Category Archives: US Foreign Policy

Arab Revolutions, Syria, Turkey, US Foreign Policy

Syrian Civil War: Turkish Delight or Turkish Dilemma?………..

   

    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter                
   
                       Neck of the woods

“Everything I do seems to make me think of you.
Why I dream of you every night,
Why I seem to like you,
I will never know.
All I really know is that you are a bit strange at times.
Other times you are nice.
You are my turkish delight……..” Turkish Delight (Linger City)

“When the Bush administration sought permission to transit its Iraq invasion troops through Turkish territory in early 2003, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Ankara’s soon-to-be installed prime minister and his Justice and Development party (AKP) bluntly refused. Their bold defiance of America’s will won plaudits around the Arab world, not least from Syria……….. with the prospect of a bilateral or regional conflict inching closer following Syria’s shooting down of a Turkish military plane, Erdogan has swiftly changed his tune. Unwilling to take on Assad by himself, Erdogan turned to the US and Nato for support this week. So much for Turkey’s much discussed “strategic realignment”…….. But Erdogan’s vow to target Syrian military formations should they approach their shared border, support opposition forces “at any cost”, and do all he can to bring down the Assad dynasty, barely disguises the weakness of Turkey’s position. Ankara’s twin priorities are both domestic in nature: modernisation and economic growth. Turkey does not want, and cannot afford, a war along its southern border that would jeopardise these aims, further destabilise the Kurdish regions, and seriously compromise its broader regional interests……………”


Whatever happens in Syria now, the Kurds are winners. The Kurds have already won concessions from both the repressive chauvinistic Baathist regime and from the ‘opposition’. The Baath has been forced to recognize the long-denied Kurdish basic rights: both Iraqi and Syrian branches of the Baath Party have been historically chauvinistic, probably influenced by the Nazism and Fascism of Europe where Aflaq and Bitar studied. The opposition has chosen a Kurd as the new head of the Syrian National Council.  He is now the most prominent Kurd since Khaled Bikdash led the Communist Party, but this does not disprove that he is a figurehead. A Kurd is much more reassuring to the outside world and to Syria’s worried minorities than some wild Salafi or suspected Muslim brother.

A Kurd is also problematic for Turkey. The Turks prefer calling their own Kurds “Mountain Turks”. Cute, but not convincing, least of all for the Kurds. They also restricted the use of the Kurdish language in education (and in official media). The Turks have long faced a rebellion in their Kurdish region, and their rapprochement with the Iraqi Kurds will not solve that: the solution has to be inside Turkey.


Cheers
mhg
[email protected]

Arab Revolutions, Syria, US Foreign Policy

Fate of the Arabs: Former Masters and Joe Lieberman as Liberators …….

    

    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter                
   
                       Neck of the woods
“Is it the fate of Arabs to keep getting liberated by their former masters?” Nobody else

“The Guardian witnessed the transfer of weapons in early June near the Turkish frontier. Five men dressed in the style of Gulf Arabs arrived in a police station in the border village of Altima in Syria and finalised a transfer from the Turkish town of Reyhanli of around 50 boxes of rifles and ammunition, as well as a large shipment of medicines. The men were treated with deference by local FSA leaders and were carrying large bundles of cash. They also received two prisoners held by rebels, who were allegedly members of the pro-regime militia, the Shabiha. The influx of weapons has reinvigorated the insurrection in northern Syria, which less than six weeks ago was on the verge of being crushed. The move to pay the guerrilla forces’ salaries is seen as a chance to capitalise on the sense of renewed confidence, as well as provide a strong incentive for soldiers and officers to defect. The value of the Syrian pound has fallen sharply in value since the anti-regime revolt started 16 months ago, leading to a dramatic fall in purchasing power. The plan centres on paying the FSA in either US dollars or euros, meaning their salaries would be restored to their pre-revolution levels, or possibly increased. The US senator Joe Lieberman, who is actively supporting the Syrian opposition, discussed the issue of FSA salaries during a recent trip to Lebanon and Saudi Arabia…………..”

