Surge in militant activity in West Bank

According to a report, over the last six months, there has been a notable increase in militant activity in the West Bank, particularly by the members of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. 

A surge in militant activity has been reported in the West Bank. Although, a recent US Department of State Travel Advisory on 13th September warned, ‘exercise increased caution when travelling to the West Bank due to terrorism and civil unrest.’ 

The rise in activity can be linked to a number of factors; the high number of killings of Palestinian Islamic Jihad and al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades militants by Israeli security forces since May and the recent escape of six Palestinian militants from a high-security prison in northern Israel. 

One can look back to the postponement of Palestinian elections and TikTok intifada as the initial stages of this surge. However, it was the conflict between Israel and Palestinian factions in May that spurred the West Bank’s militant groups to become operationally more active. 

On 18th May, Palestinian Islamic Jihad sent one of its militants in Hebron, Islam Zahideh, to attack an IDF post in the West Bank as a part of what Palestinian factions dubbed ‘Sword of Islam’ operation during the Gaza conflict. Zahideh, armed with pipe bombs and a Carlo-style submachine gun, was killed during the attack. Several days later, PIJ acknowledged its responsibility for the attack and named Zahideh as the perpetrator. 

Two weeks after the killing of Zahideh, Fadi Weshat, an al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades member, died from a gunshot wound received by Israeli security forces during clashes in the West Bank. 

On 9th June, Israeli counter-terrorism forces entered Jenin and shot two Palestinian Islamic Jihad members, killing one and capturing the second. 

Two months later, Diya’a al-Sabarini, an al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades militant died of wounds he received after clashing with Israeli security forces in Jenin. 

Several days later, four Palestinians were killed in clashes with Israeli counter-terrorism forces in Jenin. Two of those Palestinians were members of militant groups. 

The deaths of the militants mentioned above, including more than 40 Palestinians killed in a period of six months in clashes with Israeli security forces, have spurred armed groups to march openly in the streets calling for revenge. 

Lastly, the escape of six militants from a high-security prison in northern Israel on 6th September exacerbated the already unstable security situation in the West Bank. Factions held rallies in Gaza and the West Bank threatening a response if the escapees were harmed. 

However, despite weeks of threatening rhetoric from militant groups, including a reported resurrection of the ‘Joint Operations Room’ of Palestinian factions in the West Bank, the last two remaining militants on the run were captured on Sunday by Israeli forces in the militant stronghold of Jenin, unharmed and undefended by Palestinian factions.

The surge in militant activity in the West Bank over the last six months has likely reached its peak with the capture of the last two remaining militants. A few rockets may be fired by Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Gaza out of frustration over the arrests in the coming days, but the success of Israeli security forces in capturing all of the militants alive and unharmed will likely have a stabilizing effect over the coming weeks in the West Bank. 

Amendment introduced in US Defense Budget Bill to suspend sale of arms to Israel

In United States, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has introduced an amendment to the US Defense Budget Bill which would suspend the transfer of US$735 million worth of Boeing Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) to Israel. JDAMs are kits that convert unguided bombs into precision-guided munitions.

The amendment was introduced alongside six others, including one to block arms sales to the Saudi Arabia, allegedly involved in the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi and an amendment concerning the US relationship with Colombia.

Ocasio-Cortez’s office announced that the amendment concerning the sale of weapons to Israel was meant to block the transfer of the same kind of Boeing weaponry that the Israeli government used to kill 44 Palestinians in one night in al-Rimal, an Israeli airstrike on Hamas, led to a building collapse killing 44 Gazans.

Israeli Ambassador to the United States and the United Nations, Gilad Erdan criticized Ocasio-Cortez for her new amendment, stating he would expect a Congressperson to understand that Israel is defending its citizens against Hamas.

“Your amendment further legitimizes their heinous attacks against innocent civilians, as well as antisemitic lies,” Erdan wrote on Twitter. “Israel is a world leader in the fight against terrorism, and our partnership has helped prevent terrorist attacks against American citizens,” the ambassador added.

Biden administration approved the sale of US$725 million in JDAMs to Israel in May as Israel and Gaza fought in Operation Guardian of the Walls, according to The Washington Post. Congress was officially notified about the sale about a week before the fighting broke out.

During the fighting, US President Joe Biden expressed support for Israel, saying “my expectation and hope is this will be closing down sooner than later, but Israel has a right to defend itself.”

The congresswoman, along with a number of other House Democrats, including Rashida Tlaib, introduced a similar resolution shortly afterward.

“For decades, the US has sold billions of dollars in weaponry to Israel without ever requiring them to respect basic Palestinian rights. In so doing, we have directly contributed to the death, displacement and disenfranchisement of millions,” said Ocasio-Cortez in a statement in May. “At a time when so many, including President Biden, support a ceasefire, we should not be sending ‘direct attack’ weaponry to the then Prime Minister Netanyahu to prolong this violence.”

The resolution in May was endorsed by over 70 organizations, including IfNotNow, Jewish Voice for Peace Action, and Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Hassan Nasrallah Messiah for Lebanese

In the recent past Lebanon has faced multiple domestic crises. At present one of the biggest challenges facing the country is the unprecedented energy crisis that is literally suffocating a nation struggling to keep the light on. 

This crisis got worse, on the verge of reaching a point where hospitals, shops, bakeries, etc. cannot function because of a lack of fuel. Lebanon was heading towards the unknown. 

Hezbollah devised a plan to alleviate the crisis, while preventing any foreign interference or trouble for Lebanon. 

