Biden, Netanyahu on collision course

Relations between President Joe Biden and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sank to a wartime low on Monday with the US allowing passage of a Gaza ceasefire resolution at the United Nations and drawing a sharp rebuke from the Israeli leader.

Netanyahu abruptly scrapped a visit to Washington this week by a senior delegation to discuss Israel’s threatened offensive in the southern Gaza city of Rafah after the US abstained in a Security Council vote that demanded an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hamas and the release of all hostages held by the Palestinian militants.

The suspension of that meeting puts a major new obstacle in the way of efforts by the US, concerned about a deepening humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, to get Netanyahu to consider alternatives to a ground invasion of Rafah, the last relatively safe haven for Palestinian civilians.

The threat of such an offensive has increased tensions between longtime allies the United States and Israel, and raised questions about whether the US might restrict military aid if Netanyahu defies Biden and presses ahead anyway.

"This shows that trust between the Biden administration and Netanyahu may be breaking down," said Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for Republican and Democratic administrations. "If the crisis is not managed carefully, it’s only going to continue to worsen."

Biden’s decision to abstain at the UN, coming after months of mostly adhering to longtime US policy of shielding Israel at the world body, appeared to reflect growing US frustration with the Israeli leader.

The president, running for re-election in November, faces pressure not just from America's allies but from a growing number of fellow Democrats to rein in the Israeli military response.

Netanyahu confronts domestic challenges of his own, not least his far-right coalition members’ demands for a hard line against the Palestinians.

He also must convince hostages’ families he is doing everything for their release while facing frequent protests calling for his resignation.

As Netanyahu's office announced the cancellation of the visit, he said the failure of the US to veto the resolution was a clear retreat from its previous position and would hurt Israel's war efforts.

US officials said the Biden administration was perplexed by Israel's decision and considered it an overreaction, insisting there had been no change in policy.

Washington had mostly avoided the word ceasefire earlier in the nearly six-month-old war in the Gaza Strip and had used its veto power at the UN to shield Israel as it retaliated against Hamas.

But as famine looms in Gaza and amid growing global pressure for a truce in the war that Palestinian health authorities say has killed some 32,000 Palestinians, the US abstained on a call for a ceasefire for the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, which ends in two weeks.

The challenge now for Biden and Netanyahu is to keep their differences from escalating out of control, analysts say.

Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank in Washington, said there was no reason this should be a mortal blow to relations. "So I don’t think the door is closed to anything," he said.

Signalling that the two governments remain in close communication, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, on a visit separate from the one Netanyahu's delegation scrubbed earlier, went ahead with high-level meetings in Washington on Monday.

But the US abstention adds to a deepening rift between Biden and Netanyahu, who have known each other for years but have had a testy relationship even in the best of times.

Earlier this month, Biden said in an MSNBC interview that a Rafah invasion would be a red line, though he added that the defense of Israel is critical and there is no way "I’m going to cut off all weapons so that they don’t have the Iron Dome (missile defense system) to protect them."

Netanyahu dismissed Biden's criticism and vowed to press forward in Rafah, the last part of the Gaza Strip where Israeli forces have not carried out a ground offensive, though US officials say there are no signs of an imminent operation.

That was followed last week with US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, the country’s highest-ranking Jewish elected official, describing Netanyahu as an obstacle to peace and calling for new elections in Israel to replace him.

Biden called it a "good speech."

But Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters on Wednesday he was thinking of inviting Netanyahu, who spoke by videolink to Republican senators last week, to address Congress. That would be seen as a jab at Biden, giving Netanyahu a high-profile forum to air grievances against the US administration.

Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse told Reuters that Netanyahu appeared to be working with Republicans to weaponize the US-Israel relationship in favor of the right wing.

Biden’s 2024 re-election bid limits his options: he needs to avoid giving Republicans an issue to seize on with pro-Israel voters, while also halting the erosion of support from progressive Democrats dismayed by his strong backing for Israel.

Netanyahu, aware that polls show him being soundly defeated in any election held now, knows there is wide support for continuing the war in Gaza among an Israeli population still deeply traumatized. He appears willing to risk testing Washington's tolerance.

