prime minister is in office, and elections are four months away, the Americans proved very determined to go ahead with the visit.

Why visit Jerusalem at a time when the prime minister is not going to be able to make any significant promises, since in four months he may not be able to act on them. Why risk being seen as meddling in internal Israeli politics?

Israel is only a sidelight on this visit. Had Biden been coming only to Israel, he probably would have canceled and come next year, after the US midterm elections and when a new government would be in place in Jerusalem. But Israel is just the appetizer on this presidential voyage. Saudi Arabia is the main course.

Ironically, Biden is actually using the appetizer to explain to critics why he is moving on to the main course. He is using Israel to deflect criticism at home about visiting Saudi Arabia, despite that country’s human rights violations, despite its involvement in the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and despite Biden’s having said in the 2020 presidential campaign that it is a country that should be treated like a “pariah.”

One of the main purposes of this visit to the region, Biden said at a press conference in Spain last month, is to “deepen Israel’s integration in the region.”

“I think we’re going to be able to do that, which is good – good for peace and good for Israeli security,” he said. “That’s why Israeli leaders have come out so strongly for my going to Saudi Arabia.”

Biden is going to Saudi Arabia, where he will join a meeting of the Gulf Cooperation Council plus Iraq, Egypt and Jordan, and is expected to see Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, whom he has pointedly snubbed since becoming president. In Saudi Arabia, both Biden and the Saudis have their wants.

Biden wants, in fact he desperately needs, the Saudis to increase oil production to make up for shortfalls in supply caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This has led to skyrocketing prices in the US, with the average cost per gallon now standing at $4.79 a gallon (still well below the $8.96 Israelis pay per gallon at the pump).

The president is making his Mideast trip as the US economy is in the doldrums, sending his popularity numbers to new lows. Biden’s approval rating (39% on June 30) was almost 3 points lower than Trump’s at the same stage of his presidency. Low popularity isn’t because he has not put enough energy into the Mideast peace process, but, rather, primarily because of the economy – inflation and gas prices.

He hopes that in Saudi Arabia he can find a cure, at least, for gas prices, but this may be too high of an ask.

The Saudis, smarting from what they feel is the shabby way they were treated by Biden and this administration, are in no great rush to come to the president’s aid.

Lowering gas prices will help the Democrats – poised to get clobbered in five months in the US midterm election. But the Saudis aren’t interested in the Democrats doing well at the polls. If anything, they would prefer a Republican Congress and – in another two years – a Republican president.

Saudis also have their wants. They want the US to acknowledge that Riyadh has been a loyal strategic partner for 80 years; they want the US to acknowledge that the country has suffered from Houthi attacks; they want the Houthis reinstated on the American list of terrorist organizations; they want respect from Washington, and not to be viewed merely as America’s gas station.

In addition, they want assurances from Biden that they can count on the US in the future. The Saudis are looking for assurances that the US is not withdrawing from the region and is still willing to use its vast military power, and they want to hear how the US plans to protect them from Iran.

Biden will be flying into a region this week where a lot of different parties have a lot of different asks and expectations. Inevitably, some people are going to be disappointed, Biden himself may be among them. 

Why Biden is visiting Saudi Arabia remains a mystery?

Despite Israeli media reports that US President Joe Biden’s planned visit to Israel and the Middle East had been rescheduled to July 14, there has been no confirmation from Washington. 

Biden didn’t mention Israel but said that he hasn’t decided yet if he’ll travel to Saudi Arabia next month. 

Speaking to reporters before Air Force One departed from Los Angeles, Biden also addressed a question about whether there are commitments he is waiting for from the Saudis or about negotiations on peace talks, before announcing his trip.

“No,” said Biden. “The commitments from the Saudis don’t relate to anything having to do with energy. It happens to be a larger meeting taking place in Saudi Arabia. That’s the reason I’m going. And it has to do with national security for them – for Israelis,” he continued. “It has to do with much larger issues than having to do with the energy prices.”

What will he try to achieve in this visit?

