Monthly Archives: June 2014

Egypt, Foreign Affairs, Government, Middle East, Politics, Society, United States

Abdulfattah el-Sisi: Egypt’s new political leader…

EGYPT

Once again, Egypt has a senior military officer in charge of the country’s affairs. Field Marshal Abdulfattah el-Sisi, recently promoted from the rank of General, has been elected with the support of 97 per cent of the voters (of a low turnout) and has been inaugurated into office. He officially stood down from his military appointment in contesting the presidency. For the past 60-years, ever since the Free Officers Movement overthrew King Farouk in 1952, the Egyptian government has had a senior military strongman at the helm. Successive leaders – Naguib, Nasser, Sadat and Mubarak – all came from the military, so on that basis el-Sisi’s political victory in now leading his country should come as no great surprise.

For many, though, given the political earthquake and subsequent tremors that have occurred over the past three years, and the way in which power has been handed over, will leave many feeling uncomfortable if not untoward. The high hopes of the Arab Spring and the resulting revolution that toppled Hosni Mubarak were undone by the election of the Muslim Brotherhood. Mohammed Morsi’s mandate suggested that the Arab world’s most populous country would become increasingly Islamised, and became a significant factor in his eventual deposition that came in the form of a military coup. But now the Brotherhood is proscribed once more and most of its leaders are in prison.

Whether President el-Sisi is to be remembered as another Arab tyrant will depend on how he utilises his unparalleled position of public dominance. Time will tell – and history will record – whether he is able to reform his country’s anachronistic and decrepit institutions and his ability to convert an inward-looking society into one that is more representative of the modern age. In the short-term, his priorities must be to overhaul the police and judiciary and to end the daily charades of how justice is dispensed in the courts.

Standard
Government, Israel, Middle East, Palestine, Politics, United States

The formation of a Palestinian ‘unity’ government…

ISRAEL-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT

The formal announcement earlier this week of a Palestinian unity government, embracing both Fatah and Hamas, curtails any remaining hope of a successful settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for some time to come. In truth, the attempts by John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, over the past nine months in brokering a process for peace, was already dead in the water following the rapprochement between the rival factions. The decision of the Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas to enter into agreement with the Gaza-based terror organisation has simply served to convince doubters that he was never serious or intent enough on delivering a two-state model. The Palestinians have also maintained that alleged Israeli dithering over prisoner releases has been a clear demonstration that Benjamin Netanyahu’s government was simply going through the motions. Once Hamas was brought on board, though, the talks were always likely to founder. To suggest otherwise is illusionary.

Mr Kerry has devoted large swathes of his time over the past nine months in attempting to bring about a workable solution. Although many of the arguments have been thrashed out many times before, Mr Kerry’s timetable for delivery of an agreement was unrealistic, despite his efforts and commitment to the process being commendable. Progress has been made. Mr Netanyahu has come a long way from his previous implacable opposition to a two-state solution and agreed to halt new settlement buildings along the border while the talks continued.

For their part, the Palestinians have been forced to merge through weakness rather than strength: Hamas, in particular, has been affiliated with those unwieldy and tyrannical despots in both Egypt and Syria. The new ‘unity government’ in Palestine is being portrayed as a technocratic administration (whose members have no political affiliation). Fatah’s reconciliation with an organisation widely regarded as a terrorist movement, however, will be seen by many as being toxic.

There is one clear way to move forward. And that is for Hamas to recognise Israel and renounce violence for good.

Standard
Britain, Defence, Europe, Foreign Affairs, Government, Military, National Security, NATO, Politics, Society, United States

Being prepared for war is essential, but war is not cheap…

ROYAL UNITED SERVICES INSTITUTE STUDY

A study released by the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) shows that Britain’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan has cost the UK Treasury more than £29 billion. In the report, the think tank argues that the wars were “strategic blunders, spreading terrorism, drumming up resistance and increasing the opium trade”.

The conclusions, though, are controversial. For instance, the authors of the study assert that various terrorist groups would not be infiltrating Syria or threatening Britain had Saddam Hussein stayed in power. Yet, Hussein was a bloodthirsty tyrant and despot, who clearly acted as a state sponsor of terror. Tens of thousands of lives were lost, thousands more were gassed in ethnic style cleansing in northern Iraq, and Saddam Hussein would certainly have had vast stockpiles of nerve and chemical agents at his disposal left over from his 8-years war with Iran. Many of these stockpiles still remain unaccounted for. Had Hussein not been toppled he doubtless would have continued to persecute his own population. The tyrant’s bloody wars against the Kurds in the north and Arab populations of the south should never be forgotten.

Putting aside the arguments about Britain’s role in the ‘War on Terror’, one uncontroversial fact emerges from the report which is indisputable: war is not cheap. The Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) has witnessed massive cuts to our Armed Forces budget. Army numbers have been drastically cut back, aircraft have been withdrawn, tank battalions diminished, and even our last aircraft carrier decommissioned. Further cuts are imminent. Many of these cuts are being justified by the theory that we would never have to engage in the variety of long-term overseas military adventures that typified our activities and engagements during the Cold War era.

Since 2001, however, we have actually been involved in two such operations at a significant cost. And within the last few days, President Barack Obama announced that he would like America to act more as part of an international coalition rather than taking unilateral action. This implies, at least, a continued British role in Western security.

The UK has to be prepared for all eventualities, and adequate contingencies should be in place. As relations with Russia continue to worsen, for example, it might prove necessary for the UK to play a part in the wider campaign of checking Vladimir Putin’s belligerence. Only last month, Britain sent four Typhoon fighter jets to the Baltics as part of a NATO deployment, a sign that the West is unwilling to allow Europe to disintegrate at the hands of the Russian president. Nobody wants a conflict, but the potential for a tough offence remains the best defence.

Standard