All members of Netanyahu's emergency unity government support continuing the war until Hamas is destroyed and the hostages are returned, and there has been little sign of willingness to meet US calls for moderation, despite the growing risk of international isolation.

Hard-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said Israel was a partner but the United States was not its patron state.

Pakistan Day reception in Washington

Discussions at the Pakistan Day reception at the embassy underscored the importance of political unity in Pakistan, while the PTI’s protests dominated conversations among the guests.

Ambassador Masood Khan also acknowledged the necessity of political stability in Pakistan when he addressed his guests, “We continue to work for political cohesion in our country and economic development.”

The other speaker, USAID Assistant Administrator of the Bureau for Asia Michael Schiffer, emphasized Pakistan’s long-term development aspirations. “Enhancing Pakistan’s economic growth is a bedrock of our work,” he declared.

Ambassador Khan assured the audience both sides were working to recalibrate ties structured around trade, investment, green energy, healthcare, education, and science and technology.

Schiffer identified sustainable economic growth, greater access to energy, gender equality, strengthening peace and inclusion, education, and health as shared objectives.

Ambassador Khan said, “Together, we would continue to work for regional and global security and counter transnational threats, especially terrorism.”

Over 450 guests, including ambassadors of friendly countries, other diplomats and military attaches, high-ranking officials from the US State Department, the World Bank, IMF, US lawmakers, think tank scholars, media representatives, and members of the Pak-American community, attended the event.

 

Pakistan: IMF reaches staff level agreement

An International Monetary Fund (IMF) team, led by Nathan Porter, visited Islamabad from March 14-19, 2024, to hold discussions on the second review of Pakistan’s economic program supported by an IMF Stand-By Arrangement (SBA). At the conclusion of the discussions, Porter issued the following statement:

“The IMF team has reached a staff-level agreement with the Pakistani authorities on the second and final review of Pakistan’s stabilization program supported by the IMF’s US$3 billion (SDR2,250 million) SBA approved in January 2024. This agreement is subject to approval by the IMF’s Executive Board, upon which the remaining access under the SBA, US$1.1 billion (SDR 828 million), will become available.

“Pakistan’s economic and financial position has improved in the months since the first review, with growth and confidence continuing to recover on the back of prudent policy management and the resumption of inflows from multilateral and bilateral partners. However, growth is expected to be modest this year and inflation remains well above target, and ongoing policy and reform efforts are required to address Pakistan’s deep-seated economic vulnerabilities amidst the ongoing challenges posed by elevated external and domestic financing needs and an unsettled external environment.

“The new government is committed to continue the policy efforts that started under the current SBA to entrench economic and financial stability for the remainder of this year. In particular, the authorities are determined to deliver the FY24 general government primary balance target of PRs 401 billion (0.4% of GDP), with further efforts towards broadening the tax base, and continue with the timely implementation of power and gas tariff adjustments to keep average tariffs consistent with cost recovery while protecting the vulnerable through the existing progressive tariff structures, thus avoiding any net circular debt (CD) accumulation in FY24. The State Bank of Pakistan remains committed to maintaining a prudent monetary policy to lower inflation and ensure exchange rate flexibility and transparency in the operations of the FX market.

The authorities also expressed interest in a successor medium-term Fund-supported program with the aim of permanently resolving Pakistan’s fiscal and external sustainability weaknesses, strengthening its economic recovery, and laying the foundations for strong, sustainable, and inclusive growth. While these discussions are expected to start in the coming months, key objectives are expected to include: 1) strengthening public finances, including through gradual fiscal consolidation and broadening the tax base (especially in undertaxed sectors) and improving tax administration to improve debt sustainability and create space for higher priority development and social assistance spending to protect the vulnerable;

2) restoring the energy sector’s viability by accelerating cost reducing reforms including through improving electricity transmission and distribution, moving captive power demand to the electricity grid, strengthening distribution company governance and management, and undertaking effective anti-theft efforts;

3) returning inflation to target, with a deeper and more transparent flexible forex market supporting external rebalancing and the rebuilding of foreign reserves; and

4) promoting private-led activity through the above mentioned actions as well as the removal of distortionary protection, advancement of SOE reforms to improve the sector’s performance, and the scaling-up of investment in human capital, to make growth more resilient and inclusive and enable Pakistan to reach its economic potential.