Qatari money is buying chunks of France England already. It may soon own a chunk of the “new” Egypt, (including Islamic shaikhs, generals, and politicians) the chunk that is not owned by the al-Saud princes. Qatari and Saudi money are certainly aiming at buying Syria, with a down-payment paid now to the Free Syrian Army until the Baathist al-Assad regime falls. Once the regime falls, Qatari money and Saudi money will be fighting it out for the soul of the “new” Syria as well. Neither of them will win.
Which brings me to Joe Lieberman. Joe has two major issues that are close to his heart. The first one is the interests of the giant insurance corporations who contributed money to his past campaigns and are certain to offer him a lucrative salary when his term expires next year. The second one is the interests of Israel, as he perceives them. Joe doesn’t care about the Syrian people, any more than he cares about the Iranian or Saudi or Egyptian peoples. In fact, Joe probably doesn’t give a fig about any of these people. The main Middle East variable, the only “dependent variable” or “target variable” in the regional equation is Israel. In fairness to Joe Lieberman: do you think he is any different from many Arab leaders in not giving a fig about the Arab peoples?
Is it the fate of some Arabs to keep getting liberated by their former masters? By the West and now Turkey?
Cheers
mhg
[email protected]

Hezbollah, Lebanon, Middle East, U.S. Politics, US Foreign Policy

New Band in Middle East Town? Romney’s Warmongers……

    

    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter                
   
                       Neck of the woods
“Rick Perry labeled the Turkish government “Islamic terrorists.” Newt Gingrich referred to Palestinians as “invented” people. Herman Cain called Uzbekistan “Ubeki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan” and memorably blanked when asked what he thought of NATO’s incursion into Libya. Michele Bachmann pledged to close the US embassy in Iran, which hasn’t existed since 1980. Rick Santorum gave a major foreign policy speech at a Jelly Belly factory in California…………. Few advisers personify the pugnacity of Romney’s foreign policy team better than Bolton. He has been a steadfast opponent of international organizations and treaties and seems never to have met a war he didn’t like. “John’s wisdom, clarity and courage are qualities that should typify our foreign policy,” Romney responded……….”

President Obama started in office being generally well-liked by Arabs and Muslim. He has come along way: now he is not liked much in the Arab and Muslim worlds. He is considered no more than any other recent US President, probably less because he is waging more wars in the Middle East than any other American president.
I have no doubt that Willard (Mitt) Romney will immediately become the most-hated (by Arabs and Muslims) US president in history. He is already setting himself up, if elected, to expand America’s wars in the Middle East to Iran and Syria and possibly a few other places. John Bolton is such an extremist that even a Republican-controlled Senate refused to confirm him as UN ambassador when Bush nominated him. He was appointed at recess for one year only. He will no doubt be back with Romney, either as deputy at State or Defense or at National Security or as UN ambassador. Bolton assiduously evaded serving in the Vietnam war, a war he verbally supported. Sort of like Cheney and Bush and many other rightist ‘war lovers from a safe distance‘.

The Romney Middle East and Arab policy looks pretty bad when we know his advisers who are mostly neoconservatives. The only native Middle Eastern among them is a veteran of the Lebanese right-wing militia the ‘Lebanese Forces‘ (LF) which were implicated in massacres like those at the Sabra and Shatila Palestinian refugee camps. (Actually the LF militia committed the rapes and massacre, with the dead estimated at between 1,000-3,000 victims, while Israeli forces kept a lookout outside). His name is Walid Phares. This does not bode well especially for a Romney policy toward Lebanon and Syria. It does not bode well for US relations with a majority of the Lebanese people who, like it or not, support Hezbollah and its allies (they won 54% of the votes during the last Lebanese elections). It does not bode well for relations with the plurality of Lebanese who are the political base of Hezbollah.

No matter who wins next November, he will become the least popular American president in history as far as Arabs and Muslims are concerned. I am talking the people not the princes and potentates who no doubt prefer Romney but can learn to continue loving Obama.

