MIDEAST MIRROR 25.10.18, SECTION B (THE ARAB WORLD)
1-Messages of peace and threats
2-To Moscow and Damascus's satisfaction
3-In the people's interest
1- Messages of peace and threats
Bin Salman's defensive plan began with the first line of attack in Turkey. He called Turkish President Erdogan, and according to news reports, he discussed 'joint efforts to expose all aspects of journalist Khashoggi's murder' with him. After all, in addition to all his major responsibilities in the Kingdom, bin Salman has been also 'designated' [by his father King Salman] to head the committee charged with restructuring the Saudi intelligence agencies and investigating Khashoggi's murder! At…the proceedings of the investment forum (which no longer goes by the name of 'Davos in the Desert' at the request of the real Davos forum) bin Salman persisted with his plan to 'court' Turkey. He sent a very direct signal that he wants to deliver a 'message' that there will be 'no rift' between Turkey and Saudi Arabia 'as long as a King called Salman bin 'Abdelaziz, a Crown Prince called Mohammad bin Salman, and a Turkish President called Erdogan are there.' By placing his name as the 'cornerstone' of the equation that aims to prevent 'any rift', bin Salman was dismantling the formula that Erdogan – and Trump against his will – had tried to piece together, namely, one that separates the King from his crown-prince. So this was a message of 'peace,' but also a threatening one--pan-Arab al-Quds al-Arabi
Every now and then, the capitalist regimes' ideological and propaganda machines take up stories and incidents that lend credence to the claims of their models of government's cultural and moral superiority over other models: A rebellious girl murdered by her fanatic family; a pro-democracy opposition figure, preferably Russian or Chinese, who has been assassinated, imprisoned or tortured; domesticated dogs that are cooked and eaten; and so on. As for the millions of victims of their violation of large parts of the Southern globe, including those who are drowning before the shores of the Europe of enlightenment and human rights, their fate is to be forgotten. After all, they are not Washington Post columnists, and have no close links to the U.S. State Department or Congress. As a result, after imposing itself on the world's media space thanks to the calibrated and ongoing Turkish leaks and its adoption by influential political circles in the West, Khashoggi's case became one of the 'easy' issues that can be employed to promote the credibility of the West's claims to defend human rights and freedom of expression--Walid Sharara in Lebanese al-Akhbar
The internationalization of the issue, with Turkey continuing to control the manner in which the truth is being revealed, has helped Ankara to achieve half its objectives. It has succeeded in highlighting the Saudi narratives' lies a number of times. Moreover, Ankara's exposure of the fact that those involved in the crime are close to Crown-Prince Mohammad bin Salman and its proof that Khashoggi's murder was political and not criminal or security related, has helped to support the conclusion that there was a political decision to carry out this crime. This complicated management of the issue has helped to portray Turkey as a responsible and capable state so far. It has also allowed it to display its security, judicial, and political capabilities. But that on its own will not be sufficient for it to fully achieve its objectives. Moreover, it goes without saying that Ankara cannot persist with this same tactic for long--Ali Hussein Bakeer in Qatari al-Arab
Saudi Crown-Prince Mohammad bin Salman seems to have decided to go on the counter-offensive yesterday (Wednesday) in the aftermath of the Khashoggi affair, notes the editorial in a Qatari-owned pan-Arab daily. He has sought to court the Turkish president and even praised Qatar in an attempt to suggest that he is unfazed by the collapse of his international public image. Despite the human rights rhetoric invoked by the various parties waging the campaign that has turned Khashoggi's murder into a major international cause célèbre, these parties' motives have little to do with the denunciation of a crime, which pales in comparison to other crimes committed in the region, argues a Lebanese commentator. The murder is being used to promote various political agendas and uphold certain cultural assumptions about the West's superiority. Those who maintain that Turkey has struck deals with Saudi Arabia and/or the U.S. regarding the Khashoggi affair have provided no evidence of this claim, argues a Jordanian commentator. Turkey is trying to achieve a number of different objectives via its management of this affair; but it cannot achieve them all by pursuing the tactics it has adopted so far.