After careful consideration, Secretary General of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah and other high ranking officials in the movement decided to purchase oil from the Islamic Republic of Iran and bring the oil tankers to Lebanon itself. 

Hezbollah chief said, after being told of possible sanctions or other measures by the United States that could hurt the government if the tankers docked in Lebanon; it decided to dock the first vessel in neighboring Syria and take the cargo by land across Lebanese-Syrian border crossing. 

Nasrallah extended his gratitude to the Syrian government for helping coordinate the logistics of importing this vital commodity. He thanked the Syrian government for understanding the situation of Lebanon and the dangers of Lebanese and Syrian enemies in trying to harm Damascus for the assistance it provided.

The vessel was expected to dock at Syrian seaport by Sunday and the process of unloading and dispatching fuel to Lebanon was has to be completed by Thursday. Hezbollah said, this is the first of many ships to bring oil from Iran to Lebanon.

According to Nasrallah, the negative statements were the following and he noted how they ended up in dustbin of history. 

One: The announcement of importing oil from Iran was just a stunt. However, the oil has arrived.

Two: Those who said the operation will fail because Iran itself has problems exporting gasoline and diesel. 

Three: Those who stated Israel will prevent the tanker from reaching Lebanon or Syria, especially because Hezbollah announced the move publicly on the day of Ashura. It wasn’t a secret operation.

Nasrallah believes it's unfortunate that some had hoped Israel would prevent the ship from reaching Lebanon. 

He highlighted that the 2006 war which created a security equation with Israel is what prevented the regime from stopping the fuel from arriving. This is despite the fact that Tel Aviv is very well aware the arrival of the fuel would increase Hezbollah’s popularity even more, something Israel has, for decades, tried to prevent.

Four: Those who said America will prevent this operation. Nasrallah noted the US knew any action would lead to a reaction “from a certain party”.

The Hezbollah chief said, the US only knows sanctions, tried to pressure Lebanese officials and when that did not work, the US embassy in Beirut presented an alternative plan.

The US plan had already been widely ridiculed among Lebanese commentators and analysts. 

Those who said the import of oil would cause problems for the new government and this never happened.

Five: Finally, those who said this was a sectarian move and the energy would only be distributed to Hezbollah strongholds in Southern Lebanon. Nasrallah said, oil would be sent to every region of Lebanon.

In the upcoming days, the second ship will dock in Syria and will also contain diesel.

A third ship has been loaded with gasoline and the paperwork has been completed for it to sail. The fourth tanker will contain diesel.

The fourth ship will contain diesel because it will arrive at a time when some areas of Lebanon get cold and more diesel is needed than gasoline. 

The Hezbollah chief reiterated the movement is not after trade and profit or competing with energy companies. The initiative is simply adding to a product short in supply. 

Nasrallah studied the distribution process from a humanitarian point of view and came up with the following.

A months’ worth of supply will be offered, free of charge, to government-run hospitals, centers that care for the elderly and vulnerable, every facility that cares for orphans, water facilities in poorer provinces, fire stations, the Lebanese Red Cross. 

The reality of this humanitarian mission cannot be emphasized enough when Hezbollah says it is offering the diesel to the above free of charge. 

The second list will be sold, but also in terms of priority, to those that need the energy most and at a reasonable price whereby other energy supplier’s businesses are not affected. 

Private hospitals, pharmaceutical manufacturers, mills, bakeries selling bread, companies purchasing, storing and selling vital food products, food manufacturers, and agricultural companies remain top priority. Among those also considered high-priority, that will be offered the diesel, are electricity companies who provide generators to help people with power outages. 

According to the Hezbollah Chief, the oil will not be sold to individuals, but he did leave this door open when the suffering among the priority lists is gone. 

A Lebanese company has been chosen to assist and Hezbollah says this company has been chosen because it is suffering under US sanctions. 

Nasrallah added this commodity is for all Lebanese, regardless of faith or political allegiance. It will be sent to every province in the country. 

Every effort will be done to prevent the oil from entering the black market “because the black market has already profited significantly”.

Hezbollah says this operation will hopefully break the black market, which is selling oil at unreasonable prices and hurting ordinary Lebanese waiting in line for hours. 

Hezbollah said, it will not consider the import costs of the oil tankers when it sells the oil. The movement says it will bear responsibility for these costs and says it doesn’t want to make a profit.

The Hezbollah Chief said, the movement wants this initiative to be considered as a gift to Lebanese people from the Islamic Republic of Iran and from Hezbollah. 

Nasrallah said, Hezbollah won’t use the dollar to sell any of the oil imports. Any fuel sold will be done using the Lebanese Lira. 

Hezbollah could have imported a flotilla of oil tankers and not begin with one ship. He pointed out this would have led to extensive media speculation about the whereabouts of the ships and when they will arrive; something that would have boosted Hezbollah’s popularity. 

The Hezbollah chief said, “We could have done that with the first tanker”. However, the moment chose to keep a low profile because it didn’t want to frighten the Lebanese people, especially when there are officials and enemies scaremongering the public. 

Hezbollah’s goal is easing the suffering of the people, serving the Lebanese nothing more, nothing less.

United States-China rivalry intensifies after withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan

The withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan last month finally put an end to the 20-year mission sparked by the terrorist attacks on US soil on 11th September 2001. But the move has also set the stage for Washington to turn its attention and refocus its energies and resources on continuing and even intensifying its strategic rivalry with China.

President Joe Biden alluded to it as much when he acknowledged that the withdrawal will give the US the opportunity to focus on countering Russia and China, particularly in meeting the “stiff competition” from “an increasingly assertive China”.