The United States is in a years-long process of downsizing its involvement in the Middle East, said Natan Sachs, Director of the Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings.

“It still has a large military presence and still expends resources on the region, but it is looking to partner more extensively with countries in the region on security matters. This trip would be part of that effort, with the Biden administration visibly joining in an Arab-Israeli partnership for defense, especially against Iranian and Iranian-backed unmanned platforms,” he said. “It’s a significant shift in the Biden posture and another sign of a dramatically different Middle East.”

Michael Koplow, Chief Policy Officer at the Israel Policy Forum, said Biden’s visit is about US-Saudi ties first and foremost, “and I don’t expect any big American initiatives with respect to Israel or to Israeli-Palestinian issues.”

“He is trying to avoid the mistake that President Obama made in skipping Israel on his first visit to the region, and thus the Israel component seems to me more of a box-checking exercise,” Koplow said.

“The reference to Israeli security is likely about the Saudi-Egyptian agreement on transferring the islands of Tiran and Sanafir from Egypt to Saudi Arabia, which requires Israeli approval, and is viewed as another step toward Israeli-Saudi normalization and toward a broader regional security architecture in which Israel is integrated. Assuming that the JCPOA is not resurrected – increasingly the likely scenario – the US wants greater agreement and cooperation on dealing with Iran going forward, and this is a piece of that puzzle.”

Mark Dubowitz, Chief Executive at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank, said that Biden should be trying to achieve closer coordination with Israel on a pressure campaign against Iran, expanding efforts toward greater Saudi-Israeli normalization, “and sending a clear message to the Palestinian leadership that they can be part of the expanding process of normalization or it will pass them by.”

“The major obstacle to Saudi-Israeli normalization is in Washington not in Riyadh or Jerusalem,” Dubowitz said. 

“Biden has the opportunity to repair the damage in the US-Saudi relationship and to lay out a plan for greater regional military and intelligence integration against Iran and greater political and commercial integration between Israel and the Arab world. He has the opportunity to be remembered as the president who brought the most important Muslim country into the Abraham Accords.”

According to reports in Israeli media, Biden’s visit is expected to also include a visit to east Jerusalem. The plans follow Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Barbara Leaf’s visit to Israel and the West Bank, and as the State Department signaled on Twitter that it upgraded its Jerusalem office to the Palestinians, and changed its name to the “US Office of Palestinian Affairs in Jerusalem.”

“The separation of the Palestinian unit from the embassy is a partial step, well short of reopening the consulate general in Jerusalem, which Biden and Blinken both promised the Palestinians,” said Sachs.

“It’s a measure meant to blunt some of the worst criticism from the Left about going forward with the regional rapprochement without any major push on the Palestinian front.”

According to Koplow, “Biden wants to signal that he is continuing to repair relations with the Palestinians despite US moves falling short of Palestinian expectations.

“The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is still relatively low on his list of priorities, and that is unlikely to change in the near future, but Biden wants to demonstrate that he is not ignoring Palestinian concerns and is taking a different tack than president Trump did,” he said. “It’s more about the optics of a new US approach than it is about a big substantive shift or a shift in priorities.”

Dubowitz said that Biden should “avoid walking into the same trap on the Palestinian issue, which normally entails State Department efforts like the recent changes to its Jerusalem office to reward the Palestinian leadership without making reciprocal demands or holding them accountable.”

“Biden should be telling Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, “You can join normalization efforts and lead your people into greater prosperity and security or you can continue to obstruct, incite and deflect,” said Dubowitz. “That will guarantee only more misery and violence, the collapse of the PA and the rise of Hamas on the West Bank.”

Is the US hegemony around the world ending?

The horrifying images of desperate Afghans trying to get out of Kabul after the US-backed government collapsed in August signify a major twist in world history, the end of the US hegemony had come earlier than anticipated.

The growing weakness of United States can be attributed more to the domestic issues rather than its overseas proxy wars. The country is gradually losing status of largest ‘economic power’ as well as its ability to fix internal problems.

The peak period of the US hegemony lasted less than 20 years, from the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 to the financial crisis of 2007-09. The country was dominant in many domains of power—military, economic, political and cultural.