REGAINED COMPOSURE: "After Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman's psychologically and visually damaging display two days ago when he offered his 'condolences' to Salah Khashoggi the son of the murdered journalist– who is banned from leaving the country – the effective ruler of the Kingdom appears to have regained his composure," writes Thursday's editorial in the Qatari-owned, London-based, pan-Arab daily al-Quds al-Arabi.
He seems to have decided to wager a counter-offensive after his international public image (which cost hundreds and perhaps billions of dollars paid to PR relations companies and political pressure groups) has been devastated, with the exposure of the vast mountain of Saudi lies about Khashoggi 'leaving' his country's consulate in Istanbul, and after the emergence of the terrifying facts about the plan to murder the man, dismember him and hide his body parts in areas that remain unknown.
This counter-offensive was launched during a meeting between bin Salman, Bahrain's Crown Prince Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa, Lebanese PM-designate Sa'd al-Hariri, and Dubai's ruler and UAE Vice-President Mohammad bin Rashed, which was broadcast live on satellite TV. The latter three officials' songs of praise, especially Hariri's, focused on the Saudi crown prince, who was so pleased that he reminded the attendees of Hariri's detention in Riyadh [in November 2017] [jokingly] declaring that the Lebanese PM-designate 'was going to remain in the Kingdom for two more years.' In fact, he had no qualms mentioning Khashoggi, describing his death 'an ugly incident' and promising to 'hold the criminals accountable.'
All this comes at a time when the international media – especially in the U.S. – are tending towards holding bin Salman directly responsible for the murder. This was clear from U.S. President Donald Trump's statement yesterday that Saudi King Salman bin 'Abdelaziz may have not known about the operation to murder Khashoggi because the crown-prince is the country's actual ruler. (Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan made a similar statement in his speech on Tuesday). This explains the sense of self-confidence bin Salman tried to convey to a large extent; but it also explains why he had to take some defensive measures under pressure from the serious storm raised by Khashoggi's assassination and the collapse of the ill-conceived narrative composed by the network of powerful [Saudi] officials whom he personally manages.
Bin Salman's defensive plan began with the first line of attack in Turkey. He called Turkish President Erdogan, and according to news reports, he discussed 'joint efforts to expose all aspects of journalist Khashoggi's murder' with him. After all, in addition to all his major responsibilities in the Kingdom, bin Salman has been also 'designated' [by his father King Salman] to head the committee charged with restructuring the Saudi intelligence agencies and investigating Khashoggi's murder!
At the abovementioned meeting that was part of the proceedings of the investment forum (which no longer goes by the name of 'Davos in the Desert' at the request of the real Davos forum) bin Salman persisted with his plan to 'court' Turkey. He sent a very direct signal that he wants to deliver a 'message' that there will be 'no rift' between Turkey and Saudi Arabia 'as long as a King called Salman bin 'Abdelaziz, a Crown-Prince called Mohammad bin Salman, and a Turkish President called Erdogan are there.' By placing his name as the 'cornerstone' of the equation that aims to prevent 'any rift', bin Salman was dismantling the formula that Erdogan – and Trump against his will – had tried to piece together, namely, one that separates the King from his crown-prince. So this was a message of 'peace,' but also a threatening one.
The courtship also included Qatar, whose blockade bin Salman was one of the most eager to impose. He said that some of Saudi Arabia's neighboring countries were also proceeding towards success in their plans, and that these include Qatar, which, he said, has a strong economy. But sadly, this gesture would not have issued from the Saudi crown prince had it not been for Khashoggi's murder, in which case it will not be interpreted as fair praise, but as forced and fake flattery.
Even more strangely, bin Salman praised his own people, whom he described as a 'mighty and great nation.' But this great nation that is being promised economic miracles is the same nation whose elite has been imprisoned by the Saudi crown prince, beginning with its leading businessmen, and moving on to its emirs, academics, activists, and preachers.
"In doing so this, he not only targeted his opponents, but also those who offered him some advice or disagreed with him, even a little," concludes the daily.
End…
A PUBLIC CRIME: "There is no doubt that the savagery and audacity of the crime committed by the Saudi regime against its citizen Jamal Khashoggi – a public crime in the full sense of the word that was all but carried out before the cameras – partially explains the force with which broad sectors of world public opinion have denounced it," writes Walid Sharara in Thursday's left-leaning pro-Hezbollah Beirut daily al-Akhbar.