Afghanistan has already emerged as the latest arena for the rivalry, with China pledging to donate US$31 million dollars worth of aid, including food and coronavirus vaccines, to the war-torn country. 

Apart from the possibility of sending a peacekeeping force to Afghanistan if the security situation worsens, Beijing also made clear that it was ready to maintain communication with the Taliban.

China used what it calls the US “abandonment” of Afghanistan to remind America’s allies in Asia, especially Taiwan, not to rely on the US for protection, arguing that the island is merely used as a card to contain China.

Not to be outdone, the US has promised to continue humanitarian aid to the Afghan people through United Nations agencies and non-governmental organizations, including providing a further US$64 million in new humanitarian assistance.

US Vice President, Kamala Harris headed to Singapore and Vietnam to offer reassurance that Washington remains committed to the region, and she outlined the Biden administration’s Indo-Pacific strategy, which in recent months has become a buzzword for countering China.

The Americans also sailed the USS Kidd guided-missile destroyer and Coast Guard cutter Munro through the Taiwan Strait last month, and over the weekend deployed the littoral combat ship USS Tulsa and Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group, said to be a tit-for-tat move after four Chinese warships were spotted sailing in the waters off Alaska late last month.

In a brazen flexing of its military muscle, the US joined forces with its three allies in the Quad security grouping - India, Australia and Japan - in holding joint naval exercises off the coast of Guam, featuring anti-surface, anti-air and anti-submarine warfare drills.

The US is even considering the possibility of allowing Taipei’s US office to change its name from the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office to the Taiwan Representative Office, prompting Beijing to issue a terse warning to Washington not to challenge the one-China principle.

The relations between the world’s two highly disagreeable powers are so tense that cooperation in other areas, most notably in climate change, has taken a beating, with Beijing mincing no words when it declared that China would follow its own plan rather than bow to US pressure.

As both nations face pressure to improve ties, Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed in their first phone call in six months to manage the growing rivalry and to stop it from devolving into a conflict. While Biden focused on the way forward for the troubled bilateral relationship, Xi said “getting the relationship right is not optional, but something we must do and must do well”.

These are the most reassuring words that the world has heard in a while, but under the “new normal” in US-China relations, few concessions are likely, relations will remain hard-nosed, while hostile and prickly impulses will continue to undermine mutual interactions.

Iran attains full member status of SCO

While the West impatiently waits for an affirmative nod from Iran for resuming the stalled Vienna nuclear talks over reviving a 2015 nuclear deal, the new administration of Iran patiently carves a strategic path toward cementing ties with the East. 

On Friday, Iran ended a 16-year peripheral status at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and became a full member in the regional body.

At the end of the 21st Summit of SCO held in Tajik capital Dushanbe, the leaders of the eight main members of the organization agreed to change the membership of the Islamic Republic of Iran from an observer member to a full member.

The membership was attained during the first foreign visit by Ayatollah Seyed Ebrahim Raisi in his capacity as President of Iran. This gives Raisi team a boost at the start of their Asia-oriented foreign policy. 

Iran’s attaining full membership of SCO could be termed the first step on the path of the Raisi administration’s stated policy of strengthening relations with neighbors and regional organizations. 

Addressing the SCO summit in Dushanbe, Ayatollah Raisi elaborated on this policy. “When I took over the presidency of the Islamic Republic, I introduced my foreign policy orientation as focusing on ‘economic multilateralism’ and strengthening ‘neighborhood policy’ in its broadest sense, and strengthening its presence in regional organizations,” he said. 

“The combination of the Eurasia and One Road-One Belt initiatives can be an objective realization of this approach, and the vast potential of the Islamic Republic of Iran in terms of geopolitics, population, energy, transportation, human resources, and most importantly spirituality, culture and civilization can cause a significant stimulus to this outlook,” Iranian president added,

Iran’s top diplomat, Hossein Amir Abdollahian, described the country’s membership in the SCO as “strategic” that will have an important impact on Iran’s “comprehensive” cooperation within the framework of the Neighborhood and Asia-oriented Policy.

The membership was made possible due to Russia’s support and diplomacy. Preparations for the realization of Iran’s joining the SCO first came to light in mid-August when Ali Shamkhan, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, announced after a phone call with his Russian counterpart Nikolai Patrushev that Iran will soon become a full member of the SCO.

“Fortunately, the political obstacles to Iran's membership in the Shanghai CO have been removed and Iran’s membership will be finalized,” Shamkhani said on Twitter in August. 

Abdollahian also said that his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov and Russian President Vladimir Putin have supported Iranian membership. In a tweet on Friday, Abdollahian said he met with Lavrov on the sidelines of the SCO summit in Dushanbe and thanked him and Putin for their support of Iran’s membership in the organization.

Iran has been in talks with Russia and China in the last few years to sign long-term strategic partnerships that could shape its foreign policy for decades to come. By joining the SCO, Iran stepped closer to finalizing these partnerships and pushed forward its new Asia-centered foreign policy, which rests on two pillars: enhanced ties with neighbors and strategic partnerships with non-western powers. 

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh underlined this new policy in a tweet on Friday.

“Warmly welcome the decision of the SCO to approve Iran's full membership. It is a major step toward enhanced ties with neighbors and an important impetus for our Asia-centered foreign policy. We'll continue our efforts to build on indigenous initiatives for the good of the region,” Khatibzadeh said. 

Height of US brutality or tragic mistake

Calling it a "tragic mistake," the US Department of Defense admitted Friday that it killed 10 people, including seven children, in a drone strike that wrongly targeted an aid group worker in Afghanistan late last month.