The height of American hubris was the invasion of Iraq in 2003, when it hoped to remake not just Iraq and Afghanistan, but the whole Middle East. The United States not only overestimated the effectiveness of its military power to bring about deep political change, but also underestimated the impact of its free-market economic model on global finance.

The decade ended with its troops bogged down in two counterinsurgency wars and a financial crisis that accentuated the inequalities of US-led globalization had brought about.

The degree of uni-polarity in this period has been rare in history, and the world has been reverting to a more normal state of multi-polarity ever since, with China, Russia, India, Europe and others gaining power relative to counter the US.

Afghanistan’s ultimate effect on geopolitics is not likely to be small. The US may have survived an earlier, humiliating defeat when it withdrew from Vietnam in 1975, but regained its dominance within little more than a decade. The much bigger challenge to the US global standing is domestic.

American society has become deeply polarized and has found it difficult to find consensus on virtually anything. This polarization started over conventional policy issues like taxes and abortion, but has since metastasized into a bitter fight over cultural identity.

Normally a big external threat such as a global pandemic should be the occasion for citizens to rally around a common response. But the covid-19 crisis served rather to deepen divide in the United States, with social distancing, mask-wearing and vaccinations being seen not as public-health measures but as political markers. These conflicts have spread to all aspects of life, from sport to the brands of consumer products that red and blue Americans buy.

Many analysts believe that the US influence abroad depends on its ability to fix its internal problems. Polarization has affected foreign policy directly.

During Barack Obama’s presidency, Republicans took a hawkish stance and scolded Democrats for the Russian “reset” and alleged naivety regarding Vladimir Putin.

Donald Trump turned the tables by embracing Putin, and today roughly half of Republicans believe that the Democrats constitute a bigger threat to the American way of life than Russia does.

There is more apparent consensus regarding China as both Republicans and Democrats agree it is a threat to democratic values. A far greater test of the US foreign policy than Afghanistan will be Taiwan, if it comes under direct Chinese attack. Will the United States be willing to sacrifice its sons and daughters on behalf of that island’s independence?

Would the US risk military conflict with Russia should it invade Ukraine? These are serious questions with no easy answers. A reasoned debate about the US national interest has to be conducted primarily through the lens of how it affects the partisan struggle.

The biggest policy debacle of President Joe Biden’s administration in its first year has been its failure to plan adequately for the rapid collapse of Afghanistan.

Biden has suggested that withdrawal was necessary in order to focus on meeting the bigger challenges from Russia and China. Obama was never successful in making a “pivot” to Asia because the US remained focused on counterinsurgency in the Middle East.

In 2022, the administration needs to redeploy both resources and the attention of policymakers to deter geopolitical rivals and engage with allies.

The United States is not likely to regain its earlier hegemonic status, nor should it aspire to. What it can hope for is to sustain, with like-minded countries, a world order friendly to democratic values. The ability do this depend on recovering a sense of national identity and purpose at home.

Who attacked Iraqi Prime Minister?

Reports of a recent drone attack on the home of Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi have caused a major escalation in the region. There is an increased use of drones as a strategic weapon, with the goal of intimidating the Iraqi Prime Minister just days after security forces clashed with pro-Iranian protesters.

It is apprehended that the attack was carried out by pro-Iranian militias as probably there exist no other culprits in Iraq who have drones that could or would attack the Iraqi Prime Minister.

While ISIS has used drones in the past, it’s not clear why they would suddenly emerge now to target the Iraqi leader and that leaves Iran-backed groups firmly in the frame.

While official reports have not yet specified which group was behind the attack and no one has yet taken responsibility for it, the trend of such attacks in the region points to Iranian-linked groups.

A drone was used to attack a US garrison at Tanf in Syria in October. In July, a drone was used to attack a commercial tanker in the Gulf of Oman, killing two crew members. In both instances, the US and other countries have pointed the finger at Iran.