But the fact that it has turned into an international affair par excellence thanks to the positions of European and American politicians, their decisions regarding it, and its presence at the forefront of the Western media's news' reports, stems from these politicians and others' ideological and political exploitation of the incident, such as Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The fact is that it has become an inseparable part of political strategies and is no longer merely a humanitarian or moral issue.
The 'international conscience' that some believe has been awakened by the crime's terrible nature, only exists in their fertile imagination. Its effect and that of moral values on international politics is as forceful as the influence of music or poetry. In the current international context, we are dealing with a case of the sort that can be used by a significant part of the dominant powers in order to implement their agendas, settle scores, and engage in blackmail. But it will have consequences for the Saudi Arabia's rulers first, and for the Trump administration, to a lesser degree.
Former British PM Winston Churchill's definition of a democratic regime that he introduced on November 11th 1947 remains the most widely circulating definition among Western ruling elites, both those in power and those in opposition. According to this definition, that former French PM Emmanuel Valls reminded us at the start of the French presidential elections campaign in 2016, 'democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.'
Capitalist parliamentary regimes like to present themselves to their own people and the rest of the world via this negative definition: 'Our form of government is the least bad' in light of the growing conflicts, contradictions, social discrepancies, and injustices that essentially result from their policies and their regime's working mechanisms. This is one of the main ideological bases of the capitalist countries' self-narratives, aiming to gain legitimacy by lowering the people's ceilings of demands and aspirations, and diverting their attention towards the countries that are drowning in catastrophes and wars, or that live under bloody and tyrannical regimes. The object is to lead their people towards a self-evident conclusion, namely, that they are living in paradise when compared to others.
In fact, it was no coincidence that Churchill was the man who produced this definition. He was the man whom the West views as a main architect of the victory against Nazism, which is synonymous with absolute evil in the prevailing Western discourse. He is also one of the greatest perpetrators of crimes against humanity from the perspective of international law. He supervised one of the greatest famines India had ever known leading to the death of millions, so as to break the back of its national movement demanding independence. He also ordered savage repression of the peoples of Iraq, Palestine, and Sudan and refused to his last breath grant the colonies the right to self-determination.
After his long experience at the summit of power, this cunning British politician realized the importance of such definitions in providing the ideological and intellectual foundations for a consensus at home, even if it remains weak, as long as it allows him to devote himself to the policies of control and looting abroad.
Today more than at any previous time, the capitalist parliamentary regimes need to rehabilitate their legitimacy that has been shaken as a result of their social and political crises, and the rise of extreme rightwing currents, all of which are linked to neoliberal globalization and the changes in the international economic and strategic balance of power, and the emergence of competing non-Western major powers. The deep logic of the Western narrative remains the same: We are the best thing available and what lies outside our walls are various and differing forms of barbarism.
Every now and then, the capitalist regimes' ideological and propaganda machines take up stories and incidents that lend credence to the claims of their models of government's cultural and moral superiority over other models: A rebellious girl murdered by her fanatic family; a pro-democracy opposition figure, preferably Russian or Chinese, who has been assassinated, imprisoned or tortured; domesticated dogs that are cooked and eaten; and so on. As for the millions of victims of their violation of large parts of the Southern globe, including those who are drowning before the shores of the Europe of enlightenment and human rights, their fate is to be forgotten. After all, they are not Washington Post columnists, and have no close links to the U.S. State Department or Congress.
As a result, after imposing itself on the world's media space thanks to the calibrated and ongoing Turkish leaks and its adoption by influential political circles in the West, Khashoggi's case became one of the 'easy' issues that can be employed to promote the credibility of the West's claims to defend human rights and freedom of expression.
As the famous French proverb says, 'revenge is a dish best served cold.' The analyses that belittled the intensity of the confrontation between the Saudi/Emirati axis that Egypt joined after the July 2013 coup, and the Turkish/Qatari axis that backed and sponsored the Muslim Brotherhood's rise to power via elections in Tunisia and Egypt, have proven to be mistaken. The arena for that confrontation expanded to include Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Yemen, and even Syria, where the conflict manifested itself in the fighting between the various Syrian opposition factions, which in some cases surpassed the fighting between the army and its allies in its violence.