“I offer my profound condolences to the family and friends of those who were killed,” US Central Command Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. said at a briefing at the Pentagon Friday afternoon. "It was a mistake and I offer my sincere apology."

McKenzie added that the US was exploring the possibility of payments to compensate the families of the victims.

The 29th August 2021 drone strike came in response to a bombing at the Kabul airport that had killed 13 US service members as evacuations continued in the waning days of the US withdrawal from the country.

A Hellfire missile launched from the US drone killed 10 people in a Kabul neighborhood, with officials saying they were targeting an ISIS-K terrorist who was planning to use a car packed with explosives in a suicide attack.

The official military statement at the time said the US had “conducted a self-defense unmanned over-the-horizon airstrike today on a vehicle in Kabul, eliminating an imminent ISIS-K threat to Hamad Karzai International airport.”

“We are confident we successfully hit the target,” said Capt. Bill Urban, the US Central Command spokesman. “Significant secondary explosions from the vehicle indicated the presence of a substantial amount of explosive material. We are assessing the possibilities of civilian casualties, though we have no indications at this time.”

There were almost immediate reports of civilian casualties, but on 1st September 2021, Gen. Mark Milley — the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — defended the bombing as “righteous” and “still valid.”

“At the time — and I think this is still valid — we had very good intelligence that ISIS-K was preparing a specific type of vehicle at a specific type of location,” Milley said. “We monitored that through various means and all of the engagement criteria were being met. We went through the same level of rigor that we’ve done for years, and we took a strike.”

On 10th September, both the Washington Post and New York Times published stories calling the official account into question, with analyses finding no evidence of explosive materials in the car that belonged to the Nutrition and Education International, a US charity. The driver was Zemari Ahmadi, an electrical engineer who was a long-time employee of the aid group. Officials had said they did not know Ahmadi’s identity at the time of the strike but had deemed him suspicious.

"On behalf of the men and women of the Department of Defense, I offer my deepest condolences to surviving family members of those who were killed, including Ahmadi, and to the staff of Nutrition and Education International,  Ahmadi’s employer," Lloyd Austin, secretary Defense, said in a statement.

"We now know that there was no connection between Ahmadi and ISIS-Khorasan, that his activities on that day were completely harmless and not at all related to the imminent threat we believed we faced, and that Ahmadi was just as innocent a victim as were the others tragically killed."

Earlier, an analysis by Brown University earlier this year estimated that more than 71,000 Afghan and Pakistani civilians had been killed in the US-led War in Afghanistan between its start in October 2001 and April 2021. The war ended on 30th August 2021 when the final US troops left the country.

US-Australian submarine deal causes rift with France

French officials on Thursday canceled a gala at the country’s Washington DC, embassy over the Biden administration’s decision to scrap a US$40 billion nuclear submarine deal that the European nation had signed with Australia, The New York Times reported.

The US, Australia and the United Kingdom on Wednesday announced a new trilateral security partnership in the Indo-Pacific, with the three planning to launch an 18-month review exploring how Australia could best acquire nuclear-powered submarines.

But France, which had worked on the submarines since 2016 in a US$40 billion deal to replace aging Australian subs was left behind in the deal.

Paris has angrily scrapped the “240th Anniversary of the Battle of the Capes” event meant to take place Friday evening at the French Embassy and aboard a French frigate in Baltimore, a French official told the Times. The event was meant to celebrate the French navy's aid to America's fight for independence in 1781.

Following the perceived snub, France’s top naval officer, who had traveled to Washington for the gala, will return to Paris early.

Asked about France’s displeasure later on Thursday, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said that the United States values its relationship and partnership with France “on a variety of issues facing the global community.”

She cited cooperation on economic and security issues and the coronavirus pandemic, and maintained that the Biden administration was engaged with French officials “in advance of the announcement.”

Psaki also indicated that President Biden would speak with French President Emmanuel Macron “soon” but said she had no calls with French officials to preview. 

Concerns brushed aside: Asked later what Biden thinks about the French foreign minister comparing him to former President Trump and the French cancelling the gala, Psaki answered that Biden “doesn’t think about it much” and that he is focused on maintaining US relationship with France, UK and Australia.

She also said a handful of times that it was Australia's decision to seek nuclear-powered submarine technology.

Other assurances: Secretary of State Antony Blinken also on Thursday sought to assure France, saying it was a vital partner, according to remarks made after he spoke with Australian foreign and defense ministers in Washington, Reuters reported.

France has made no secret of its displeasure over being left out of the triad. Earlier on Thursday, French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said the decision was “a stab in the back.”

“This brutal, unilateral and unpredictable decision reminds me a lot of what Trump used to do," Le Drian told franceinfo radio, according to Reuters. “I am angry and bitter. This isn't done between allies.”

The issue is whether the US government sought to hide its submarine deal from the French, who had their own now scrapped multi billion dollar deal with Australia, meant to be stretched out over 50 years.

French officials are accusing the Biden administration or shrouding information about its deal with the United Kingdom and Australia despite French diplomats' repeated attempts to find out more about any such plans.  

A French official told the Times that Paris sought to speak with Blinken and national security adviser Jake Sullivan but were unable to. 

 

US, UK and Australia forging military alliance against China

The United States, Britain and Australia have forged a historic security alliance to strengthen military capabilities in the Pacific, allowing them to share advanced defence technologies and giving Australian forces nuclear submarine technology. The move, announced on Wednesday, extends Washington’s drive for military cooperation.