Cheers
mhg
[email protected]

U.S. Politics, US Foreign Policy

Romney Promises Policies ‘Opposite’ Of Obama, Screwing Up the Economy…

    

    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter                
   
                       Neck of the woods

This past weekend, Mitt Romney vowed that he would look at what President Obama has done regarding Israel and “do the opposite.” What do you think? ……” 

Some American voters responded that: “I can only assume what Romney means is that he’s going to cut off aid to Israel, support the Palestinians, and make out with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad…..…. this style of rhetoric could really take the guesswork out of Romney’s positions on everything…….”

This might be problematic for Romney if he applies it to economic policy (especially before he gets elected). Obama always says he wants to create more jobs for Americans. Ergo: Romney has to say he will strive to lose more American jobs (just like Bush and Cheney did). Hopefully if he is elected Romney will abandon this policy since it will screw up the U.S. economy in a way that only Republicans have been able to do so far and get away with it.
Cheers
mhg
[email protected]

Iran, Israel, nuclear wepoans, US Foreign Policy, War on Iran

Netanyahu Raises Chutzpah to a New Level: Hiroshima Mon Amour…….

 

    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter 

“They all said it would end the war,
And we thanked Christ for the bomb,
And the priests and witches all agreed,
They should die to keep them free.
The fireball that shamed the sun,
Burning the shadows on the ground,
As the rain falls to dry the land,
Leaving the desert for the thirsty man.

Hiroshima Mon Amour………………”  Alcatrazz

  
“Netanyahu: Iran must commit to halt all enrichment in upcoming nuclear talks. In unusual move, PM invites Barak, Lieberman and newcomer Mofaz to join meeting with EU foreign policy chief Ashton, in which he accused Iran of playing for time and said world powers must demand that Iran take tangible steps toward halting uranium enrichment……….. On Wednesday afternoon, the prime minister met with European Union Foreign Affairs Chief Catherine Ashton, who arrived in Israel to brief Netanyahu on the preparations for the second round of nuclear talks with Iran………….”

It would be funny if it weren’t so outrageous. Here is the leader of a small Middle East country, one that has built many nuclear bombs and never joined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and it is annexing occupied lands against international law. And he is “demanding” that Iran stop all uranium enrichment. He should be the last person, his government the last government that would talk about nuclear threats and enrichment and hiding and deception. Demanding: and European leaders actually listen to this charlatan and hustler! I can understand how they would worship him in the U.S. Congress: selling snake oil in some constituencies is an honorable old tradition that goes back to the Frontier days.
Now he is trying to set the agenda for the Baghdad meeting, perhaps hoping to provoke an Iranian withdrawal. That would apply more pressure on the White House in this year of Our Lord of Elections.
Cheers
mhg


[email protected]

Iran, OPEC, Sanctions, US Foreign Policy, War on Iran

Plan B? Western Sanctions Tighten, Iran Launches Huge New Oil Tankers……..

    

    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter   
 



“Iran has procured a new oil tanker with a capacity of 2.2 million barrels, one of the world’s largest. The tanker, which is valued at around $300 million, will join the Iranian fleet within the next few days. The oil tanker is a ‘floating storage and unload vessel’, said Managing Director of Iranian Offshore Oil Company Mahmoud Zirakchianzadeh. The National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC), Iran’s oil shipping operator, is expanding its tanker fleet with the first of 12 supertankers to be delivered from China in May, fortuitous timing for the OPEC member as Western sanctions force Tehran to rely more on its ships to export oil, Reuters reported. The new tankers, each capable of carrying 2 million barrels of crude, add much-needed capacity to NITC’s fleet at a time when the number of maritime firms willing to transport Iranian crude has dwindled significantly amid European sanctions. The EU will prohibit European insurers and reinsurers from indemnifying tankers carrying Iranian crude oil anywhere in the world from July, threatening to curtail shipments and raise costs for major buyers like China, India, Japan and South Korea. The NITC managing director announced in December 2011 that 21 new tankers will be added to the national fleet by the end of 2013…………”


Either the Iranians are optimistic about an end to Western sanctions soon or they have one hell of a Plan B. Since I know for certain that Western sanctions will not be lifted or even eased this year, then there must be a Plan B.
Cheers
mhg


