Taliban seize key Afghan border crossing with Iran

According to Associated Press report, Taliban on Thursday seized another key Afghan border crossing, this time with Iran. The seizure is part of a Taliban surge as American troops complete their pullout from Afghanistan.

It was the third border crossing the insurgents have taken in the past week, after seizing crossings with Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. The development came as President Joe Biden said the US military mission in Afghanistan will stop operation on 31^st August 2021.

Taliban victories have caused some countries to close their consulates in the region, while Tajikistan has called up reservists to reinforce that country’s southern border with Afghanistan.

An Afghan official said the Taliban on Thursday took control the Islam Qala crossing point in western Herat province. The official, who is in Herat, spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to release the information to reporters.

Afghan soldiers in the border area of Islam Qala — a major transit route between Afghanistan and Iran — fled from their positions, crossing into Iran for refuge, Iranian media reported. The crossing is around 120 kilometers (75 miles) west of the city of Herat, the provincial capital.

Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid tweeted to confirm the taking of Islam Qala and said that Taliban fighters entered the Islam Qala town itself, and were greeted warmly by the local residents. Mujahid also posted a video purporting to show Taliban riding on the back of trucks in Islam Qala and shooting off into the air in celebration as a crowd of men cheered on.

Afghanistan has seen a Taliban surge as the American and NATO pullout stepped up over the past few months. On Tuesday, the US Central Command said 90% of the withdrawal of US troops and equipment from Afghanistan is complete. The US says the last troops will be gone by August.

Earlier, Taliban seized control of several districts from fleeing Afghan forces, several hundred of whom fled across the border into Tajikistan.

Since mid-April, when Biden announced the end to Afghanistan’s “forever war,” the Taliban have made strides throughout the country. On Thursday, Biden said he didn’t trust the Taliban but trusted the capacity of the Afghan military to defend the government. He also urged the Afghan government to reach a peace deal with the Taliban.

But their most significant gains have been in the north, a traditional stronghold of the US-allied warlords who helped defeat the Taliban in 2001. In Badakhshan province, many districts fell without a fight. The consulates of Turkey and Russia have reportedly closed in Mazar-e-Sharif, the capital of northern Balkh province, and Afghanistan’s fourth-largest city.

Taliban now control roughly a third of all 421 districts and district centers in Afghanistan. Their victories are also putting pressure on provincial cities and taking away government control of key transportation routes.

Islam Qala made headlines in February, when a massive fire erupted following an explosion of a fuel tanker. At least 20 people were injured and hundreds of trucks lined up at the crossing carrying natural gas and fuel were engulfed in the blaze. It took firefighters from both countries three days to put out. There was no suggestion of Taliban involvement in the explosion.

Israel trying to buy out loyalty of Lebanese

According to The Jerusalem Post, Lebanon is a state with which Israel shares many common attributes. Both Israel and Lebanon have diverse populations and complex histories. Both the countries are part of the long trajectory of the Middle East and have civilizations that date back millennia. However, recent political divisions and Lebanon’s politics dominated by Hezbollah have made relations difficult.

Amid an unprecedented crisis, Lebanon needs aid, and there is no better country well-placed to give that aid than Israel. Defense Minister Benny Gantz has offered to assist Lebanon as it continues to suffer from a worsening economic crisis. 

“As an Israeli, as a Jew and as a human being, my heart aches seeing the images of people going hungry on the streets of Lebanon,” he wrote Sunday on Twitter. “Israel has offered assistance to Lebanon in the past, and even today we are ready to act and to encourage other countries to extend a helping hand to Lebanon so that it will once again flourish and emerge from its state of crisis.”

The next day, Gantz sent a formal proposal to UNIFIL to provide aid to Lebanon.

Even though the chances the Lebanese government will actually respond in the affirmative to Israel’s offer are close to nil, the Gantz proposal illustrates Israel’s important role as a light unto the nations, willing to do the tikkun olam that is part of Jewish tradition. As a Jewish state, we know all too well what it means to be poor, isolated, abandoned and at the mercy of things beyond our control.

Those that brush off the offer as merely a PR gimmick by Israel, one that Jerusalem knows it won’t have to go through with, are cynically missing the point.

Lebanon today is suffering. With currency exchange rates spiraling to new lows, people are losing money in their accounts. Gas prices are too high, and there are shortages. Lines are long, and the heat of the summer is making many things impossible. Violence is percolating. There is no government, and instead, Saad Hariri, who is the prime minister-designate, has had an impossible time trying to create a functioning coalition.

“The increasingly dire socioeconomic conditions risk systemic national failings with regional and potentially global effects,” the World Bank said in a report last month.

Lebanon desperately needs some assistance. According to an assessment released by UNICEF on Monday, 77% of Lebanese households don’t have enough money to buy food. As we have reported, the country’s medicine importers have warned they have run out of hundreds of essential drugs. Electricity outages and gas shortages are commonplace, and the Lebanese Armed Forces announced it was offering tourists helicopter rides for $150 to make money.