 

Pakistan exports to European Union states fall

Pakistan’s exports to European countries have fallen in the current fiscal year despite a GSP+ status that allows duty-free entrance into European markets for the majority of its products.

In absolute terms, Pakistan’s exports to European countries dipped 6.89%YoY in the first eight months of the current fiscal year to US$5.411 billion from US$5.812 billion in the corresponding period last year.

The decline was mainly attributed to reduced demand for Pakistani goods in western, southern and northern Europe.

In FY23, exports to the EU had dropped 4.4% to US$8.188 billion from US$8.566 billion a year ago.

In October 2023, the European Parliament unanimously voted to extend the GSP+ status for another four years until 2027 for developing countries, including Pakistan, to enjoy duty-free or minimum duty on exports to the European market.

Western Europe, which includes Germany, the Netherlands, France, Italy and Belgium, accounts for the largest portion of Pakistan’s exports to the EU.

There has been a significant decrease of 13.2% in exports to this region. The export value was reported at US$2.609 billion in the first eight months of FY24, down from US$3.006 billion during the same period last year.

While exports to western, southern and northern Europe have seen a decline, there is a silver lining in the form of an uptick in exports to Eastern Europe. The exports saw an increase of 8.2% to US$407.6 million in 8MFY24 against US$376.68 m over the corresponding months of last year.

Exports to southern Europe saw a paltry decline of 1.1% to US$1.971 billion in 8MFY24 from US$1.993 billion over the corresponding period of last year. Exports to Spain grew 4.66% to US$966.95 million in 8MFY24 from US$923.85 million a year ago.

Exports to Italy declined 3.36% to US$733.79 million from US$759.36 million.

Exports to northern Europe have not done well, recording a 3.04% dip. The export to this region was reported at US$423.732 million, down from US$437.03 million in the corresponding period last year.

Before Brexit, Pakistan’s major export destination was the United Kingdom. In the post-Brexit period, Pakistan’s exports to the UK slightly went up to US$1.351 billion in 8MFY24 from US$1.329 billion.

In FY23, Pakistan’s exports had dipped by 10.63% to US$1.966 billion to the UK from US$2.20 billion a year ago.

The British government has assured Islamabad of no change in the post-Brexit scenario which is evident from the inclusion of Pakistan in its preferential market access scheme.

US opposition of Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline

While US Assistant Secretary of State Donald Lu’s recent testimony before a Congressional panel contained no bombshells about the cipher saga, the American diplomat’s replies to questions from lawmakers about the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline should certainly be cause for concern.

American reservations over the gas project clearly infringe on Pakistan’s sovereign right to take independent foreign policy decisions.

Lu told lawmakers that it was an American goal to ensure the pipeline is not completed. Using highly undiplomatic language, he observed that if they [Pakistan] get in bed with Iran, it will be very serious for our relationship.

The Foreign Office reaction to these comments was measured, as the spokesperson told the media that there was no room for discussion on a third-party [US] waiver, while the pipeline plays an important role in Pakistan’s energy security.

It is hoped that the state remains steadfast in upholding its commitments to the project, and rejects unwarranted foreign pressure.

Until the caretaker government gave the go-ahead for revitalizing the pipeline last month, the scheme had been in the doldrums for over a decade, mainly out of concern over attracting America’s wrath.

Pakistan should be the best judge of its energy requirements, and unsolicited advice such as that offered by Lu should be rejected with thanks. The American official also questioned how Pakistan would procure the financing to complete the scheme. Again, that should be Pakistan’s headache, not anyone else’s.

The fact is that the Iran pipeline appears to be a viable energy project, as the other major regional scheme — the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline — is in deep freeze particularly after the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan. Moreover, if Pakistan reneges on the deal with Iran, it risks entering a messy litigation process, and paying a hefty US$18 billion in penalty.

Lu’s comments should also serve as a warning to our policymakers of the demands some of our friends may make of us in future as geopolitical turbulence increases.