In May, a drone was launched from Iraq, or possibly from Syria, targeting Israel during the 11-day war with Hamas. It is believed that Iran was also behind this attack.

For years, Iran has been building more sophisticated drones for surveillance and kamikaze-style attacks. The drones have become better at navigation and pre-programmed flight paths, or even real-time intelligence gathering. The fact they have targeted a moving ship is a clear indication of this.

An attack on the residence of Kadhimi is also a likely message by pro-Iran groups in Iraq that the Prime Minister is not immune.  

Iraqi armed forces announced the start of investigations to discover the location of the launch of the booby-trapped drone that targeted Kadhimi. Images showed the damage to the home, but it is unclear if drone fragments had been found that would link the design to any single country or entity.  

One of the reasons pro-Iran groups — including Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis in Yemen — use drones, is that it is difficult to trace their launch site and to know who is behind them once they are launched.

Israel has, in the past, accused Iran of creating a drone training center. Drones from Iran and technology from Iran has been a key to aiding Houthi efforts to attack Saudi Arabia.

Since January, the pro-Iran militias in Iraq have increasingly used drones to target US forces. This has occurred even in Erbil where the pro-Iran militias used a drone in the spring of 2021 to target what US media called, at the time, a CIA hangar at Erbil airport. Pro-Iran groups have done parades with drones.  

But, the kind of drone used to attack the Iraqi Prime Minister may be smaller than some of the kamikaze drones, which tend to be larger than a human. Locating parts of the equipment will be important, but Iraq’s security services may be reticent to conclude that Iran or any of its proxy groups were behind the attack.

Because in previous incidents where Iraq’s prime minister has acted against pro-Iranian groups engaged in illegal attacks, they succeeded in freeing their jailed members as a result.

Now, the groups, most linked to the Fatah party in parliament and the paramilitary Hashd al-Shaabi, have been conducting a sit-in to demand the overturn of recent election results. This kind of election protest is designed to raise tensions and pressure the prime minister.  

The problem being faced by the Iraqi government is that the militias are often tied to official paramilitary forces because former Iraqi Prime Minister, Haider Abadi, pushed to give the militias a legitimate role.

The militias were given increased power in 2014, based on some existing pro-Iran units, to fight ISIS but after the war on ISIS ended, the militias refused to go home and Abadi, who was backed by the US, empowered the militias.

Israel unveils remote controlled armed robots to be used in battle zones

According to an AP News, an Israeli defense contractor on Monday unveiled a remote-controlled armed robot it says can patrol battle zones, track infiltrators and open fire. The unmanned vehicle is the latest addition to the world of drone technology, which is rapidly reshaping the modern battlefield.

Proponents say such semi-autonomous machines allow armies to protect their soldiers, while critics fear this marks another dangerous step toward robots making life-or-death decisions.

The four-wheel-drive robot presented Monday was developed by the state-owned Israel Aerospace Industries’ “REX MKII.”

It is operated by an electronic tablet and can be equipped with two machine guns, cameras and sensors, said Rani Avni, Deputy Head of the Company’s autonomous systems division. The robot can gather intelligence for ground troops, carry injured soldiers and supplies in and out of battle, and strike nearby targets.

It is the most advanced of more than half a dozen unmanned vehicles developed by Aerospace Industries’ subsidiary, ELTA Systems, over the past 15 years.

The Israeli military is currently using a smaller but similar vehicle called the Jaguar to patrol the border with the Gaza Strip and help enforce a blockade Israel imposed in 2007, after the tiny territory was seized by Hamas.

Gaza is home to 2 million Palestinians who have largely been locked in by the blockade, which is also supported to some extent by Egypt. The border area is the site of frequent protests and occasional attempts by Palestinian militants or desperate laborers to infiltrate into Israel.

According to the Israeli army’s website, the semi-autonomous Jaguar is equipped with a machine gun and was designed to reduce soldiers’ exposure to the dangers of patrolling the volatile Gaza-Israel border. It is one of many tools, including drones armed with guided missiles that have given the Israeli military vast technological superiority over Hamas.