Of course, we cannot ignore reality. Hezbollah is the most dangerous terrorist organization in the world, and has a stranglehold on part of Lebanon. It routinely threatens to destroy Israel. Lebanon also suffers from Iran’s tentacles.

However, every country has extremists and local problems. We have an opportunity to turn a new page. Lebanon and Israel can work together on maritime disputes and other issues. Lebanese and Israelis have been friends in the past, and Jews and Shi’ites, Sunnis, Druze and Maronites, Armenians and Greek Catholics, have all had shared experiences in the past. Modern politics has hijacked this coexistence.

What is needed is a unique, unprecedented and innovative solution that will enable some support from Israel for our cousins in Lebanon. The international community could show that it doesn’t just thrive off the conflict, and step in to help as well. Human rights groups and coexistence groups can showcase their importance now to step up.

In addition, our close friends in the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan may provide a way to aid Lebanon in this time of troubles. This could build on the emerging coexistence and new ties emerging in the region and Eastern Mediterranean.

Lebanon needs help, and Israel is offering it. If only life in the Middle East was as simple as that. Perhaps with the assistance of the above bodies and countries, it can be.

Isaac Herzog sworn in as President of Israel

Isaac Herzog was formally sworn in as the 11th President of Israel on Wednesday at the Knesset, replacing Reuven Rivlin. Herzog was sworn in using the same Bible used to swear in his father, Chaim Herzog, sixth President of Israel. The Bible belonged to the new president’s grandmother, Sarah.

Upon accepting the presidency, Herzog pledged to “lower the tone, reduce the flames, and calm things down” in Israel, despite the many divides in the Jewish, democratic state.

“I will set out to complete the task every morning to be the president for all,” Herzog said. “In normal times, this task would almost sound naive. Unfortunately, however, these are not normal times. These are days when statesmanship has been swept away by polarization; days in which the unifying ethos and the shared values are more fragile than ever.”

Herzog noted the two-and-a-half years of stormy election campaigns that followed one another, in what he called an unprecedented political crisis in the State of Israel.

“It has been a crisis which, as the history of modern times teaches us, has managed in the past to destroy nations that were much more ancient and established than the young State of Israel, which is only 73 years old,” he said.

Herzog said he would “embark on a journey between the lines of the rifts and breaks of Israeli society” and “aim to be a unifier amid the differences, the bridge between the tears.”

In his final speech to the Knesset, Rivlin broke out in tears and warned Herzog that nothing in Israel can be taken for granted. Herzog thanked Rivlin for his years of service in his address.

“You knew how to make your love of this country infectious for its sons and daughters,” Herzog told Rivlin. “You represented Israel with great respect in the family of nations, including during the last month of your tenure. You painfully identified the breaking points in Israeli society. You placed a mirror before us, even if its reflection was not always pleasing for all of us.”

Herzog wished the new government of Prime Minister Naftali Bennett success.

“There are many complex arguments in Israel that focus on internal elements,” he said. “This is the beauty of Israeli democracy. I am confident that this entire body wants you to succeed. May it be the success of the entire State of Israel.”

But Herzog also made a point of wishing well to the opposition, under Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu, against whom he ran unsuccessfully for prime minister.

“There is no democracy without opposition,” Herzog said. “Political realities called me to serve in the position you are now in a number of times. This time, it has fallen on your shoulders. I am confident that you will fulfill your service to the people from the opposition in a statesmanlike, responsible and relevant manner.”

Ever Given starts journey out of Suez Canal

According to BBC, the mega container ship that blocked the Suez Canal in March finally left the Suez Canal after Egypt signed a compensation deal with its owners and insurers. The Ever Given, around 09:30 GMT headed north towards the Mediterranean escorted by tugs. The ship has been impounded for three months near the canal city of Ismailia.

As it got under way, Egyptian TV showed footage of the captain and a crew member being presented with flowers and a plaque on board the ship.

The 193 kilometre long Suez Canal connects the Mediterranean Sea at the canal's northern end to the Red Sea in the south and provides the shortest sea link between Asia and Europe.

The vital waterway was blocked when the 400-meter long Ever Given became wedged across it after running aground amid high winds. Global trade was disrupted as hundreds of ships were stuck in the traffic jam.

The container ship was refloated following a six-day salvage operation that involved a flotilla of tug boats and dredging vessels. One person was killed during the operation.

Since then, the Suez Canal Authority (SCA) has been seeking compensation from the Ever Given's Japanese owner Shoei Kisen for the cost of the salvage operation, damage to the canal's banks and other losses.

The SCA initially asked for US$916 million compensation, including US$300 million for a salvage bonus and US$300 million for loss of reputation. But UK Club - which insured Shoei Kisen for third-party liabilities - rejected the claim, describing it as "extraordinarily large" and "largely unsupported".