For instance, today, Washington has issues with CPEC and the Iran pipeline; tomorrow it could let its displeasure be known regarding our relations with Moscow or other American foes.

Pakistan should be ready to face such criticism, and take decisions that are in the national interest.

Pakistan values its ties with the US and other Western states. But this does not mean relations with other states/ blocs should be held hostage to the whims of its Western partners.

However, it is also true that Pakistan can only take truly independent decisions when it does not have to depend on others to keep its economy afloat.

India and China can ignore US strictures about not trading with Russia because of their economic heft. Pakistan must heal itself if it wants to achieve true sovereignty.

Courtesy: Dawn

United States has ruined Haiti and Honduras

Haiti and Honduras have made headlines in the last few weeks. Honduras’ former president, Juan Orlando Hernández, was just convicted in a US court of drug trafficking. He faces life in prison. Haiti is a nation without a government, as armed groups have united against the US-backed, unelected Prime Minister installed after the assassination of their president in 2021.

US intervention in Haiti, Honduras and other countries is one of the principal drivers of people seeking asylum in the United States, as they flee violence, poverty and persecution at home. This point is almost never mentioned in the US press. To understand and ultimately solve the immigration crisis, Americans need to understand what their government has long done in their name, with their tax dollars–arming and propping up brutal regimes abroad.

In both cases, what is missing from mainstream news coverage is the role of US intervention that brought them to this point. “The crisis in Haiti is a crisis of imperialism,” University of British Columbia Professor Jemima Pierre, a Haitian American scholar, explained on the Democracy Now! news hour. 

In her NACLA Report article headlined, Haiti as Empire’s Laboratory, she describes her home country as the site of the longest and most brutal neocolonial experiment in the modern world.

Haiti was the world’s first Black republic, founded in 1804 following a slave revolt. France demanded Haiti pay reparations, for the loss of slave labor when Haiti’s enslaved people freed themselves. For more than a century, Haiti’s debt payments to France, then later to the US, hobbled its economy.

The United States refused to recognize Haiti for decades, until 1862, fearful that the example of a slave uprising would inspire the same in the US.

In 1915, the US invaded Haiti, occupying it until 1934. The US also backed the brutal Duvalier dictatorships from 1957 to 1986. Jean-Bertand Aristide became Haiti’s first democratically-elected president in 1991, only to be ousted in a violent coup eight months later. The coup was supported by President George W. Bush and later by President Bill Clinton.

Public pressure forced Clinton to allow Aristide’s return in 1994, to finish his presidential term in 1996. Aristide was reelected in 2001.

“In 2004…the US, France and Canada got together and backed a coup d’état against the country’s first democratically elected president, Jean-Bertrand Aristide,” Jemima Pierre continued. “The US Marines… put him on a plane with his security officials, his wife and aide, and flew them to the Central African Republic.”

Democracy Now! traveled to C.A.R. in 2004 covering a delegation led by Transafrica founder Randall Robinson and US Congress member Maxine Waters who defied US policy and escorted the Aristides back to the Western Hemisphere. Aristide confirmed to Democracy Now! then that he had been ousted in a coup d’état backed by the United States. Aristide then went to live in exile in South Africa for the next seven years. In response to allegations that gangs are currently controlling Haiti, Professor Pierre said, “The so-called gang violence is actually not the main problem in Haiti. The main problem in Haiti is the constant interference of the international community, and the international community here is, very explicitly, the US, France and Canada.”

The Biden administration is reportedly now considering the transfer of Haitian asylum seekers to the controversial US Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba – a repeat of some of the worst US policies in its long history of exploitation of Haitians. Honduras, meanwhile, currently has a democratically elected president, Xiomara Castro. Her husband, Manuel “Mel” Zelaya, was elected president in 2006, then ousted in a US-backed coup in 2009. In the following years, Honduras descended into a narco-state, forcing hundreds of thousands to flee violence, seeking asylum in the United States and elsewhere.

In 2013, Juan Orlando Hernández was elected president amidst allegations of campaign finance violations, then again in 2017 in an election widely considered fraudulent.