To begin the “Aukus” security partnership, naval officials and technical specialists from the three countries will work together over the next 18 months to give Australia the nuclear technology that will allow it to deploy submarines “to improve deterrence across the Indo-Pacific”, said a senior official from US President Joe Biden’s administration.

“We undertake this effort as part of a larger constellation of steps, including stronger bilateral partnerships with our traditional security partners in Asia – Japan, South Korea, Thailand, the Philippines – and also stronger engagements with new partners like India, Vietnam and new formations like the Quad,” the official said, referring to the security grouping of the US, India, Japan and Australia.

“This is an historic announcement. It reflects the Biden administration’s determination to build stronger partnerships to sustain peace and stability across the entire Indo-Pacific region.”

The three countries will also cooperate on integrating artificial intelligence, quantum computing and undersea capabilities into their military operations.

At a joint press conference with Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and British leader Boris Johnson, Biden said the initiative was needed to ensure the US and its allies had the “most modern capabilities we need to manoeuvre and defend against rapidly evolving threats”.

“We need to be able to address both the current strategic environment in the region and how it may evolve because the future of each of our nations, and indeed the world, depends on a free and open Indo-Pacific enduring and flourishing in the decades ahead,” Biden said.

The nuclear-powered submarines will be built in Adelaide with “in close cooperation” with Britain and the US, said Morrison.

Johnson called the undertaking “one of the most complex and technically demanding projects in the world”.

“Only a handful of countries possess nuclear-powered submarines,” he said. “And it is a momentous decision for any nation to acquire this formidable capability, and perhaps equally momentous for any other state to come to its aid.”

While all three leaders cast the initiative as an effort to bring “stability” to the Indo-Pacific region, none made any explicit mention of China.

Asked whether the formation of Aukus was meant to counter China’s military build-up, the US official said the move “is not aimed or about any one country”, adding that “it’s about advancing our strategic interests, upholding the international rules-based order and promoting peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific”.

The official said that Biden did not mention the Aukus initiative specifically when he spoke to Chinese President Xi Jinping last week, but that the US leader “did underscore our determination to play a strong, strong role in the Indo-Pacific”.

Asked on Wednesday about the new security alliance, Liu Pengyu, a spokesman for the Chinese embassy in Washington, said that countries “should not build exclusionary blocs targeting or harming the interests of third parties”.

“In particular, they should shake off their Cold War mentality and ideological prejudice,” Liu said.

While Beijing may seek to downplay the new pact by calling it an outdated ideological move, there was “no doubt” about the initiative’s significance, said Oriana Skylar Mastro, an expert in Chinese military and security policy at Stanford University’s Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies.

“Not only for the content of the deal, but it shows innovation in how US allies and partners are thinking of working together,” she said. “It’s more than the usual exercises and air shows.”

News of the trilateral alliance comes as China’s People’s Liberation Army steps up aerial drills near Taiwan and in the South China Sea, where China’s territorial claims have been contested by Washington and other countries in the region.

Against this backdrop, Beijing will not buy the Biden administration’s assertion that Aukus is not a specific reaction to China’s military rise, said Bonnie Glaser, director of the Asia program at the German Marshall Fund of the United States.

“Beijing will see this as part of US efforts to forge coalitions aimed at pushing back against China, and they aren’t wrong,” she said. “The Chinese need to recognize that this assertive behavior is drawing democratic countries to cooperate in new ways to defend their interests.”

Charles Edel, an expert in Indo-Pacific security issues, viewed Wednesday’s announcement as the latest example of Biden’s rejection of the go-it-alone approach that characterized his predecessor’s China policy, and “a signal that the United States is willing to invest more responsibilities into its allies than it has in the past”.

 “The bet that’s clearly being placed here is that, in response to increasing Chinese capabilities and the turn to a more threatening Chinese foreign policy, more allies are going to become more capable, and that that will serve as a greater deterrent to the Chinese, both militarily and politically,” said Edel, a global fellow at the Wilson Centre in Washington and senior fellow at the University of Sydney’s United States Studies Centre.

At Wednesday’s press conference, Morrison stressed that the submarines would be nuclear in propulsion only, rather than carrying nuclear weapons. “We will continue to meet all our nuclear weapons,” he said.

But nuclear power alone carried with it significant tactical advantages that had obvious applications when it came to countering China’s military presence in the Indo-Pacific, said Edel.

Besides increased payload capabilities, nuclear-powered submarines had greater endurance and could remain in deep waters for longer periods of times, said Edel. “They are, at depth, less detectable, so that’s a deterrent,” he said. “When we think about the extraordinary production of Chinese ground-based missiles that basically blanket the entire South China Sea – without necessarily a counterbalancing force other than the US – this then, I think, is a partial answer to that.”

Biden’s other geopolitical initiatives since taking office, including his efforts to bolster ties with NATO and the G7 and the shaping of the QUAD, have specifically included language about countering China’s growing influence.

The administration official cited Biden’s planned in-person meeting with Morrison and the other Quad leaders next week at the White House, and suggested that the presence of British aircraft carriers in the South China Sea in recent months figured into the strengthening military alliance.

“You have just seen the substantial deployment of British forces throughout the Indo-Pacific very successful deployments of the aircraft carriers, supporting ships, lots of valuable port engagements,” he said. “Our strategic discussions … transcended several months of very deep, very high level engagements with both our military commands, our political leadership and the people closest to our leaders in order to chart a common path on the way forward.”

The establishment of Aukus follows a warning on Tuesday by Glaser, former US National Security Council, Deputy National Security adviser Zack Cooper and other military analysts that the US needs stronger military partnerships in region.