Unmanned ground vehicles are being increasingly used by other armies, including those of the United States, Britain and Russia. Their tasks include logistical support, the removal of mines and firing weapons.

The tablet can control the vehicle manually. But many of its functions, including its movement and surveillance system, can also run autonomously.

“With every mission, the device collects more data which it then learns from for future missions,” said Yonni Gedj, an operational expert in the Company’s robotics division.

Critics have raised concerns that robotic weapons could decide on their own, perhaps erroneously, to shoot targets. The Company says such capabilities exist but are not being offered to customers.

“It is possible to make the weapon itself also autonomous, however, it is a decision of the user today,” Avni said. “The maturity of the system or the user is not there yet.”

Bonnie Docherty, a senior researcher from the arms division of Human Rights Watch, said such weapons are worrisome because they can’t be trusted to distinguish between combatants and civilians or make proper calls about the harm attacks may do to nearby civilians.

“Machines cannot understand the value of human life, which in essence undermines human dignity and violates human rights laws,” Docherty said. In a 2012 report, Docherty, a lecturer at Harvard Law School, called for fully automated weapons to be banned by international law.

The defense magazine Janes said the development of autonomous ground vehicles has lagged behind autonomous aircraft and boats because moving across land is far more complex than navigating water or air. Unlike the open ocean, vehicles have to deal with “holes in the road” and know exactly how much force to apply to overcome a physical obstacle, the report said.

The technology in self-driving vehicles also has raised concerns. Electric car manufacturer Tesla, among other companies, has been connected to a series of fatal accidents, including an incident in Arizona in 2018 when a woman was hit by a car driving on autopilot.

The Israeli drone vehicle is being showcased at this week’s Defense and Security System International arms trade show in London.

 

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.

Is Israel losing resilience?

Once upon a time Israel was considered invincible, but now it is being said openly that its security has eroded and its safety bubble burst in the last few months. The situations demands an assessment of Israeli vulnerability and the weakening of other US allies and partners in the region.  

It is being said that Israel faces political and social disintegration. It has suffered strikes against its maritime interests and also witnessed cyber security vulnerabilities.

The fragility and vulnerability of the Israeli national security system is getting exposed.

The country had held four elections to appoint a prime minister, but still unable to do so and probably go for the fifth election. The system has received extraordinary injuries.

It is not the first time that Israeli strategic installations have been attacked. While Tehran claims it is retaliating against Israel, most of these have been termed accidents or total myths by Israel.

Several Israeli-owned ships have been attacked in the Gulf of Oman. This includes a February incident involving the MV Helios Ray. The Hyperion Ray was allegedly attacked in April, after a Wall Street Journal report claim that Israel had struck a dozen Iranian ships.  

Israel seems to be collapsing from within and may face further problems with the US gradually leaving the region.

It seems the US is not willing to support its allies. It is distancing from Saudi Arabia, after having achieve self sufficiency in crude oil production.

Political balance seems to be emerging in Syria and the country is getting ready to hold election.

There is political unity in Iraq and resistance movements seem to getting further strength.

The US faces pressure from Iraqi groups who are trying to expel it from the region.

As the US losing influence, Iran is getting ready to play a new role in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan.

Bahrain faces anti normalization protest

Reportedly, anti normalization protests erupted in the streets of the Bahraini capital of Manama after Friday prayer. 

Protesters held up banners denouncing normalization, with the unified slogan “Anti-normalization Friday”, along with a photo of a masked Palestinian militant.

Bahrain’s normalization agreement with Israel was met with widespread anger, despite tight security restrictions, as well as the summoning of the demonstration organizers and participants, forcing them to sign an order to stay off the streets and not to engage in disruptive activities.

The protesters expressed their rejection of normalization by carrying banners with the slogans: “Normalization is treason”, “We reject submission, humiliation and surrender to the instructions of the US and Britain” and “Israel is a cancer that must be eradicated, and we will”. Other slogans stated: “We will never surrender” and “Normalization is shameful, it is a betrayal”.

After Bahrain announced normalizing relations with Israel, the hashtag “Bahrainis against normalization” was widely circulated by Bahraini activists on Twitter.