Shortly thereafter, his brother Juan Antonio Hernández was arrested in Miami for drug trafficking. Then, following Xiomara Castro’s election, Juan Orlando Hernández himself was arrested and extradited to the US for cocaine trafficking. On March 8th, he was convicted in US federal court, and is currently awaiting sentencing.“

The evidence was chilling,” history professor Dana Frank, who was in the courtroom, said on Democracy Now! “This litany of assassinations of prosecutors, assassinations of journalists, corruption of the police, the military, politicians, the president, his brother, you name it. And it was like the curtain was drawn back, and you could see the day-to-day workings of this tremendous violent, corrupt mechanism that was the Juan Orlando Hernández administration…this was what happened after the 2009 coup that opened the door for the destruction of the rule of law in Honduras.”

Courtesy: Information Clearing House

Growing number of countries ready to recognize Palestine

The leaders of Spain, Ireland, Slovenia and Malta have announced they stand ready to recognize the State of Palestine as the only way to achieve peace and security in the war-ridden region.

The four leaders gathered on the margins of a summit in Brussels on Friday to discuss their readiness to recognize Palestine, adding they stand ready to do so when it can make a positive contribution and the circumstances are right.

“We are agreed that the only way to achieve lasting peace and stability in the region is through implementation of a two-state solution, with Israeli and Palestinian States living side-by-side, in peace and security,” a joint statement by the four heads of government reads.

Speaking after the summit, Slovenian Prime Minister Robert Golob said he believed a lot could be done in the next week to strengthen political backing for a Palestinian state in the United Nations. Golob added he was sure that the moment when conditions for establishing a new government in Palestine will be ripe could be a few weeks, maybe a month away.

Nine of the EU’s 27 member states currently recognize Palestinians’ right to a state according to the so-called 1967 borders, which includes the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem.

Malta, along with eastern states such as Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Romania and Slovakia, have recognized the Palestinians’ right to statehood since 1988. In 2014, Sweden became the first member state to unilaterally recognise Palestinians’ right to statehood while a member of the bloc.

The Slovenian premier confirmed a representative also attended the meeting on behalf of the Belgian government, seen as another staunch supporter of Palestinians’ fight for statehood.

Belgium currently holds the 6-month rotating Presidency of the Council of the EU, responsible for overseeing its work and therefore likely restricted from signing such declarations.

Although the European Union supports the two-state solution – which would deliver statehood for Palestinians – and is the single biggest donor of aid to Palestinians, it has not yet unanimously backed the recognition of a Palestinian state.

“The debate on the recognition of Palestine was not on the table,” European Council President Charles Michel explained on Friday.

“But I will share with you what I think about it. I think that if the idea is to start a kind of process so it’s possible to take into account steps that could be made on both sides – by the Palestinian Authority, for instance, and by Israel – then it could be a useful process.”

Since the outbreak of the war in Gaza, both Ireland and Spain have repeatedly expressed readiness to recognize Palestine, and spearheaded efforts to toughen the EU’s stance on Israel in response to the excessive loss of life in Gaza.

In a breakthrough on Thursday, the EU’s 27 leaders unanimously called for a ceasefire in Gaza for the first time since the outbreak of the war between Israel and Hamas.

Last November, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez vowed that his newly formed government would make the recognition of Palestinian statehood its main priority in terms of foreign policy.

Speaking after the Brussels summit on Friday, Sánchez suggested to reporters that Spain preferred to move in lockstep with other EU countries rather than recognizing a Palestinian state unilaterally, an idea it has flirted with in the past.

“We want to take this step united. It’s a decisive step in order to lay the foundations of a lasting peace,” he said, adding that the EU should carefully calibrate the right moment to take the step.

Sánchez also suggested that the fact the four leaders represented all sides of the political spectrum – with Spain and Malta governed by centre-left parties, Slovenia by a Liberal party, and Ireland by a centre-right party – showed there was broad political consensus that the recognition of Palestine is necessary for any future peace process.

In February, Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar also confirmed a group of member states were in talks to formally recognize Palestine to enable a more equal negotiation to happen when the war raging in Gaza comes to an end.