“China’s modernizing military … poses the greatest challenge in the world,” they said in a white paper on how Washington should respond to challenges posed by Beijing. “China is not a global military peer competitor of the US … but it has developed a robust capability to fight effectively in the areas within the first island chain, which runs north to south from Japan in the East China Sea, to Taiwan, to the Philippines in the South China Sea.”

“Long-term success will depend on the US making significant advances in its regional diplomacy with new partners who feel threatened by Beijing’s military modernization and grey zone assertiveness, even as many have strong trade, investment and financial ties with China,” they said.

But in the wake of Wednesday’s announcement, it remains a possibility that Beijing will respond to Washington’s growing alliances with increased assertion, said Ali Wyne, a senior analyst with Eurasia Group and an expert in US-China relations.

“A big question is whether China will recalibrate, recognizing that it is engendering greater resistance among advanced industrial democracies or instead adduce that resistance as evidence that it needs to double down on its current course of diplomacy.”

Tanker carrying Iranian fuel for Lebanon reaches Syria

After 19 days of waiting, the Iranian ship containing 33,000 tons gasoline for Lebanon reached Baniyas port in Syria on Tuesday. Hezbollah leader Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah had threatened retaliation if anyone tried to interfere with the shipment and said the tankers bringing fuel are considered Lebanese territory.

Nasrallah dropped a bombshell when he announced that an oil tanker carrying Iranian fuel oil was bound for Lebanon. Addressing a commemorative ceremony marking the Day of Ashura, Hezbollah’s chief announced that the first of several ships loaded with fuel would sail from Iran to Lebanon within hours, warning the United States and Israel against any sabotage.

“Our first ship has completed all arrangements and will sail within hours from Iran to Lebanon with the blessing of Imam Hussein (peace be upon him),” he said, noting, “This ship will be followed by other ships, but we gave priority to diesel oil on the first ship because it is a top priority and is linked to people’s lives.”

Nasrallah thanked Syria for receiving the shipment on Sunday and facilitating its transfer, and said it would reach Lebanon by Thursday.

Unable to deliver directly by sea to Lebanon due to sanctions, the Iranian vessel, named Faxon, went instead to Baniyas, Syria for land transfer.

Lebanon’s Prime Minister Najib Mikati has not yet commented on the arrival of the Iranian tanker. 

“Lebanon set to receive more fuel shipments from Iran”

The Hezbollah chief said a third and a fourth fuel-laden vessel is expected to navigate towards Lebanon in the future, saying his group seeks for a part of Lebanon’s fuel needs to be met using Iranian imports.

“Paperwork has been done for the dispatch of the third gasoline-laden ship from Iran. The fourth ship will carry diesel and will be sent over subsequently,” Nasrallah said during a speech on Monday, Press TV reported.

Referring to Lebanon’s new government that was formed recently at the direction of President Michel Aoun following endless indecision, he said the government would decide on any fuel shipments that could follow that. 

Nasrallah, however, asserted “we want part of Lebanon’s fuel imports to be provided by Iran.”

The Hezbollah movement announced a decision to start importing fuel from the Islamic Republic last month amid crippling economic conditions, caused partly by the United States’ sanctions that have been targeting Lebanon over Hezbollah’s legitimate involvement in the country’s political and military sectors.

Nasrallah went on to say that some used to speculate that the promise for shipment of fuel from Iran simply served propagandist media purposes. “It, however, became finally clear that such remarks are false,” he said, according to Press TV.

Those same people were hopeful for the Israeli regime to target the vessels, the Hezbollah chief said.

“Their speculations were proven wrong. Israel is in a tight spot and the deterrence equation is there” to dissuade it from taking any such action. 

By deterrence power, Nasrallah was referring to his movement’s vast arsenal of missiles, including precision ones that the group has vowed not to hesitate to deploy to defend the country against the Tel Aviv regime.

Meanwhile, Nasrallah said the fact that the movement was distributing the fuel at a lower price that its purchase and imports have cost proved that it has not been cooperating with the fuel shipment “for commercial purposes.”

“We’re not after conducting business here,” he noted.

 

US military-industrial complexes the biggest beneficiary of Afghan war

Brown University’s Costs of War Project released a new report Monday, detailing post-9/11 spending by the Pentagon. The study found that of the over US$14 trillion spent by the Pentagon since the start of the war in Afghanistan, one-third to one-half went to private military contractors.

The report, authored by William Hartung of the Center for International Policy, said US$4.4 trillion of the total spending went towards weapons procurement and research and development, a category that directly benefits corporate military contractors. Private contractors are also paid through other funds, like operations and maintenance, but those numbers are harder to determine.

Out of the US$4.4 trillion, the top five US weapons makers — Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman — received US$2.2 trillion, almost half. To put these huge numbers into perspective, the report pointed out that in the 2020 fiscal year, Lockheed Martin received US$75 billion in Pentagon contracts, compared to the combined US$44 billion budget for the State Department and USAID that same year.

Besides getting paid for weapons and research, US corporations profit from private contractors that are deployed to warzones. The most notorious private security contractor previously employed by the Pentagon is Blackwater, the mercenary group whose employees massacred 17 people in Iraq’s Nisour Square back in 2007.

Besides armed mercenaries, the Pentagon employed private contractors for just about every task in US warzones. Demonstrating the Pentagon’s reliance on contractors, at the end of the Trump administration, only 2,500 US troops were left in Afghanistan, but over 18,000 Pentagon contractors were still in the country.

The report explained how China is the new justification for military spending. “The most likely impact of the shift towards China will be to further tighten the grip of major weapons makers like Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, and Raytheon Technologies on the Pentagon budget,” the report reads.

