Water scarcity making Middle Eat more vulnerable

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cyber Attack at South African Ports

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

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

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

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

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

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

Israel accused of war crimes in recent Gaza war

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Iran claims arresting Mossad agents with weapons

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

US military involvement in Afghanistan was a mistake

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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