The SCA later lowered its demand to US$550 million. The final settlement, which has not been revealed, was agreed a few days ago and signed on Wednesday to coincide with the ship's release.

SCA head Osama Rabie told a news conference that the authority would not change its rules about the passage of ships in bad weather. However, he said the grounding had accelerated plans for the canal's expansion.

The UK Club paid tribute to "the work and expertise of the SCA and others whose professionalism and dedication resulted in the ship being refloated".

"Over the last three months we, along with the ship's owners and other interests, have worked closely with the SCA's negotiations team to achieve today's results," a statement said.

Yukito Higaki of Imabari shipbuilding, of which Shoei Kisen is a subsidiary, said the company would continue to be "a regular and loyal customer" of the Suez Canal Authority.

The vessel, with an Indian crew, is still loaded with about 18,300 containers. It is due to undergo an inspection by divers at Port Said before sailing to Rotterdam and then to the UK port of Felixstowe where it will offload its containers, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Pentagon defends Bagram exit

The Pentagon on Tuesday defended its departure from Bagram Airfield after reports emerged that the United States left in the dead of night, shutting off electricity without coordinating a handover and temporarily leaving the base to looters.

Pentagon press secretary John Kirby said he had seen the press reports but insisted there was “coordination with Afghan leaders, both in the government, as well as in the Afghan security forces, about the eventual turnover.”

“As you know, it was the seventh and the final base that we turned over to the Afghan National Security Forces. You don't do that in a vacuum, and this wasn't done in a vacuum,” Kirby told reporters at the Pentagon.

The Associated Press earlier on Tuesday reported that when the US military left Bagram early Friday they did so by shutting off the electricity and leaving in the dark, without notifying the base's new Afghan commander. 

The commander reportedly discovered the absence more than two hours later. Before the Afghan army could take control of the airfield from which US forces have fought the war in Afghanistan for the past 20 years. It was invaded by a small army of looters, Afghan military officials told the AP.

The US military also reportedly left behind thousands of civilian vehicles, most without keys to start them, hundreds of armored vehicles and small weapons and the ammunition for them.

Kirby said the final conversation and coordination about the turnover at Bagram occurred about 48 hours prior to US troops leaving.

“Obviously, for operational security reasons, we didn't go into the exact hour at which all US forces would leave Bagram,” he said. 

He added that while he can't speak for the level of information that went down the Afghan chain of command, “Afghan leaders, civilian and military, were appropriately coordinated with and briefed about the turnover of the base, including a walk-through of facilities with senior Afghan leaders.” 

When asked which senior Afghan leaders and the US officials had coordinated with, he referred questions to the staff of Army Gen. Scott Miller, the top US commander in Afghanistan who is preparing to turn over his command to US Central Command head Gen. Frank McKenzie. 

Kirby also confirmed, “There were some vehicles obviously left behind and some turned over to Afghan officials,” but said it was not uncommon compared to turnovers of other facilities in the country. In addition, throughout the drawdown, “A few hundred small arms and ammunition were transferred” to the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces.

Haredim: The biggest threat facing Israel

Israel’s new leadership calls itself the “Change Government” because the long-serving Benjamin Netanyahu has been finally displaced. But its ideological disparities risk blocking the real changes that are needed, including on the primary threat the country as currently constituted faces.

It’s not from the Palestinians, nor from the wider Arab world or even Iran. The greatest danger is from within: the rapidly expanding haredi.

The haredim cling to a rigid interpretation of Judaism which tolerates little deviation from ancient traditions. They can be found in the United States, Belgium, Britain and elsewhere, always forming tight-knit communities, but only in Israel is there a toxic firewall between them and fellow citizens.

This can be traced to the decision some 70 years ago by David Ben-Gurion to grant draft exemptions to students at yeshivot. Back then this applied to several hundred genuine scholars.

This arrangement turned Torah study into an arguably unprecedented obsession in which all haredi men are pushed to lifelong seminary duty, first to avoid the draft and then essentially as a source of welfare.

Whereas other university students pay tuition, haredim receive stipends for as long as they study, if possible for life. Over 150,000 men now in these schools are indoctrinated in the faith that stricture and rabbis supersede the laws and officials of the state.

To maintain the insularity, most haredi high schoolers are sent to the community’s schools that teach little or no math, science and English; in recent days Israel’s chief rabbi, who is haredi, called such studies of secular subjects “nonsense.” Israel funds these schools even though their unfortunate graduates are essentially unemployable in a modern economy.

As a consequence less than half of haredi men are part of the workforce, the lowest participation level of any identifiable group in Israel – and, tellingly, far less than haredim in other countries. The minority who do work tend to populate a vast religious bureaucracy that includes supervisors of the mikvaot ritual baths, kashrut food certifications, and other apparatchiks.

Women in the community are banished from haredi parties’ candidates lists and encouraged to procreate with such vigor that they on average produce 7.1 children – far more than in any identifiable group in Israel.