This confrontation peaked with the UAE and Saudi Arabia's involvement – together with the U.S. – in the coup attempt against the Turkish president in June 2016 and the eruption of the crisis with Qatar, which according to confirmed reports, almost led to an armed invasion led by Saudi Arabia. And the confrontation was intensified with the U.S.'s siding with the Saudi/Emirati/Egyptian axis, especially after Trump's rise to power, and the deterioration with its relations with Turkey, which was beginning to be viewed by some as a Fifth Column inside NATO, after the great improvement in its relations with Russia, Iran, and China.
Erdogan had wagered on the possibility of turning Turkey – in cooperation and understanding with the major powers – into a major regional pole that can sponsor and supervise the political changes in the region that were believed to be inevitable at the time. But the opposing axis succeeded in foiling that change, in alliance with the ancient regime's forces in Egypt and Tunisia. It also received Washington's support in this in this axis's capacity as the U.S.'s major regional partner, together with Israel.
In light of the above, bin Salman's crime against Khashoggi and the catastrophic political and media effects on him represent an unmissable opportunity for Erdogan to demolish that axis's credibility before the Western powers, prove the futility of their wagers on Saudi Arabia as an allied regional pole, and to convince them to return to working with a major and responsible regional power such as Turkey.
This is Erdogan's main aim before any other – such as securing investments or backing for the Turkish Lira for example. This has been the main motive for Turkey's exposure of the crime's circumstances; and without this, Jamal Khashoggi would not have turned into a cause célèbre.
By adopting Khashoggi's case, most of the other Western – American and European – forces wanted to confound the U.S. president by denouncing his ally, Mohammad bin Salman, and by pushing him into an awkward political and media position, especially since the mid-term elections in November are imminent. Bin Salman's crime is also a golden opportunity for some Europeans – Germany for example – who have been suffering from Trump and his decisions, and for the Democratic Party in the U.S. to damage Trump's reputation as much possible as a friend and partner of bloody murderers, and cast doubt on his strategic options, namely, his alliance with the rash camp that is leading Saudi Arabia today.
"The convergence between all these political and ideological factors has led to the transformation of a savage murder, even uglier instances of which our countries sadly witness on a daily basis, into an international cause that will be employed in the service of agendas that have nothing to do with the higher ideals and values that those who are in charge of the campaigns to denounce this crime are invoking today," concludes Sharara.
End…
NO INFORMATION: "Much has been said over the past three weeks about a Turkish/Saudi deal and another Turkish/American deal regarding the Jamal Khashoggi affair," writes Ali Hussein Bakeer in Thursday's Qatari daily al-Arab.
But the advocates of this theory have offered no information or details to confirm the shape and content of this supposed deal. They have not backed up their theories with any logical justifications, especially at a time when the leaks regarding the case have been increasingly undermining the claims about such a deal in practice, which would require that the truth itself be murdered and the Khashoggi file be closed.
In the speech he delivered before the AKP (ruling Justice and Development Party) parliamentary bloc on Tuesday, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan shed light on part of Turkey's strategy regarding this issue. Even though many people may have expected him to reveal more information, his contribution remained within the confines of what he could say at this juncture, without dismissing the importance of his words.
I believe that Turkey's strategy regarding this issue seeks to achieve three objectives: First, to push the Saudis to tell the full truth regarding Khashoggi's murder; second, to undermine Mohammad bin Salman's authority since he is primarily responsible for this murder that took place inside Turkey; and third, to uphold Turkey's honor via demand that all those involved in the murder should be tried on Turkish soil.
Although it is not possible to be absolutely certain that all the reports that have been leaked so far are true, and although we are waiting for more evidence to be revealed, the tactic of using such leaks has continued to serve the abovementioned three Turkish objectives.
Another point worth highlighting has to do with the Turkish president's attempt to distance King Salman from the consequences of what has happened. On the one hand, this allows further light to be focused on Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman's role as a suspect; and on the other hand, it allows Turkey to maintain a thin thread linking it to Saudi Arabia as a state.
In this regard, one could say that, had the Turkish side transformed the crisis into a bilateral Turkish/Saudi one, it would not have been able to achieve much. The most it could have done would have been to sever all relations with Saudi Arabia. But it is unclear how that could have served a judicial inquiry, for example, or how it could have helped subject Saudi Arabia and Mohammad bin Salman personally to pressure.