The Emirati and Bahraini normalization agreements with Israel were categorically rejected by the Palestinian authorities and factions, who considered the decision as a betrayal of Al-Aqsa mosque, Jerusalem and the Palestinian cause.

United States having inflicted hunger around the world faces the same fate

In July of 2013, Rose Aguilar wrote a wonderful article for al-Jazeera, discussing the dire hunger crisis prevailing in the United States. In her article, she brought back a memory of something people had long forgotten, an event that so outraged the American public that the government was temporarily forced to respond with more humane policies. That event was a 1968 CBS special hour-long documentary called Hunger in America, in which viewers literally watched a hospitalized child die of starvation. The then president, Nixon responded because the public outrage left him no choice, but Reagan quickly dismantled those improvements.

When Reagan came to power in 1980, there were 200 food banks in the US; today there are more than 40,000, all overwhelmed with demand and forced to ration their dispersals. Before 1980, one out of every 50 Americans was dependent on food stamps. Today, it is one out of four. Before Reagan, there were 10 million hungry Americans; today there are more than 50 million and the number is increasing with the passage of time.

A substantial part of the Great Transformation included not only tax cuts and other benefits for the wealthy, but a simultaneous massive reduction in budgets for social programs – in spite of the fact that Reagan and the secret government were creating the conditions that would desperately require those same social programs.
That 50 million hungry Americans today includes the 25% of all children in the US who go to sleep hungry every night. About 25% of the American population today cannot buy sufficient food to remain healthy, with most of these being hungry for at least three months during each year. It is so bad that many college students have resorted to what is called “dumpster-diving” – looking in garbage bins for edible food.

According to a WFP and FAO investigation, food shortages and food insecurity deteriorate in areas affected by conflict. The most critical situation is recorded in Yemen, plagued by wars and epidemics. Syria and Lebanon are also of concern. Food insecurity and famine in conflict-affected countries, especially in the Middle East, continue to worsen in the face of growing problems in the delivery and distribution of aid to the population.

The latest report prepared by the UN agencies focuses on food insecurity in 16 countries in the world: Afghanistan, Burundi, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Iraq, Lebanon (Syrian refugees), Liberia, Mali, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Ukraine and Yemen, in addition to the Lake Chad Basin. The joint FAP-WFP survey shows that in over half of these nations, a quarter or more of the population live in crisis situations or in levels of emergency regarding hunger.

Economically destroyed, socially unstable and now hungry, Venezuela is undergoing turbulent times. Known as “Saudi Arabia” of South America, today Venezuela more closely resembles Syria. Economically destroyed and socially unstable, the country is now fighting an ever more alarming specter hunger. In the slum of Petare in the metropolitan area of the capital, Caracas, refrigerators remain empty, supermarket queues grow longer and the necessity of procuring something to eat drives young people to violence. 

Many come together in armed gangs, plunder houses and shops, rob food from passersby and are paid in foodstuffs. Unsustainable inflation has caused prices to double week after week; today, nine out of 10 Venezuelans do not feel they have the sufficient resources to buy food. For some time now the government has been trying to remedy ‘Clap plan’, which distributes food to civilians. But this does not seem to be enough and hunger is now one of the greatest threats to Venezuela’s fragile national security.

Pakistani entrepreneurs seeking joint venture partners

For more than quarter of a century I have been working as economic analysts. Later on, I ventured into political economy and the new focus is geopolitical affairs. Ever since Pakistan and China have agreed to build China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) both the local and global investors are trying to understand the importance and economic implication of this project. Without going into too many details it may be said that CPEC is a game changer and those who get associated with the main and even peripheral projects now will enjoy the ‘early bird’ advantage.

By this time it has become evident that China is developing two routes to minimize the distance covered by its imports and exports. These two routes have been termed ‘Silk Routes’, one on land and the other in waters. Let one point be kept in mind that various roads/railway tracks already exist, which are now being interconnected. Similarly, ports are already operating in almost all the countries, though enjoying different levels of technology. Effectively China is creating interconnectivity and upgrading technologies under CPEC.

