The Yemeni Army Inside Houthi Territories: New Age Islam's Selection, 28 January 2017
New
Age Islam Edit Bureau
28 January 2017
• The Yemeni Army Inside Houthi Territories
By Abdulrahman Al-Rashed
• What Does Being Virtuous Mean?
By Gulse Birsel
• Astana Talks: Counting Iran’s Gains And Losses
By Dr. Majid Rafizadeh
• The US Embassy's Move To Jerusalem Won't Happen Soon
By Daoud Kuttab
• US Unlikely To Withdraw From World Stage
By Fahad Nazer
• Russia, Iran Face Alliance Dilemma
By Sinem Cengz
• My Advice To The New US President
By Khalaf Ahmad Al-Habtoor
Compiled By New Age Islam Edit Bureau
-----
The Yemeni Army Inside Houthi Territories
By Abdulrahman al-Rashed
27 January 2017
Supported by the Saudi- coalition forces, the Yemeni army surprised everyone by entering and expanding in Saada, the land and province that are considered under the Houthi control.
This is a very important development. Yemen’s Vice President, Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar, has even travelled to Saada, which confirms that the battle is very important and symbolic. A year and a half ago, the militias considered that General Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar has left Yemen on a one-way ticket, announcing the collapse of the Republic.
However, the many developments related to the military situation on the ground in Yemen are simultaneous and important; the coalition forces and the Yemeni legitimate forces are scoring victories on various fronts. According to the recent reports, Mocha was liberated in the west of the country with an air and sea support, enabling it to regain control of Bab al-Mandab.
These reports mentioned a significant progress in the city of Taiz, where battles are taking place from one neighbourhood to another. The same applies to Bayda province. The Yemeni army is now in control of most of the east coast, which was a gateway to smuggle weapons coming to the militias from Iran.
The militias faced difficulties in penetrating through the naval blockade, after the intensified activity of the naval forces that is stopping ships and boats smuggling weapons. These simultaneous victories are very important on the political level as they encourage major powers that are still reluctant about supporting the legitimate powers. Yemen will be a test for the policies of the newly elected US president, Donald Trump, in the face of Iran.
On the political level, we are witnessing quick actions; UN envoy returned to propose a long-term truce and negotiations for a peaceful solution. The Houthi militias and former President Ali Saleh forces wanted to manoeuvre and hence did not accept yet the international peace initiative.
All the President’s Powers
Houthis insist on transferring all of the president’s powers to his deputy, and not just a part of them. This will weaken and disrupt the initiative, which will make them lose the opportunity to participate in the government.
Their intransigent attitude is probably tutored by Iran, which has a primary role in igniting the war and supporting all the militant activities targeted at the military, diplomatic and propaganda levels. The Iranians insist on their participation in the negotiations, in order to sell their allies in Yemen within the regional barter basket.
Since the legitimate government recovered nearly 80 percent of the lands and the militias’ choices got limited, they still have a narrowed opportunity to take advantage of a peaceful solution to end the war through political reconciliation and partnership. This opportunity will not remain available once the military takeover becomes imminent.
The losses suffered by the militias affected their internal relations, where most of their troops located now in the capital Sanaa, have now different opinions regarding the management of their government, including their slogan that Houthis borrowed from the Iranian militias: “Death to America, Death to Israel”.
Saleh’s militias had another opinion and chose a different slogan that is as distrustful as the Houthis’: “One Yemen and one people”, but all they had done was to divide the country.
Sanaa will be the last battle, and I am not saying the decisive one because the draft project of the militias has failed when they lost the majority of the cities and were unable to manage the alternative government and transfer the last governmental institutions, i.e. the central bank, to Aden. Aden had become the capital upon the transition of President Hadi’s government after returning from exile in Saudi Arabia.
Recent military gains have led to significant breakthroughs in the war in Yemen that has been ongoing for a year and a half, which indicates that this conflict will be shorter than others, when compared with those of the region. The conflicts in Syria and Libya have lasted for 5 years now, and the struggle in Afghanistan has been going on for 15 years now.
Yemeni people have suffered a lot due to the coup, the destruction of the political regime, the breakdown of legitimate authority, and the militias seizing the resources of the state and the entire country.