The internationalization of the issue, with Turkey continuing to control the manner in which the truth is being revealed, has helped Ankara to achieve half its objectives. It has succeeded in highlighting the Saudi narratives' lies a number of times. Moreover, Ankara's exposure of the fact that those involved in the crime are close to Crown-Prince Mohammad bin Salman and its proof that Khashoggi's murder was political and not criminal or security related has helped to support the conclusion that there was a political decision to carry out this crime.
This complicated management of the issue has helped to portray Turkey as a responsible and capable state so far. It has also allowed it to display its security, judicial, and political capabilities. But that on its own will not be sufficient for it to fully achieve its objectives. Moreover, it goes without saying that Ankara cannot persist with this same tactic for long.
"Only the possession of qualitative and unconventional evidence will help Turkey achieve its aims, block Mohammad bin Salman's path to repairing his image, and prevent any possible U.S./Saudi deal to contain the matter and seal the dossier with the least possible harm," concludes Bakeer.
Ends…
2-To Moscow and Damascus's satisfaction
The ongoing dialogue between Washington and Moscow suggests that the issue of the U.S. military presence East of the Euphrates will be resolved to Syria and Russia's satisfaction, says Silva Razzouq in today's Syrian al-Watan
The fact that there are clear signs that the U.S. is now ready to hold a dialogue with Russia regarding the situation in Syria suggests that the fate of the U.S. military presence East of the Euphrates will be the next major issue that will be resolved in a manner satisfactory to Damascus and its Russian ally, maintains a commentator in a pro-regime Syrian daily.
SIGNIFICANT IMPLICATIONS: "At an unexpected international timing and at a regional moment that seemed extremely complicated and intricate imposed by the unfolding changes produced by Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi's murder, Moscow has come out with statements that have significant implications for the region," writes Silva Razzouq in Thursday's pro-regime Syrian daily al-Watan.
Moscow has spoken of a Russian/American understanding and successful talks with U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton regarding the Syrian dossier in particular.
The successful results that Moscow and Washington have both spoken of, and that have produced an agreement on summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump after the U.S. congressional mid-term elections, certainly did not emerge by accident. They were preceded by important regional political moves led by Moscow that seemed to pave the way for placing the Syrian file on a new political track. This was expressed by UN Envoy Staffan de Mistura's resignation at the end of next month, with the UN beginning to search for alternatives in order to coordinate with Damascus.
The region has entered a phase of intensive political activity that began with Russian presidential representative Alexander Lavrentiev's tour of Damascus and other capitals, in tandem with U.S. special envoy James Jeffrey's tour of a number of regional states and areas inside Syria. Turkey has also announced that a four-way summit will be held including Russia, Turkey, France, and Germany – with the latter two joining the numerous political tracks linked to the Syrian file for the first time. And there was also the announcement of a hasty meeting in Moscow for the representatives and foreign ministers of the countries guaranteeing the Astana track.
This has all sent a definite signal that further activity is certain, that it will take final decisions regarding the Idlib question, and will produce parallel political conditions that will impart serious momentum to the political track, of which the [Syrian] 'Constitutional Committee' constitutes the main title.
This climate was accompanied by a new American military display led by the Commander of the U.S. Central Command Joseph Votel who visited Tanaf and spoke of the U.S.'s need to remain in this area for a long time. There was also an announcement that joint U.S./Turkish patrols will take to the streets in Manbij, giving the impression that the Pentagon needs to send a number of messages to more than one party that this area is still under Washington's protection and outside any negotiations, at least for the moment.
The rapid regional developments or arrangements, that were crowned by the announcement of the success of the U.S./Russian talks in Moscow regarding 'the conflict in Syria' (as U.S. National Security Advisor Bolton described it), confirm that Washington is now ready to divulge its negotiating cards in return for receiving Russian guarantees regarding the remaining international dossiers relating to Iran, China and other issues that the administration needs at this 'awkward' American moment.
Setting aside what is being said about priorities, and although the Idlib question remains at the forefront, the most important issue that the U.S. and Russia must have discussed in Moscow was that of the area East of the Euphrates and the U.S.'s illegal presence in Syria in general. After all, and regardless of the direction the situation may take, the fate of the Idlib issue has already been determined.