They live in a poverty rendered minimally tolerable by state subsidies for each child at the expense of working Israelis. Thus the community doubles itself every 16 years, four times the rate of the rest of Israel.

The haredim have grown to about 12% of the 9.5 million people – almost 20% of the country’s Jews. Unless something changes – and the attrition rate is estimated at less than 5% – they will constitute a majority of Israel’s Jews in a few decades.

Do Israelis comprise of settlers and occupiers only?

"There are no people in the Israeli entity, they are all occupiers and settlers," said Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah during a speech on Monday afternoon. The speech was delivered at the opening of a conference titled "Palestine is Victorious," convened in Lebanon in order to renew media discourse and manage the conflict with Israel.

Nasrallah did not specify whether Arab Israelis were also considered occupiers and settlers.

With tensions rising between the United States and pro-Iranian militias in Syria and Iraq, Nasrallah stressed on Monday that Hezbollah is "facing the American hegemony" in Iraq and Syria.

The Hezbollah leader added that the conflicts with Israel and the US cannot be separated as Israel's existence is contingent on American support, saying "Every massacre committed by the enemy is an American massacre, and every aggression of this enemy is American aggression."

Concerning the worsening economic crisis in Lebanon, Nasrallah blamed the US, saying American policy is the "main reason" for the crisis, as "the Americans want to besiege, punish and prevent any aid that comes to Lebanon." 

While Nasrallah admitted that incorrect government policies were also "among the causes" of the economic crisis, he stressed that the US is the "main cause."

Nasrallah added that the goal of the American blockade is to "provoke" the people of Lebanon against Hezbollah and to keep Hezbollah busy in order to prevent it from supporting Palestinians.

On Sunday night, Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz offered humanitarian aid to Lebanon, saying "as an Israeli, as a Jew and as a human being, my heart aches seeing the images of people going hungry on the streets of Lebanon."

Lebanon is suffering from a worsening economic crisis, with violence and protests breaking out in cities around the country as basic services collapse. Electricity outages and gas shortages are commonplace.

More than half of Lebanon’s population is living in poverty, and its financial crisis is likely to rank in the top 10, and possibly even the top three, most severe crises in the world since the mid-1800s, according to the World Bank.

Nasrallah has said in recent speeches that the country's gasoline crisis could be addressed "within a few days" if it would just accept Iranian oil shipments, which are under sanctions by international law.

Hezbollah will eventually negotiate directly with Tehran and import Iranian oil through the Port of Beirut if the Lebanese government does not begin “bearing its responsibility,” Nasrallah said at the time.

During the speech, which focused largely on pro-Iranian media capabilities, Nasrallah also claimed that Israelis trust Palestinian and pro-Iranian media more than they trust their own leaders and media.

Nasrallah stressed that the media of the "Axis of Resistance" must be developed just like its military capabilities, adding that the "resounding victory" that the media contributed to the "victory" Palestinian terrorist groups claimed during Operation Guardian of the Walls.

The Hezbollah leader additionally claimed that "everyone" recognized the "victory" of the Palestinians during the operation, despite "some media in the Gulf" denying it. "While the enemy fails to achieve victory, Arab media come to make an imaginary victory for him from the remains of children," said Nasrallah.

Nasrallah also referenced the recent blocking of a number of pro-Iranian media sites by the US, saying that this was "proof" of the strength of the resistance media "because of its influence."

The militant leader stressed the importance of using social media, stating that while "the enemy can take down satellite channels, it is not possible to stop social networking sites, so we must take advantage of them."

"We know the enemy's strengths, recognize them, and work on ways to confront and weaken them," said Nasrallah. The Hezbollah leader claimed that one of the most important strengths of the axis' media is "honesty in conveying news and facts, adding that the militant groups' media did not rely on "illusions and lies" in their "psychological war."

Referring to Palestinian issues, Nasrallah stated that Palestinian militant groups promised "liberation" and to get prisoners released, and fulfilled their promise. It is unclear which liberation Nasrallah was referring to. Additionally, a prisoner swap agreement has not yet been reached.

"When in the axis of resistance we talk about the liberation of Palestine, we are not talking about dreams or fantasies. The battle of the Sword of Jerusalem (the name the Palestinians gave to Operation Guardian of the Walls) has made Jerusalem closer than ever," said Nasrallah. "We do not exaggerate our goals, and this is one of the most important elements of the resistance force."

In recent speeches, Nasrallah has warned that any “violation” of Jerusalem would result in a regional war in which pro-Iranian groups from multiple countries could take part.

Nasrallah also addressed recent reports in Lebanese media about the defendants in the investigation of last year's Beirut port explosion, questioning whether the investigation was "real judicial action" or "political targeting." A large explosion targeted the Beirut offices of a lawyer involved in the case last week.

Dozens were killed and thousands were injured in the massive blast which shook Beirut last August. While the investigation into the explosion has made little headway amid a system plagued by corruption, Lebanese Judge Tarek Bitar recently moved to lift the immunity of a number of high ranking officials in order to question them as suspects in the case.