----
Abdulrahman al-Rashed is the former General Manager of Al Arabiya News Channel. A veteran and internationally acclaimed journalist, he is a former editor-in-chief of the London-based leading Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat, where he still regularly writes a political column. He has also served as the editor of Asharq al-Awsat’s sister publication, al-Majalla. Throughout his career, Rashed has interviewed several world leaders, with his articles garnering worldwide recognition, and he has successfully led Al Arabiya to the highly regarded, thriving and influential position it is in today.
Source: english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2017/01/27/The-Yemeni-army-inside-Houthi-territories.html
----
What Does Being Virtuous Mean?
By Gulse Birsel
January/28/2017
What are we most feeling the absence of in Turkey?
Dollars? Stability? Law? A good education?
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of the Turkish Republic, once delivered a speech to Ismet Inönü, Turkey’s second president, addressing the situation in a country torn apart by war and questioning what should be done.
This speech should be included in the modern history section of the national curriculum and taught to children over and over again.
There is a particularly important sentence in the speech on poverty, economic struggles, the lack of education and educated human resources. “To make the Republic live, we need to prepare its human resources and reinforce its moral front,” Atatürk says.
The country had just emerged from war. Poverty and unemployment was at its peak. Illiteracy was everywhere. There were people with nothing to lose who got into criminal activity just to survive. The final days of the empire had witnessed fraud, corruption and bribery.
Atatürk wanted the human resources of the new republic to be honest and virtuous so the system could work and the country could develop.
Virtue is one of Turkey’s current shortcomings, though not to the degree it was in the early days of the republic.
Unlike many who believe otherwise, being virtuous is not about avoiding alcohol and dressing “modestly.” These are individual freedoms and preferences that have nothing to do with being virtuous.
Virtue and morality are universal. Country and religion make no difference.
Virtue and morality are about conscience, keeping your word, being fair. A virtuous person does not kick a woman in a bus. A person with morality does not dupe people as a fake police officer or soldier. They do not beat their wife. They do not demonize rivals with smear campaigns.
They do not lie or recount something they have done without really believing it.
The people who do these things may not be violating the law, but in my eyes they are disgraceful people.
We keep talking about education, but what purpose does it serve if we forget the simplest moral principles we learn in kindergarten? If we are pursuing a new constitution, a new political system, a new this or that, then we need to strengthen our moral front with universal values.
Freedom’ On Talk Shows
We hear it in the TV debates. One guest dares to start talking about freedoms and another guest starts to object.
“There is not much freedom left in the world either,” they say.
“Other countries are not as free as they used to be,” they say.
“Yes but in our days even the most advanced countries restrict freedoms,” they say.
Brothers! Sisters! Freedom is not a fashion item like a short skirt. It can never be old-fashioned. It is always in fashion!
Freedom is a fundamental need, like water and bread. When you talk about something that is no longer fashionable or no longer relevant you are not talking about freedom.
You could not even exist without freedom. You could not even talk like that if it was not for freedom. So pray that, in your own words, freedoms always remain fashionable.
Source: hurriyetdailynews.com/what-does-being-virtuous-mean.aspx?pageID=449&nID=109072&NewsCatID=527
----
Astana Talks: Counting Iran’s Gains And Losses
By Dr. Majid Rafizadeh
27 January 2017
Media and officials in Iran have hailed the two days of talks in Astana, capital of Kazakhstan, between the Islamic Republic, Russia, and Turkey over the Syrian civil war.
The talks were mostly collection of words rather than actions. However, Iran’s state mouthpieces projected the meetings as a success and emphasized Iran’s positive role in nearly six years of the Syrian civil war. Iran’s Press TV wrote that Bashar Ja’afari “brushed aside Syrian opposition’s anger about Iran’s presence at the talks, praising Tehran for its positive role in Syria”.
The distinction between Astana talks and the Geneva process, led by the United Nations and the US, was the exclusiveness of the Astana talks that included a cherry-picked number of parties. The Iranian government and its staunchest ally, Bashar al-Assad, scored a victory, and Tehran had more to gain than to lose from the Astana talks.
Iran Showcases Its Power and Legitimacy
First of all, the Astana talks were a critical platform for Iranian leaders to showcase their power, increasing influence and predominant role in Syria’s political affairs, and further advance their regional hegemonic ambitions.