The clear position regarding the next step that the Syrian state will take on the ground– namely, recapturing the area East of the Euphrates – confirm that this card has headed or will be heading the coming U.S./Russian dialogue's list of priorities. And this will take place parallel to the revival of the political track in a manner that reflects the great change in the balance of power in the Syrian state's favor. This will be manifest in the name and identity of the new UN envoy, who will, naturally, not be burdened by de Mistura's legacy and his political choices.
It would thus appear that the area East of the Euphrates will be at the heart of the coming political moves and that arranging the cards as a prelude to dealing with this issue will take the time needed to undo the knots imposed by the facts on the ground.
"The Americans' readiness for a dialogue with Moscow will impart great momentum to the effort to settle these issues in the manner that satisfies Damascus and its Russian ally,' concludes Razzouq.
Ends…
3-In the people's interest
Amman's decision to end the lease of aJordanian land to Israel is not only a popular demand, but will bring the country significant economic returns, says today's Emirates' al-Khaleej
In addition to its patriotic dimensions and popularity among the Jordanians in general, Amman's decision to end Israel's lease of the Baqoura and Ghumar areas will be of great economic benefit for Jordan, says the editorial in an Emirati daily. It will create job opportunities for thousands of Jordanians and increase the country's water and agricultural resources.
CLINGING TO THE LAND: "Jordan decision a few days ago to stop applying the two annexes regarding Baqoura and Ghumar that were signed as part of the 1994 Jordanian/Israeli peace agreement known as Wadi Araba, and that allowed Israel to benefit from these areas for a quarter-of-a-century, has reconfirmed that Jordan will not squander its sovereignty and that it is ready to deal with situations based on the interests of the Jordanian people who cling to their land," writes Thursday's editorial in the UAE daily al-Khaleej.
Ending the lease, which is supposed to officially expire on November 10th 2019, is part of Jordan's fixed principles. Jordan aims to protect its people's interests and rights, dealing with them in a manner that ascertains the state's sovereignty, especially since there is no disagreement over Jordan's sovereignty over these areas, and that it has the best arguments to defend its interests. This is why the decision was strongly applauded inside and outside Jordan, and why many observers have described it as 'an exceptional and historic step,' especially since in introducing his decision, the Jordanian monarch said that Baqoura and Ghumar are 'Jordanian territories and will remain Jordanian territories,' and that 'Jordan will exercise its sovereignty in full over all its territories.'
The decision is comprehensive and requires Jordan to enter into negotiations with Israel to end its presence in these two areas, especially since the Kingdom's legal position regarding ending Israel's lease is very strong. In fact, even the Israeli side recognizes Jordanian sovereignty.
King 'Abdullah II's decision to reimpose Jordanian sovereignty over Baqoura and Ghumar seems to be consistent with growing popular demands. In fact, one could say that it is the only acceptable decision in popular and patriotic terms. It satisfies everyone in the country's interest regaining full sovereignty over Jordan's lands in these two areas as well as other areas. There appeared to be a pressing need to end the situation imposed on these two areas by the Wadi Araba treaty.
After this decision, there has been a growing debate among the Jordanians regarding the major economic and political benefits of regaining sovereignty over the two areas, especially in agricultural and water terms. These two files have been a source of concern for the Jordanian government for some time now, especially since both areas are of exceptional importance due to their strategic and geographic location, and their fertility and underground water they contain.
One may thus understand why the Jordanian government was in a hurry to regain these two areas by begin to develop clear and speedy plans to benefit from their lands. This will enhance Jordan's economic gains and will help invigorate business activities and provide job opportunities for thousands of unemployed Jordanians, since both areas offer the government many investment opportunities. In addition, they may become a future free trade zone and an area for managing Jordan's exports and imports to Europe and other countries using the occupied Palestinian ports.
The two areas' return to Jordanian sovereignty will not be free of problems and crises with Israel, which seems to be unhappy with this step that has deprived it of the possibility of exploiting the two areas.
"But Jordan is undoubtedly aware of the consequences of its decision, and is dealing with them based on its interests," concludes the daily.
Ends…