“Justice is still distant and the truth is still concealed,” said Nasrallah concerning the investigation. Hezbollah has been accused of being responsible for the blast, as it has strong control over Lebanon’s ports.

Ever Given to leave Suez Canal on 7th July

A giant container ship that blocked Egypt’s Suez Canal for nearly a week in March this year will be released on 7^th July following an agreement between authorities and the vessel’s owners, said Suez Canal Authority (SCA) on Sunday.

A ceremony for the signing of the settlement ending the dispute over the 400-meter-long Ever Given will be held on Wednesday, and the ship will be allowed to depart.

Earlier, Stann of London, the attorneys for the ship’s owner and insurers, said that a formal solution had been agreed upon and that preparations for its departure were being made.

Neither the SCA nor the attorneys provided details of the settlement. But the agreement marks an end to a dispute that arose after the Ever Given was freed after getting stuck in the vital waterway in March. The incident roiled global shipping markets.

The SCA had initially sought over US$900 million in damages and compensation that included recovering expenses related to freeing the ship, lost revenue and other costs and claims. The figure was later lowered to US$550 million.

Japan’s Shoei Kisen Kaisha the owner, and the ship’s insurers initially offered US$150 million.

The SCA brought the matter to an Egyptian court, which ordered the seizure of the ship pending a resolution of the dispute. Authorities had said that they were eager to reach an out-of-court agreement and that the ship would be allowed to leave once such a deal was reached.

The ship is being held in the Great Bitter Lake -- about halfway along the canal.

Saving Lebanon from total collapse

Reportedly, Lebanon is hurtling toward total collapse. The World Bank believes that the country’s financial and economic crisis is one of the severest the world has witnessed in the past 150 years. 

A number of factors have contributed to Lebanon’s disastrous situation, but a major cause of its troubles is the dominant position that Iran has managed to acquire in the nation’s political life, by way of its proxy Hezbollah. But now that Iran is undergoing a severe economic crisis of its own, a window of opportunity may have opened for its malign influence over Lebanon to be weakened, if not entirely eliminated.

Lebanon is on the verge of a political, economic and social catastrophe. It has been without a government for eight months. Food and medicines are in short supply, electricity cuts last for much of the day, while people are queuing for hours at gas stations and, as they clash over who gets to fill their tank first, fist fights have turned into shootings. Now criminal gangs are moving in to exploit the situation. A representative of the union for fuel distributors and gas stations in Lebanon said, “Individuals claiming to be in charge of security at gas stations are using extortion… The owners of over 140 gas stations are refusing to accept deliveries of gasoline because they have been exposed to extortion and beatings.”

On 22^nd June the acting administration raised the price of bread for the fifth time in a year.  The latest increase — 18 percent from the last raise in February — was the result of the decision to end subsidies on sugar and yeast, which both go up in price in consequence.  

In June the World Bank issued a report on the rapidly deteriorating situation. It believes that more than half of Lebanon‘s population may have been pushed below the poverty line. While the official rate of exchange for one US dollar is 1,507 Lebanese pounds, the banks do not permit currency conversion or foreign fund transfers and so dollars are simply not available at the official rate. On 25^th June the rate on the black market was 16,450 Lebanese pounds. The country’s gross domestic product, close to US$55 billion in 2018, plummeted to some US$33 billion last year.  Foreign currency reserves are at an all-time low. 

The World Bank pulls no punches in its criticism of Lebanon’s political elite in which Hezbollah features so strongly. It accuses them of deliberately failing to tackle the country’s many problems, which include the economic and financial crisis, the COVID pandemic and last year’s Port of Beirut explosion.  The inaction, says the report, is due to failure to agree on policy initiatives but also a continuing political consensus that defends “a bankrupt economic system, which benefited a few for so long”.

Following the explosion in Port Beirut in August 2020, Saad Hariri was named by the Lebanese parliament as prime minister designate, and charged with forming a new government. So far, because of an ongoing dispute between him and President Michel Aoun over the composition of the new administration, he has failed to do so.  

Hariri wants to assemble a technocrat cabinet dedicated to enacting the reforms long demanded by the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and donor countries such as the United States and France. In March he stormed out of a meeting with Aoun, telling reporters that the President had sent him a proposed list of ministers and asked him to sign off on them. Hariri had rejected the request as unconstitutional.  Aoun is a strong supporter of Hezbollah, the Iran-backed group that dominates Lebanese politics and underpins his presidency. According to Hariri, Aoun was pushing for a third of all cabinet seats for his Hezbollah allies and their supporters, which would give them, veto power over government decisions.

The shoeing into power in Iran on 18^th June of a hard-liner, Ebrahim Raisi, as its new president can be seen as a desperate effort by the ruling élite to shore up the power of a regime in economic freefall.  The value of the Rial, the national currency, has halved over the past two years, inflation is running at 50% and the country is experiencing mass unemployment. Popular protests are bursting out in major towns and cities all over Iran.