Secondly, Iranian leaders achieved their main objective of giving legitimacy to Bashar al-Assad and Tehran. From the perspective of Iranian leaders, the fact that opposition groups and heads of states sat on the same table with the Syrian government officials and Iranian officials, grants Assad’s forces and Iran more legitimacy. It also recognizes Assad’s delegate as official representatives.
Ali Akbar Velayati, a senior adviser to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and head of the Expediency Council’s Center of Strategic Research, emphasized this issue in his remarks to reporters in Tehran.
“The Astana meeting showed that all sides, including Turkey and those groups, which follow this country and even countries not present there (in Astana), have acknowledged the Syrian government’s legitimacy either directly or indirectly,” Velayati pointed out.
Third, Iran has used the talks to firm up its “diplomatic” role at a global stage in resolving the Syrian conflict. But, Iran attempted to conceal its role in the humanitarian tragedies that occurred recently in Aleppo, or its role in other humanitarian catastrophes unfolding on a daily basis in various parts of Syria.
Furthermore, by not inviting the US, European countries, or other regional Arab powers, Tehran is sending a signal that no other players have stakes in what direction the Syrian civil war takes. Iran is stating that Syria is its red line.
Supporting Assad
The meeting ended with a final joint statement, which is mainly a collection of words rather than a plan of action. The Syrian government, Iran, or other parties did not sign the agreement. There were no nuances laid out on what mechanism would be used to enforce the final joint statement regarding Iran’s military role in Syria.
The joint statement is aimed at increasing Assad’s and Iran’s legitimacy. It is also ironic that Iran holds the conviction “that there is no military solution to the Syrian conflict and that it can only be resolved through a political process.”
The Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its proxies have been militarily involved in the Syrian civil war. Since the nuclear agreement, Iran has been publicly acknowledging its military, intelligence, advisory, financial and political assistance to the forces of the Syrian government.
Iran used the Astana talks to justify its military adventurism in Syria by arguing that it is fighting “terrorism”. The Iranian government also attempted to increase the significance of Astana talks by claiming that all sides of the conflicts were presents at the talks. Nevertheless, only handpicked number of opposition groups and state supporters of Bashar al-Assad attended the meeting.
The final joint statement stated that it would “observe and ensure full compliance with the ceasefire, prevent any provocation and determine all modalities”. But, the proposed ceasefire would mainly preserve Iran’s strategic and geopolitical interests.
Iran tends to advocate for a short-term orientated ceasefire after its forces, with the assistance of Assad and pro-government forces, make significant territorial gains through hard power, shelling and bombings. This kind of timely ceasefire allows Iran and its Shia militia forces to consolidate power, reorganize, recruit, and hold on to the gained territories.
A Political Game
Iran is exploiting these talks to increase its leverage and strengthen Assad’s and Tehran’s position in the upcoming Geneva talks. The Astana talks reaffirmed Iran and Russia’s strategic and tactical cooperation in Syria as well.
Even if Russia shows a willingness to accept a political transition to serve its interests in Syria, Iran’s Shiite militias would more likely continue the war to totally ensure the hold on power of the Alawite-dominated state of Assad.
Finally, Iran used a much harder line in the talks in comparison to Russia. The rebels appeared more hopeful about Moscow listening to their grievances.
Iran highlighted the fact that it will not politically compromise, but will use every opportunity to robustly support Assad, strengthen his position, and advance Tehran’s regional ambitions.
----
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh, an Iranian-American political scientist, is president of the International American Council. Harvard-educated, Dr. Rafizadeh serves on the board of Harvard International Review at Harvard University. He is also a member of the Gulf project at Columbia University. Rafizadeh served as a senior fellow at Nonviolence International Organization based in Washington DC. He has been a recipient of several scholarships and fellowship including from Oxford University, Annenberg University, University of California Santa Barbara, and Fulbright Teaching program. He served as ambassador for the National Iranian-American Council based in Washington DC, conducted research at Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and taught at University of California Santa Barbara through Fulbright Teaching Scholarship.