[email protected]

Iran, Persian Gulf, Persian-American Gulf, UAE, US Foreign Policy

Strait of Hormuz: a Visit to an Island for Lease, Liberation of Iran……

    

    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter     



“Tehran on Monday warned Arab states in the Gulf that things could become “very complicated” if they do not act cautiously over a simmering islands dispute between Iran and the United Arab Emirates. Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi made the declaration to Iran’s ISNA news agency on the eve of talks in Doha between the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states over three tiny islands in the Gulf and claimed by both Iran and the UAE. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad infuriated the UAE by visiting one of them, Abu Musa, on April 11 and asserting in a speech that historical records proved “the Persian Gulf is Persian,” as state media called his trip a purely “domestic issue.”…………”


“Sheikh Abdullah said the islands were in a “pivotal area”, crucial to the passage of oil. The UAE wants to find a solution to the conflict, but Iran’s behaviour “might bring serious complications and implications”, he said. “We have to have a clear agenda, a deadline for these negotiations.” If necessary the parties should seek international arbitration or go to the International Court of Justice, Sheikh Abdullah said. “But we cannot keep this matter going on for ever.” The Foreign Minister added: “It is with regret that a Muslim and neighbour country with civilisation and traditions behaves in such a manner. It is supposed to behave rationally, not to project its internal concerns abroad. In this case the consequences can be dangerous.”………”

I had thought there was an old agreement between Iran and one of the Emirates (Sharjah), allegedly brokered by Britain which had controlled the island, to share the oil and gas around Abu Moussa. I need to research this, but I thought there was some agreement regulating supervision as well (I can be wrong, but I doubt it).
 
More Seriously: There are rumors swirling around me that Abu Dhabi wants to lease at least one of the islands to a foreign power as a military naval base. The rumors have it that since the Canadians pulled out of their base, the UAE has had major foreign bases for only the United States, Britain, and France. In addition to some possible facilities to smaller powers like Bosnia and Monaco and the Maldives. Apparently the rulers of Abu Dhabi feel that they need more foreign bases (on the assumption that “the more the merrier“). The rumor says they wish to release an island to the Sultan of Bruni to use as a naval base to protect the Strait of Hormuz from Iranian incursions. The idea is that Western bases and Bruni bases will protect the Gulf from such ‘external’ threats as Iran poses. Bruni-ian and Western soldiers are known to be always eager to defend their national territorial waters in the Persian-American Gulf against outside incursions from faraway foreign places like Iran.
Another rumor, quickly discounted by yours truly, is that the potentates plan to settle their new foreign mercenary brigade formed by Blackwater executives from among Colombians gang veterans, disgruntled white South Africans, rare teetotaler Australians, Mexican drug cartel graduates, and other such Arab nationalists.
The Iranians, remembering Iraq in 2003, may worry that the mercenaries and/or Bruni forces will use the island as a base for launching an invasion of their country with the intention of liberating it. Stay tuned.
I still don’t know wtf Ahmadinejad was doing visiting that island at this time. It is not like he is running for office again; he can’t. Maybe he knows.
Cheers
mhg


[email protected]

Iran, nuclear Iran, U.S. Congress, U.S. Politics, United Nations International Organizations, US Foreign Policy, War on Iran

Obama Painted into a Corner on Iran: Why Hillary Clinton Should Leave State…..

    

    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter   
 



“L’Iran a appelé lundi les Occidentaux à envisager la levée des sanctions s’ils veulent parvenir à une solution de la crise liée à son programme nucléaire controversé, et laissé entendre qu’il pourrait discuter du niveau d’enrichissement de son uranium. «Si l’Occident veut construire (un climat de) confiance, il devrait commencer par les sanctions, car cela peut aider à accélérer les discussions pour parvenir à une solution», a déclaré le chef de la diplomatie iranienne Ali Akbar Salehi à l’agence de presse ISNA………..”