Can Bennett-Sisi cooperation restore peace in Middle East?

Israeli Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett met Egyptian Pres­ident Abdel Fattah al-Sisi on Monday, on the first visit by a prime minister of the Jewish state to the North African country in over a decade. 

Sisi hosted Bennett in the Red Sea resort of Sharm-el-Sheikh where they discussed “efforts to revive the peace process” between the Israelis and Palestinians, presidential spoke­sman Bassam Radi informed.

Security cooperation between the two countries was also discussed at the meeting attended by Egyptian Intelligence Chief, Abbas Kamel and Israel’s National Security Advisor, Eyal Holata.

Egypt, the Arab world’s most populous country, in 1979 became the first Arab state to sign a peace treaty with Israel, after decades of enmity.

In May this year, Egypt played a key role in brokering a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas that rules the Gaza Strip, after 11 days of deadly fighting.

Egypt regularly receives leaders of Hamas as well as of its political rival the Palestinian Authority led by Mahmud Abbas, while maintaining strong diplomatic, security and economic ties with Israel.

Israel’s Foreign Minister Yair Lapid on Sunday had proposed improving living conditions in Gaza and building new infrastructure in exchange for calm from Hamas, aiming to solve the “never-ending rounds of violence”.

But “it won’t happen without the support and involvement of our Egyptian partners and without their ability to talk to everyone involved”, he said.

Bennett’s visit came about 10 days after Abbas was in Cairo for talks with Sisi.

Monday’s talks mark “an important step in light of the growing security and economic relations between the two countries, and their mutual concern over the situation in Gaza”, Cairo-based analyst Nael Shama said.

It also fits with “Egypt’s plans to revive the political talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority”, he added.

Bennett, a right-wing religious nationalist, took office in June, ending Benjamin Netanyahu’s 12 straight years as Israel’s premier.

The last meeting between an Egyptian President and an Israeli Premier dates back to January 2011 when Hosni Mubarak received Netanyahu, weeks before Mubarak was toppled in a popular revolution.

In the political turbulence that followed, relations between the two countries deteriorated as protests were staged outside the Israeli embassy in Cairo in 2011.

The one-year reign of Egypt’s Islamist president Mohamed Morsi in 2012 also proved to be icy, with Israel suspicious of his Muslim Brotherhood’s close ties to Hamas.

Sisi has again positioned Egypt as a regional bulwark of stability, echoing the frequent peace summits overseen by Mubarak before his ouster.

Israel and Egypt are two of Washington’s main allies in the Middle East and are the largest recipients of US military aid, and they have worked together on security issues. Sisi, in a 2019 interview on CBS, acknowledged Egypt’s army was working closely with Israel in combating “terrorists” in the restive North Sinai.

He underscored Cairo’s wide range of cooperation with Israel.

The relationship developed after Egypt regained sovereignty over the Sinai Peninsula, which Israel occupied in the 1967 Six-Day War.

The two neighbors have also deepened their ties in the field of energy. Since last year, Egypt has received natural gas from Israel to liquefy and re-export to Europe.

 

Baghdad talks pave way for Iran-Saudi Arab rapprochement

After years of rivalry and lack of diplomatic relations, Saudi Arabia and Iran are slowly moving toward mending ties thanks to at least three rounds of behind closed doors talks mediated and hosted by the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Mustaf al-Kadhimi. 

He arrived in Tehran on Sunday as the first foreign high-ranking official to visit Iran since the new Iranian President, Ayatollah Seyed Ebrahim Raisi, took office in early August. 

Al-Kadhimi had many issues on his agenda during his meetings with Iranian officials, including Ayatollah Raisi and Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Ali Shamkhani. These issues included visa abolition for Iranian citizens, completion of a joint railway project, increasing the level of trade between Iran and Iraq, withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, and the presence of anti-revolutionary dissident groups in Iraqi Kurdistan.  

During a joint press conference, Ayatollah Raisi and al-Kadhimi stressed the importance of deepening the Iran-Iraq relations at all levels. “The deep bonds between Tehran and Baghdad stems from the beliefs and hearts of two nations, two countries and two governments,” Ayatollah Raisi said. “Despite the wishes of the enemies, the level of relations between Iran and Iraq will develop day by day.”

In addition to bilateral issues, the Iraqi Prime Minister also discussed regional issues. Arab media outlets reported that during his visit to Tehran, al-Kadhimi would pursue a mediation between Tehran and Riyadh among other issues. Informed sources revealed to Al-Araby Al-Jadeed that al-Kadhimi planned to discuss with Iranian officials four important issues during the visit, which are the Iraqi elections issue, the energy issue, and the mediation between Iran and Saudi Arabia, as well as other mediation between Tehran and Washington.

Regarding the mediation between Tehran and Riyadh, these sources told Al-Araby Al-Jadeed that al-Kadhimi will bring with him new proposals to push this mediation forward and achieve practical results for it in light of the failure that accompanied the Baghdad conference recently to persuade the leaders of the two countries to participate in the conference on the one hand, and hold a meeting between the foreign ministers of Iran and Saudi Arabia on the sidelines of the conference on the other hand. 

The sources indicated that Baghdad is seeking to hold a meeting between the foreign ministers of the two countries during the next stage. Saudi side had suggested that Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian visit Saudi Arabia. Iranian refused and suggested Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan visit Tehran. 