Source: english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2017/01/27/Astana-talks-Counting-Iran-s-gains-and-losses.html
----
The US Embassy's Move to Jerusalem Won't Happen Soon
By Daoud Kuttab
27-01-17
Signs coming from Washington seem to point out that the intended decision to move the United States embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem might not be implemented so quickly. But this should not be a reason for complacency.
In fact, if the embassy is not moved, such a decision might be the outcome of a backroom dealing which may result in a US policy even more biased towards Israel than has been seen from Washington for decades.
While Israelis are very much in favour of obtaining legitimacy for their insistence that the unified Jerusalem is Israel's capital forever, the embassy move is more of a priority for Donald Trump than it is for Israel.
Speaking at a Washington, DC, event last December, Israel's Defence Minister Avigdor Lieberman didn't list the embassy issue as one of Israel's top priorities. Iran, the Palestinian issue, settlements and Syria were listed by him as his country's "focal points."
Unlikely To Be Soon
The fact that the embassy decision wasn't going to made early on in the Trump administration became clear in the public statements emanating from Washington. The White House spokesman Sean Spicer was asked three times about the issue during his first briefing, but he repeatedly answered that "no decision" was made on this issue.
Perhaps the most obvious signal came from the person in line to become the US ambassador to Israel - or as some Israeli settlers said Israel's ambassador to the US - David Friedman, Trump's bankruptcy lawyer who is a pro-settlements American Jew. He has said that he plans to live in Jerusalem regardless of where the embassy will be located.
Statements against the move came from the 70 countries attending the Paris peace conference on January 15 and from Jordan's King Abdullah, who met Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Amman to drive home this message.
A delay by Washington regarding the embassy's move might also be helpful to one of Trump's closest advisers. The job of President Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, who was appointed as a peace envoy earlier this month, would certainly have become more difficult had the newly elected US president made a rash decision on the issue of the very sensitive status of the holy city.
Both Israelis and Palestinians have welcomed - albeit the latter cautiously - Kushner's appointment.
The Issue Is Not Dead
The Jerusalem Embassy Act became law in the US in 1995 (PDF). It calls for the embassy to be moved unless the president feels it could harm US national security.
Continuous Republican and Democratic presidents have taken this route. Former US President Barack Obama signed a six-month waiver early in December 2016, practically denying any change on the issue until next June.
While Palestinians and others may have breathed a sigh of relief, the issue is certainly not dead and will not easily go away.
However, what is most worrisome is that the Israelis are most probably willing to trade off this issue for a yet to be known political advantage. It is very likely that Israel will approve a deal by the Trump administration that could keep the status quo regarding the embassy in return for an even more favourable US position towards Israel.
A sign of such a possibility was evident on the second working day of the Trump administration. When the White House press secretary was asked to comment on the Israeli decision to build new settlements in Jerusalem and other parts of the West Bank, he refused to take a stand.
Israeli media has reported that US-Israeli issues will be addressed during the upcoming summit between Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu in February. No doubt handlers and aides will be planning whatever deals Israel wants before that meeting.
National Unity Needed
Palestinians have very low expectations in regards to the Trump administration, which has not given many positive signals regarding a neutral US position on the Arab-Israeli conflict, despite the claims by Trump at one time that his administration would try to be neutral.
Palestinians must continue to oppose Israeli and US moves that can negatively affect the final outcome of any future talks, but they need to look inwards at the same time.
The decision to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem may have been temporarily delayed, but there is no guarantee that it will not be implemented in the coming months.
To stop the embassy move and any other deals that the Israelis and Americans might come up with, concerted effort must be made to make the Israeli occupiers pay a price for their continued violations of international law and their rejection of binding UN Security Council resolutions such as the latest in December 2016, which demanded halting the settlement activity.
Palestinian national unity must be given the highest priority now, followed by an agreed and practical strategy for accomplishing Palestinian national aspirations.
This unity can then be leveraged to produce Arab and international support that together can help block any Israeli or US efforts to impede the right of Palestinians to determine their future on their land.
Daoud Kuttab, an award-winning Palestinian journalist, is a former Ferris professor of journalism at Princeton University.
Source: aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2017/01/embassy-move-jerusalem-won-happen-170127094051812.html
----
US Unlikely To Withdraw From World Stage
By Fahad Nazer
28 January 2017
It has been a week since Donald Trump was sworn in as the 45th US president. People in the US and abroad listened very carefully to his inaugural address, for it is on that occasion that new presidents enunciate their worldviews and domestic policy agendas most clearly.