Hezbollah’s popularity among the Shia population owes much to the vast sums it has spent in its social and health programs.  The collapse of the Iranian economy means that the regime is no longer able to pay its Hezbollah proxy in dollars.  Its financial support is now provided in the rapidly depreciating Lebanese currency. 

Bahaa Hariri, the brother of Lebanon’s designated Prime Minister Saad, is a billionaire businessman.  He is reported to believe that if Iran cannot continue with its payments, support for Hezbollah will quickly collapse. “Some die-hard supporters will maintain their allegiance to Hezbollah,” he is reported as saying, “but many others will no longer be prepared to support the movement if the payments stop.”  

One failing economy is attempting to support another, while simultaneously trying to maintain the political status quo.  That is scarcely a sustainable situation.  If Iran’s deteriorating economic position results in Hezbollah losing power in Lebanon, this might provide the opportunity for Hariri to assemble his technocrat cabinet and institute the economic reforms necessary to pull the country back from the brink of disaster. 

Israeli cargo ship hit in Indian Ocean

According to initial media reports, an Israeli-owned cargo ship was struck by an ‘unknown weapon’ in the northern Indian Ocean, causing a fire onboard the vessel. The reports claims that the Israeli ship was anchored in the port of Jeddah before moving towards the coast of the Emirates, adding that no one has claimed responsibility for this targeting so far.

The ship identified as Tyndall, a Liberian-flagged cargo ship. The vessel was initially reported to be partly owned by Israeli businessman Eyal Ofer, Israeli sources later confirmed that the ship’s crew is not from Israel.

Tyndall is owned by Zodiac Maritime. A source familiar with Zodiac Maritime's fleet said the company had sold the CSAV Tyndall several months ago and that no such incident had taken place involving any of its vessels.

It was reported that the ship was sold two months ago, and was no longer under the ownership of the Ofer family, or any Israeli company.

Ship-tracking data from Refinitiv Eikon showed a vessel called the CSAV Tyndall that was last docked in Jeddah was off the coast of Dubai.

Israel has been carrying out its “war-between-wars” against Iran for years, though it focused on weapons convoys from Iran to Hezbollah in Syria. But, according to foreign reports, Israel began to attack ships carrying Iranian oil and weapons through the Mediterranean starting in 2019.

Several Israeli and Iranian vessels have been damaged in the middle of the sea in the maritime war-between-wars between the two countries.

According to foreign reports Israel has hit tankers and ships transporting oil and weapons to Hezbollah. Several Israeli-owned vessels have also been struck in the Indian Ocean, and while there was damage, none sank.

China and India wooing Bangladesh

Bangladesh, which was once dismissed by former US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger as a “basket case” after its birth in 1971, is en route to becoming one of the Asian Tigers. Friction between China and India is elevating Bangladesh’s importance. 

Located at the head of the Bay of Bengal, Bangladesh is in a key strategic position, with both Asian powers eyeing to build ports in the country to boost their presence in the Indian Ocean region.

India-Bangladesh relations have witnessed ups and downs. Since the government led by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina came to power in 2009, ties with India have greatly improved. Bangladesh is now India’s largest trading partner in the sub-continent, with bilateral trade reported at US$9.5 billion in 2019-20.

Both governments have undertaken initiatives for boosting connectivity. Cooperation in the power sector has resulted in private Indian companies investing US$9 billion in Bangladesh. However, unresolved water-sharing issues, India’s border killings of Bangladeshi nationals, controversial laws on Muslims in India and expulsion of alleged illegal Bangladeshi migrants remain sources of friction.

China is considered an ‘all-weather friend’ by many in Bangladesh. A Chinese move to exempt tariffs for 97% of Bangladeshi products is a welcome boost in Covid-stricken times for bilateral trade, which was reported at US$18 billion in 2019. Bangladesh now accounts for 20% of China’s arms sales. Bangladesh is also the recipient of billions in loans and other assistance under China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

Bangladesh is building its third largest Payra deep-sea port with Chinese assistance while opening up Mongla and Chattogram ports to the Chinese, after access was granted to India. A US$250 million contract to build an airport terminal in Sylhet city was awarded to China over Indian competitors.

As India drags its feet on water-sharing negotiations for the Teesta River, the lifeline to north-western Bangladesh, “Teesta River Comprehensive Management and Restoration Project” was inked last year with support from China for a US$ one billion engineering scheme. That said, moves by Bangladesh to assert cost control on some Chinese-backed rail projects have led to friction.

Earlier last month, India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar spoke to his Sri Lankan counterpart Dinesh Gunawardena amid Delhi’s growing concerns over the proposed Chinese-funded Colombo Port City project.

Despite India’s support for Bhutan against China over a still-unresolved border dispute, it has not stilled rumblings about reducing Bhutan’s dependence on India in the Himalayan kingdom. In the Maldives, although there has been a renewal of an ‘India First’ policy, China’s expanding footprint there, such as the US$200 million China-Maldives Friendship Bridge, has ensured its position in the country.