That is the dilemma of the Iran negotiations with P5+1. Even if the Iranians agree not to enrich uranium to the 20% level, the Western regimes are in no position to lift the sanctions. Provided they are really willing to provide the isotopes needed for research. The Obama administration has painted itself into a corner, where it cannot lift the sanctions in exchange for Iranian concessions. In this political year, the sanctions have been tightened more than ever before, mainly for domestic US political reasons, pressure by the Republican right and AIPAC and the likes of Joe Lieberman. There is no way Obama can lift any sanctions this year; he certainly can’t get the Congress to go along. There is also no way the Iranian will agree to yield on the enrichment issue without a lifting of the Western blockade. That would be tantamount to surrender.
In their eagerness to accommodate the American and Israeli right-wing, Obama and Hillary Clinton have made sure that there can be no deal this year. Not a very good job by the Clinton State Department. If Obama is reelected, he really should look for another secretary of state: the current one has not done a good job.
Cheers
mhg


[email protected]

Iran, Iraq, Middle East Nuclear, United Nations International Organizations, US Foreign Policy

Appointment in Baghdad: Percentages of U-235, Netanyahu the Most Predictable………..

    

    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter   
 




“The secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Saeed Jalili, has said that Tehran does not intend to stop producing uranium enriched to a purity level of 20 percent. Jalili, who is Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator, made the remarks during a press conference in Istanbul on Saturday after two rounds of talks between representatives of Iran and the 5+1 group (the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China, and Germany), which ended a 15-month hiatus in talks. EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton represented the 5+1 group in the nuclear negotiations and Jalili headed the Iranian delegation………”

“MP Alaeddin Boroujerdi has said that the topic of lifting economic sanctions against Iran will be discussed during the next round of talks between Tehran and the major world powers, which is scheduled to be held in Baghdad on May 23. He also said that the issue of uranium enrichment is highly important to the Islamic Republic, adding that Iran has the right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes under the supervision of the International
Atomic Energy Agency…………”

Interesting take, or maybe spin, by Iranian officials, through a semi-official news agency. Enrichment of uranium to 20% (i.e. 20% weight fraction of U-235) is usually needed for medical isotopes, while enrichment to 5% is needed for power generation. Neither is sufficient for developing a nuclear weapons.
The Iranian official seems certain they will not give up on 20% enrichment needed for medical isotopes. They also seem certain there will be meeting in Baghdad next month. The two don’t seem compatible in view of previously-expressed official American opinion. Maybe the Iranians are also bluffing. We’ll have to wait the U.S. State Department comments this week, perhaps later today. Both sides seemed subdued this weekend, except for Netanyahu who is probably the most predictable politicians in the world. Netanyahu mouthed off his usual mantra, biding his time as he awaits the inauguration of Mitt Godot Romney.
(FYI: I am not a nuclear physicist, not anymore, or maybe not yet)
Cheers
mhg


[email protected]

Cuba, Latin America, U.S. Politics, US Foreign Policy

Failed Cartagena Summit: Blame Florida, Blame Canada…….

    

    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter   
 




“A summit of nearly 30 Western Hemisphere leaders has ended without a joint declaration due to divisions over Cuba and Argentine claims to the Falkland Islands. “There is no declaration because there is no consensus,” said Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos as the summit’s closing news conference. Washington, backed by Canada, stood fast against widespread demands to include in the meeting’s final declaration language specifying that Cuba be included in future hemispheric summits. They had also balked at backing Argentina’s claims to the British-held Falkland Islands. “All the countries here in Latin American and the Caribbean want Cuba to be present. But the United States won’t accept,” President Evo Morales of Bolivia told reporters late Saturday. “It’s like a dictatorship.”……..”


So, no more Summits of the Americas unless ALL nations of the Americas are allowed to attend. Canada’s right-wing government and the United States’ allegedly communist socialist government blocked any consensus on Cuba (and perhaps Florida)and the Malvinas (Falklands). At least until after the 2012 elections. This time Canada got the Malvinas (Falklands) in exchange for Cuba (and perhaps Florida), next time: who knows.
Cheers
mhg


[email protected]