One of the most recent examples is the commencement of a rail service that passes through various countries and offers the ultimate connectivity between China and Turkey. On the sea front two new ports are being developed; Chabahar and Gwadar. Chabahar is located in Iran and Gwadar is situated in Pakistan. The key objective behind the construction of both the ports is to get access to land locked Central Asian countries, Russia and China. Other countries will also benefit from these ports and the biggest beneficiary is Afghanistan as it will get cost efficient connectivity for its transit trade.

If one looks at the map of the region, Pakistan can be rightly termed ‘natural corridor for trade and energy’ because two of the proposed mega gas pipelines; Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) and Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) will also pass through Pakistan. It is no secret that even today Pakistan offers the shortest and most cost efficient route to Afghanistan.

For ensuring the most efficient service, Pakistani entrepreneurs will have to focus on three key areas: 1) logistic, 2) warehousing and 3) collateral management services. I will admit it point blank that Pakistan is weak in all the three areas, mainly because of shortage of funds as well as lack of expertise. Therefore, the entrepreneurs are seeking joint venture partners, who have the capital as well as the expertise.

Pakistan’s central bank, with the help of multilateral donors, is also ready to offer loans on concessional interest rate. However, little success has been achieved as local entrepreneurs have not been able to get in touch with overseas investors. One of the reasons for the poor response from the overseas investors is that those are shy in investing in Pakistan, due to geopolitical condition of the region.

However, regional landscape is changing fast. China, Russia and United States seem to be arriving at the consensus that ‘enough is enough’ and for boosting the global economy policy must shift to cooperation from confrontation. Global downturn must be reversed and this will not be possible without establishing peace and tranquility in the region.

P.S. The foreign investors keen in locating joint venture partners in Pakistan are invited to contact us in locating a trustworthy business partner. They may send their queries at shkazmipk@gmail.com

US troops to stay in Afghanistan perpetually

I wrote a blog as back as in August 2012 posing a question; will the US pull its troops out of Afghanistan after 2014? While the overwhelming perception was it will pull the troops out, my conclusion was contrary. This seems true as the US troops are still there, with 2015 approaching an end.

Even at that time I had stated very clearly that the US attack was not to liberate Afghanistan from the control of USSR or Taliban but to occupy it for economical and political reasons. Neither presence of Taliban in Afghanistan not its involvement in attack on the world trade center was known to all.

Now, I can attribute occupation of Afghanistan to: 1) valuable metals in the country, 2) geopolitics and top of all 3) the huge quantity of poppy produced in the country. Being the super power the US keeps its troops in almost every region where it has some stake. Afghanistan has an important place in the US foreign policy due to common borders with Pakistan, Iran, China and proximity with many oil and gas rich Central Asian countries.

After the Islamic Revolution, Iran was projected as the biggest threat for the world, especially for Arab monarchs and also to the US and its 53^rd state, Israel. The US also had plans to send its troops to Iran to takeover country’s nuclear assets. It needs an outpost near Iran and Afghanistan is the ideal country.  The two countries share a long mountainous border, which is virtually impossible to monitor and defend.  

China is the second most powerful superpower, which is likely to surpass the gross domestic product of the US by 2020 and become world’s strongest economic superpower. The US already has outposts in Taiwan and South Korea and Afghanistan provides the third base in case any attack o China becomes the ultimate.

Taking Afghanistan as hostage was part of the US foreign policy and military strategy. The USSR believed that getting control over Afghanistan could give it a perfect foot hold in South Asia and the Middle East. The US also believes the Afghanistan is the gateway to central Asian countries.

Over the years China remained focused on its economy. When Russia tried to stretch its muscles sanctions were imposed on it. Now it is attacking ISIS bases in Syria and also trying to establish friendly relations with Pakistan and other strategically important countries

This does not bode well for the US, still adamant at maintaining its hegemony in South Asia and MENA. Therefore, probability of end to the US occupation of Afghanistan is hoping against the hopes.