With the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, the stakes for both India and China’s regional security concerns have increased. Though, India enjoys cordial relations with the current Afghan regime, China has the advantage of deeper pockets and good ties with Pakistan, a key player in Afghan geopolitics. While Beijing has diplomatic ties with Kabul, it has also been hedging its bets by building up contacts with the Afghan Taliban.

The wooing of Bangladesh by China and India is part of a bigger tussle over regional and maritime security. China, whose economy is heavily dependent on energy exports shipped from the Middle East, is driven by its need to ensure it has friendly relations with littoral states around the Indian Ocean.

From India’s perspective, the building of Chinese relationships—and the ports and other facilities that come with it—with key countries along the maritime route is a threat, with the likes of Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the Maldives being part of a strategic ‘string of pearls’ to encircle India and choke its power projection.

Seen in this light, China’s BRI is a tool to augment its foothold in South Asia by creating economic dependence, as it did in Sri Lanka. Chinese support for Bangladesh under the BRI framework, it is argued, is part of the same game to undermine India’s security and strategic interests.

India too has been wooing Bangladesh in line with its ‘Act East’ policy. Among other things, Delhi is trying to get Dhaka to join the Indo-Pacific ‘QUAD’, an informal strategic alliance involving the United States, India, Japan, and Australia.

This has elicited a strong reaction from Beijing, with the Chinese Defence Minister Wei Fenghe on a recent visit to Dhaka calling for joint efforts to resist ‘powers from outside the region setting up a military alliance in South Asia’.

Bangladesh has been deftly balancing its relations with the two Asian giants, making it clear that it would not be choosing between the two. While trying to address India’s geopolitical concerns, Bangladesh has steadfastly maintained its right to maintain economic cooperation as well as close defence ties with China.

While China has strengthened its economic ties with Bangladesh by bankrolling development projects, India has the benefit of a shared history, values, culture and connectivity with Bangladesh.

The onus is now on the two giants to prove whose strategic objectives are more aligned with the long-term interests of Bangladesh. For now, the country can enjoy the attention it gets from the two rivals. By playing its cards wisely, South Asia’s stellar performer can safeguard its economic and strategic interests.

Bennett must usher paradigm shift in foreign policy of Israel

Naftali Bennett government has been endowed a unique opportunity to bring positive changes in the foreign policy of Israel. A perception is being created that this government will be ineffective due to the ideological differences among its member parties. 

It is also believed that Israel’s foreign policy was distorted under Benjamin Netanyahu regime and his departure from office will create positive diplomatic momentum. This offers fertile ground for action on which the government could agree despite its diversity.

Despite Netanyahu achievements, Abraham Accords on top, his acts created deep antagonism, especially on the part of leaders of liberal democracies. He was regarded as challenging the fundamental principles of governance and democracy, supporting racist parties in Israel and abroad, and undermining prospects of a two-state solution.

Netanyahu’s credibility was questioned in Washington, Paris, Amman and perhaps in other capitals. His aggressive approach prompted loud clashes with critics of Israel, even with those inherently enjoying friendly relations. It also became evident that during the recent political crisis Netanyahu’s actions were driven, first and foremost, by his desire to remain in power.

This criticism was generally voiced behind the closed doors, but it surfaced occasionally and created much-publicized crises. Netanyahu’s oust enable the new government to improve diplomatic relations with the many countries, particularly the Muslim world.

However, the foreign policy potential of the new coalition does not stem only from Netanyahu’s absence. Yair Lapid serving as foreign minister has long been preparing himself for the job. He has entered the office with experience, contacts and plans to revamp Israeli diplomacy.

Most notably, he clearly has a strong desire to strengthen the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and its public standing. The approval of appointment of 35 ambassadors could be the biggest achievements, which Netanyahu has been holding up for over six months.

The participation of the Labor and Meretz parties in the new government will also contribute to restoring diplomacy to its rightful place in Israeli decision-making. Members of Knesset from both parties have challenged Netanyahu’s foreign policy approach repeatedly and sought to advance new paradigms and guiding principles shaping a pro-peace, multi-regional, internationalist, modern and inclusive Israeli foreign policy.

Labor and Meretz will be in charge of the Ministry of Regional Cooperation and the Ministry of Diaspora Affairs in the new government, both with distinct diplomacy components, as well as the Ministries of Health and Environmental Protection, both of which deal with issues high on the global diplomatic agenda to which Israel has much to contribute.

Their voices are also expected to be heard and exert influence regarding the Palestinian issue. In addition, the election of Israel’s new President Isaac Herzog – a pro-peace, liberal democratic leader with extensive diplomatic experience and who enjoys international respect – will bolster the assets of the new Israeli leadership and its capabilities in the international arena.