Trump said his domestic and foreign decisions would be predicated on policies that put “America first.” However, that should not be construed as an isolationist posture or a slight against international cooperation.
In his first week as president, Trump’s executive orders relating to immigration issues, including the proposed building of a wall along the southern border with Mexico, received inordinate media coverage. Another executive order that withdrew the US from the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) also garnered attention, especially since it was among his first as president.
It is tempting to read these measures as a harbinger of things to come, but there are ample reasons to believe the US will be engaged on the world stage politically and economically. The order to withdraw the US from the TPP was essentially a formality. As the presidential campaign got underway, it became clear early on that both the Republican candidates and their Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton opposed the treaty.
Even former President Barack Obama, who championed it, acknowledged that it had no support in Congress and its chances of being ratified were slim. Trump’s executive order appears more a reaction to a treaty that was widely seen as unfair by both Republicans and Democrats.
Before assuming the presidency, Trump had been known primarily as a businessman who had a talent for developing real-estate in the US and abroad, including Saudi Arabia and across the Middle East. It is hard to fathom that his decades of deal-making with partners in the US and worldwide have not made him a firm believer in the efficacy and benefits of free trade.
The same can be said about Trump’s pick for Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson. Tillerson, who is expected to be confirmed by the US Senate soon, was CEO of the world’s biggest energy company ExxonMobil. He has spoken on the record about the benefits of free trade. His statements make clear that he does not see trade as a zero-sum game, where one party wins and another, by definition, loses.
His many decades of experience as a major player in the oil market, which has always been global in nature, will mean he will likely champion a foreign policy that promotes international trade and cooperation. The concern that the US in general and American workers in particular get a “fair deal” when trade treaties are signed is not at all unreasonable.
Speaking on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland last week, Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir expressed great optimism about working closely with the Trump administration, and the prospect of Saudi-US relations broadening and deepening on several levels, including politically, militarily and economically. Al-Jubeir said he expected the US to be more engaged in the world than it has been in recent years.
Trump has repeatedly said he wants to restore what he considers to be America’s diminished standing in the world. That cannot be done by withdrawing from the world stage. As Al-Jubeir correctly said, when the US is not engaged in the world, it creates a vacuum. There are strong indications that the veteran team of national security and foreign policy advisers that Trump has appointed understand that reality very well.
The international political and economic order — that was created after World War II to prevent a slide into yet another devastating world war — has served the US and much of the international community well.
Trade and economic cooperation have increased, and the world, despite some seemingly intractable conflicts, has become generally more stable and peaceful since the establishment of a host of economic and political institutions that encourage international economic cooperation and seek peaceful means to resolve political disputes. There is no reason to believe Trump will abandon that.
-----
Fahad Nazer is an international affairs fellow with the National Council on US-Arab Relations. He is also a consultant to the Saudi Embassy in Washington, but does not represent it or speak on its behalf. His writing has appeared in the New York Times, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, CNN, The Hill and Newsweek, among others.
Source: arabnews.com/node/1045421/columns
-----
Russia, Iran Face Alliance Dilemma
By Sinem Cengz
28 January 2017
Moscow and Tehran have managed to maintain a strategic alliance and close political and military ties, particularly in Syria. Both are supporting Bashar Assad’s regime at all costs, but the relationship is no bed of roses. Russia and Iran have different motivations in the Syrian war and divergent views on the country’s future. These differences have recently started to come to the surface far more, raising questions as to how long the alliance will last.
Their interests first clashed regarding Aleppo. Their divergent policies have become apparent, especially since the cease-fire brokered by Russia and Turkey was undermined by Iran-backed militias that prevented civilians and opposition fighters from leaving the besieged eastern part of the city in December. This was an important sign that the interests of the two allies have started to conflict.