The sources added that the Iranian foreign minister had held detailed talks with Kuwaiti Prime Minister Sheikh Sabah Khaled al-Hamad al-Sabah on the sidelines of the Baghdad conference, and the Kuwaiti official also held a similar meeting with the Saudi foreign minister, and exchanged messages between the two sides.

“These multilateral contacts created a comfortable atmosphere for a meeting at the level of the foreign ministers of Iran and Saudi Arabia,” the sources noted.

Tehran and Riyadh have been involved in security oriented talks in Baghdad ever since April when Tehran also resumed talks with major world powers over reviving a 2015 nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Before al-Kadhimi’s visit, Iranian Ambassador to Iraq Iraj Masjedi, who has been involved in the Iran-Saudi talks, announced that they would resume soon. “So far, we have had three rounds of talks with the Saudi side, and the fourth round will be held following the formation of the new Iranian government,” he said at an event in Baghdad held on the sidelines of the August Baghdad summit. 

Underlining that Iran is a large and civilized country and is ready for any kind of dialogue with other countries, including Saudi Arabia, Masjedi said, “Iran has declared its readiness for dialogue and peace and has extended its hand to help neighboring countries and the region.”

During the past three rounds, the Saudis have been cautiously treating the talks with Iran as “exploratory.” They brought up the issue of Yemen at an early stage, possibly to gauge the seriousness of Iran in the talks. Yemen is the most important point of contention, which explains why Tehran and Riyadh have agreed to form an Iranian-Saudi-Iraqi “thinking cell” to exchange ideas and opinions to set broad lines for resolving the Yemeni crisis, according to the Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar. 

Citing diplomatic sources, the newspaper said that the Baghdad talks between Tehran and Riyadh are up and running. The sources confirmed to Al-Akhbar that the Iraqi capital will witness “soon” the fourth round of Iranian-Saudi talks after they were postponed due to the Hajj season and the Iranian presidential elections.

The sources confirmed that the previous three rounds of dialogue led to “results that will appear soon” through the reopening of each country's consulates in the other country, paving the way for the resumption of diplomatic relations between them. 

The sources also stressed that the Baghdad dialogue approaches the contentious issues between the two countries and sets the general contexts for implementing some measures in a way that helps bridge views, and works to bring about de-escalation between the two parties, which resulted in the “Oman dialogue.”

According to Al-Akhbar, the Oman talks deal with technical issues and procedural details. It also serves as a platform for the exchange of “security information” in the context of confidence-building measures. 

 

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.

 

Will Pakistan be ready to renegotiate Indus Water Treaty?

According to an article published in South Asia Journal the Indian Parliamentary Standing Committee on Water Resources has recommended that the government should renegotiate the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), signed in 1960, with Pakistan.

According to the author, the need has arisen due to some pressing challenges that include: climate change, global warming and environmental impact assessment. Without making overtures of abrogating the treaty, which has often been part of the debate in midst of tensions with Pakistan, the committee, in no uncertain terms, acknowledged the rationality of the framing of IWT on the basis of knowledge and technology existing at the time.

IWT, with its emphasis on hydraulic engineering, divided the basin into upper and lower parts (the western and eastern rivers), and envisaged the most complete utilization of the waters through dams, barrages and canals. Without the treaty, Pakistan would have been constrained to build grand hydraulic works to transfer water from the western rivers to meet its irrigation needs and become independent of the eastern rivers. And without the eastern rivers being given exclusively to India, it would have struggled to operationalize the Bhakra and Nangal dams. The Rajasthan canal would not have made much progress, and the Ravi–Beas link canal would have failed to take off.

However, during the IWT negotiations, there was no unified methodology or specialized institutions to foretell the dangers of the climate crisis on water resources. With the advancement of science and improvement in measurements, snow and glacier melt in the upper Indus hydrology, which contribute to 60-70% of total average flow in the Indus river system, and precipitation patterns are now better understood. The contribution of these sources to the Indus Basin is undergoing considerable variations explained by the weather systems and the monsoon.

As a result, sustainability and future water availability are under existential threat. Rivers are the lifeline of almost 300 million people living in the Indus basin. Issues such as food and energy will increasingly have intricate linkages to water while demographic pressures will impact water management.

The emphasis of cooperation should be on setting up new meteorological observation stations, supply of data, and new engineering works on the rivers. However, Article XII explicitly mentions that IWT “may from time to time be modified by a duly ratified treaty concluded for the purpose between the two Governments”.

The author has put blame on Pakistan saying that technically, any cooperation or modification of the treaty cannot be undertaken unilaterally. Even if India shows the political courage to renegotiate IWT, the dynamics of it will be far more exacting.

It also alleged that Pakistan, in all likelihood, will make it a political and territorial issue, expressing its disappointment over the treaty rather than the material benefits it has accrued. Pakistan has never advocated abrogation or revision of the treaty, but has not shied away from blaming India for its water woes.

IWT remains a scapegoat to cover up its poor water management policies, which, in successive decades, have seen inefficiency in its irrigation system and excessive water waste in the agricultural sector.

The author suggests that the best option for India is to fulfill the provisions of IWT, particularly those on the western rivers in Jammu and Kashmir. While signing IWT, India gave preference to fulfilling its immediate water needs over future needs, particularly those of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. IWT allows storage entitlement of up to 3.6 MAF (million-acre feet) on the western rivers. Many of the projects are now underway in achieving the “permissible storage capacity”.

He also says that the Permanent Indus Commission that meets every year to settle differences over IWT is an excellent mechanism to raise concerns over water efficiency, ecological integrity and sustainability in the backdrop of the climate crisis. A new water governance framework will be required to deal with the uncertain future of the Indus basin.