There are reasons to believe that the coalition parties can reach agreement on a series of urgent foreign policy goals that include: 1) rebuilding trust with the Jordanian monarch and restoring Israel’s strategically important ties with the kingdom; 2) deepening ties with the US Democratic Party to restore bipartisan support for Israel; 3) leveraging the normalization agreements with Arab states to forge bilateral and regional cooperation; 4) improving relations with European Union and renewing the high-level dialogue (Association Council) which has not convened since 2012; 5) leveraging opportunities in the Eastern Mediterranean, including restoring relations with Turkey and advancing maritime border negotiations with Lebanon and 6) strengthening the moderate Palestinian leadership, along with restoring Israeli-Palestinian dialogue channels to advance mutual interests.

Although, the new government is not likely to achieve a final-status peace agreement with the Palestinians, which should be a top foreign policy and national security for Israel, it could be instrumental in mending and healing Israeli foreign policy and leaving a significant diplomatic legacy that will better position Israel in the region and internationally.

Russian apprehensions about QUAD

With the spotlight recently on Russia’s relations with the United States and Europe, following the meeting between US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin and the G7 and NATO summits, less attention has been paid to the complex challenges facing Russia in Asia.

After the inaugural QUAD summit between the leaders of Japan, Australia, India and the US in mid-March this year, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov visited China, South Korea, India and Pakistan to underscore Russia’s continuing relevance.

Lavrov’s talks in New Delhi aimed at bolstering Russia–India ties. He underlined Moscow’s concerns about the QUAD, repeating Russia’s opposition to the creation of security blocs in the Asian region.

In December last year, Lavrov had sharply criticized the QUAD as part of a US-led ‘persistent, aggressive and devious’ policy intended to ensnare India in its ‘anti-China games’ and designed to undermine the close partnership between Moscow and New Delhi. Russia also claims the QUAD is divisive and undercuts ASEAN centrality.

First and foremost among Russia’s priorities in Asia is China. The close and growing strategic partnership between Moscow and Beijing reflects political affinities, economic complementarities and foreign policy convergences. But it remains a pragmatic, transactional relationship, and Moscow is conscious that growing asymmetries make it the junior partner.

Russia has sought to balance its close ties with China by expanding relations with other Asian states, especially India but also Japan and ASEAN states. Little headway has been made with Japan, with the intractable Kuril Islands dispute impeding progress. Efforts to intensify economic links, especially energy and arms sales, with partners like Vietnam and Indonesia have made more headway.

Underpinning its Asian swivel, Russia has promoted its Greater Eurasian Partnership idea as a platform for engagement with the wider Asian region, based on institutions such as the Eurasian Economic Union and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization—in which Russia plays a leading role. Moscow has advocated greater cooperation between the EEU and ASEAN, and supports observer status for the EEU at APEC. Russia has sought to leverage its geographical location to promote its relevance to greater connectivity between Asia and Europe.

Moscow fears that the emerging Indo-Pacific strategic concept, especially closer security cooperation within QUAD, jeopardizes its position in Asia.

Conceptually, the Indo-Pacific construct is a maritime-based cooperative framework, as opposed to the continental Eurasian-centered vision for regional integration promoted by Russia. Whereas the Eurasian cooperative model would confer a leading role on Russia, it’s not clear to Moscow how it might fit into the Indo-Pacific framework.

Moscow’s concern is that QUAD, perceived as a US-orchestrated security coalition against China, will complicate Russia’s efforts to strike some balance in its relationships with China and other key Asian regional countries, especially India.

If the QUAD gains momentum, drawing in Asia–Pacific players such as South Korea and ASEAN, Russia fears that it will become more isolated and be compelled into greater dependence on China than it would like.

India is a particular concern. Moscow knows that New Delhi’s growing anxieties about Beijing, including military rivalry, underpin India’s involvement in the QUAD. Moscow believes this will encourage New Delhi’s tilt towards closer cooperation with the US, weakening Russia’s own ‘special and privileged partnership’ with India.

India has tried to mollify Russia, talking up the Indo-Pacific as a principles-based, inclusive and unifying construct and encouraging Moscow to view it positively as an opportunity—but to no avail.

Moscow remains suspicious of where India is heading. While Russia is an important partner for India, especially in energy and defence, the overall relationship remains thin, compared to India’s growing and diverse connections with the US and others.

In this context, Lavrov’s subsequent visit to Pakistan—his first in a decade—was a clear warning to New Delhi. During talks in Islamabad, Lavrov discussed expanding Russian security assistance to the Pakistan military.

Alive to potential marginalization, Moscow will strive to bolster its relevance and importance as a credible major actor in the wider Asian region. Expect further intense Russian bilateral and regional diplomacy over coming months, as well as efforts to diversify ties with other Asian partners, such as Bangladesh, Pakistan and Myanmar. Moscow will try to lift its modest military presence and influence in the Indian Ocean, building on the recent naval basing agreement with Sudan and military exercises with India, Iran and Pakistan.