Tehran’s attempts to sabotage the Russian-Turkish peace initiative raised eyebrows in Moscow, which is increasingly uncomfortable with Iranian policy. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s recent statement can be read in this context. He said Syria was “two or three weeks” away from falling to terrorists when Russia intervened in support of Assad, downgrading Tehran’s role in the country. Moscow sent a clear message to Iran regarding future power distribution in Syria. To Russia, Assad is dispensable, but to Iran he is not. For Moscow, a strong Syria as a Middle East ally is a must in order to protect its strategic interests, but for Tehran a weak Syria is desirable so as to easily control the country for its future aims.
Russia’s naval base in Tartus and airbase in Latakia are very important for its long-term Middle East plans, as Syria is a good market for its military exports. Moscow wants to turn its advances on the ground in Syria into diplomatic gains in talks with the West. Therefore, it wants the upper hand in political decision-making, which jeopardizes Iranian interests in Syria and the region.
While Russia approaches the Syrian war from a geostrategic and realist perspective, Iran’s stance is based on sectarian concerns. Syria is the heart of its strategy to create a “Shiite crescent” across the region. Tehran is struggling at all costs to ensure the Syrian regime’s survival, aware that it is a necessary tool to connect with a valuable ally in Lebanon, namely the Shiite group Hezbollah, which is fighting in Syria along with Iran.
The downfall of the Assad regime would be a blow to the Syria-Iran-Hezbollah axis. Tehran would lose a valuable ally in Lebanon, as Hezbollah would face serious problems obtaining vital Iranian military and financial support.
Iran is knowledgeable in playing the games of the Middle East. Because Syria is an important instrument for it to wage its proxy wars in the region, and is a strategic gateway to the Arab world and a crucial link to Hezbollah, Tehran does not hesitate to take steps that could even disturb its ally Russia.
For example, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said ahead of the Astana talks that Tehran was vehemently opposed to the US joining them. This was the second time Iran went against Russia and Turkey, the other two organizers of the talks, which both said Donald Trump’s new US administration should take part.
While Iran is shooting itself in the foot by confronting Russia and Turkey, the relationship between Moscow and Ankara is gradually improving. Both hope to cooperate more effectively with the Trump administration and turn a new page with the US.
With its recent moves, Tehran is not only revealing its disagreements with Russia and Turkey regarding Syria, but signalling a possible dispute with the Trump administration, which consists of pro-Russia and anti-Iran figures. While taking a harsh stance toward Iran, Trump is calling for close ties with Russia. It might be hard to predict his steps, but it seems his administration will become another issue of controversy between Moscow and Tehran.
Russia’s stance proves that it would reset relations with the US at Iran’s expense. Every step taken toward Syria’s future is bringing Russian and Iranian interests face to face. Time will tell how long their alliance will last.
---
Sinem Cengiz is a Turkish political analyst who specializes mainly in Turkey’s relations with the Middle East.
Source: arabnews.com/node/1045416/columns
-----
My Advice to the New US President
By Khalaf Ahmad Al-Habtoor
28 January 2017
Donald Trump the businessman was impressive. Reality star Trump equally so. But I fear the journey he is taking us on as US president and leader of the free world. I am not alone, as evidenced by the many millions of protesters who banded together from Hong Kong to Houston to register their disapproval.
Too late though! The stable door is shut and the horse has bolted. All we can do now is sit back and watch this showman’s greatest performance in the hope that the world as we know it remains intact.
Our planet needs a strong and stable US more than ever during these turbulent times, especially when the fabric of the EU is fraying due to the specter of upcoming elections in France, the Netherlands and Germany, where far-right populist candidates are poised to emulate Trump’s win.
Never before has an incumbent began work with so much enmity ranged against him from a great swathe of the population to the mainstream media, the intelligence community, ethnic minorities and political elites, both Democratic and Republican.
His executive order overturning former President Barack Obama’s halt to two pipelines due to environmental concerns has already re-ignited protests, and his disdain for climate change may see the US reneging on the Paris agreement.
Never before has a US president raised the hackles of America’s closest friends and partners (the EU, NATO and the UN), or ignited such loathing in the capitals of his country’s neighbors and rivals (Mexico and China) at the start of his 100-day honeymoon period. I am all for giving him a chance, but after reviewing his statements on various issues, regretfully I am not optimistic. Does he imagine his selfish “America first” goals will go unanswered?
Mexico has categorically refused to pay for his border wall that is about to be constructed. China has warned there will be no negotiation on the mainstay of the US-China relationship, the “one China” policy. North Korea is believed to be readying a message, the launch of a sophisticated long-range missile. Iran says it has no intention of renegotiating the nuclear deal, and in the event it is torn up it will resume its previous nuclear program.
Meanwhile, relocating the US Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem will cause a violent backlash and end the very peace talks Trump has pledged to successfully broker with the aid of his son-in-law Jared Kushner, who has been sworn in as senior adviser.
EU ministers have met successive times to discuss the impact of a Trump presidency on US-EU ties. Their fears are not misplaced. The new administration has wasted no time in ordering Brussels to choose between its proposed EU army and US funding for NATO. Nations that have relaxed under the US diplomatic and military umbrella, including several in the Middle East, could decide to go it alone and begin developing nuclear deterrents.
Russian President Vladimir Putin, who looks to Trump to lift sanctions, and “Brexit” British Prime Minister Theresa May, eying a speedily-negotiated trade deal with the US, are understandably as keen to shake his hand as he is theirs.
Trump’s family says he values loyalty above all, so we can assume that as long as his two new best friends are willing to play ball, those relationships will endure. Should they stray, however, they will join his list of targets.
What worries me, for example, is that the international community is united in its belief that the 2003 invasion of Iraq was a blunder of catastrophic proportions. Trump now insists he never supported it. Videos prove that is yet another example of “alternative facts.”
During his inaugural speech, he said the US will not seek to impose its way of life on other countries. I believe him. He does not care what happens in the rest of the world, provided it does not impinge on US national interests. Given the mess Obama made poking his nose where it was not wanted, that sounds like welcome news, but is it?
I was recently shocked by a video cataloguing Trump’s various interviews and speeches, including his most recent message to the CIA, during which he said the US should have taken Iraq’s oil in return for its liberation.
He expected Iraq to pay for its own destruction by impoverishing itself. Such statements almost make his predecessors George W. Bush and Obama look like do-gooders by comparison. If taking Iraq’s oil is still his aim, how does he expect to defeat terrorists? The theft of its natural wealth would be akin to a terrorist-producing conveyor belt. His words are guaranteed to make other states shudder.
Likewise, his seeming wish to impoverish Mexico by repatriating millions of undocumented migrants and threatening multinational manufacturers not to create jobs in Mexico at pain of high import tariffs could lead to a desperate human flood that no wall can keep at bay.
Trump portrays himself as a champion for the little guy, the forgotten people. Yet his proposed protectionist trade policies could spark price increases, inflation and trade wars. China must be chuckling over his tearing-up of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP), which took seven years to make, and which Beijing has now been invited to join.
Trump’s America is devoid of all compassion. His executive orders banning refugees from war-torn Middle East countries, targeting “sanctuary cities” refusing to prosecute undocumented migrants, and halting visit visas for nationals from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen will only heighten anti-US sentiment, and be construed as blessing hate speech and xenophobia against American-Muslim communities. It has started. On Jan. 15, a mosque in Seattle was torched.
His rush to dump Obamacare without a suitable replacement could leave millions uninsured. One of his very first executive orders was to roll back Obama’s efforts to reduce mortgage insurance premiums. Trump has also been accused of demonizing food stamps, on which 45 million of America’s poorest — the very people who voted for him — rely.
The US is run on a system of checks and balances. But with a Republican majority in the Supreme Court in the offing, and a Republican-dominated Congress, we can but trust that partisanship will not keep those brakes from being well-oiled.
My advice to Trump is: “You can catch more flies with honey. Reach out to all those you have threatened or offended. Ask them to work with you to make our world better, not just for Americans but for us all. You cannot manage the superpower like a family business.”
At stake are America’s cherished values and its stature as a beacon of hope for the poor and oppressed. If and when the US loses the world’s respect, its leadership role will be rendered defunct for decades to come.
----
Khalaf Ahmad Al-Habtoor is a prominent UAE businessman and public figure. He is renowned for his views on international political affairs, his philanthropic activity and his efforts to promote peace. He has long acted as an unofficial ambassador for his country abroad.
Source: .arabnews.com/node/1045426/columns
URL: https://newageislam.com/middle-east-press/the-yemeni-army-inside-houthi/d/109865