How the Commodification of US Foreign Policy is Leaving Netanyahu and the Israeli Far-Right in the Dust

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant recently opined that "America First doesn't mean America Alone."  In other words, the Trump administration isn't isolationist. What Bessant failed to mention is that US foreign policy has abandoned a system of shared values with our traditional allies designed to promote democracy and international economic growth.  

Trumpian foreign policy is transactional, not value-based. Its guiding criterion when dealing with  a foreign country or international agency is to ask: Will the United States directly benefit in some material way from the issue at hand?  As many analysts have noted, this stance has upended 80 years of post-WWII US policy by viewing international relations strictly through a transactional lens. 

When Donald Trump looks beyond America's shores, all that matters to him is deals, and especially deals that in some way add to his personal wealth. This approach to the world was on view in the deal the United States signed with Ukraine. In return for continued support for its war with Russia, Ukraine was required to sign away much of its rights to its rare earth and other precious minerals which are critical to electronics, clean energy technologies and military production.

Trump's dramatic revision of US foreign policy was also front and center during his recent trip to the Middle East where he visited Saudi Arabia and two Arab Gulf states, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.  Although the trip was officially billed as promoting US security interests in the MENA region, it was in fact meant to conclude a set of financial deals, many of which directly benefitted Trump and his family.

Why and how has United States foreign policy become commodified? Who benefits from Trump's foreign policy and who are the losers?  Donald Trump's trip to the Middle East provides some key answers.   

The big winners of the deals which were struck were the three richest Arab states - Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE. All three contain enormous quantiles of fossil fuels, including natural gas in Qatar. In the UAE, Dubai has become one of the world's most powerful  financial centers (including the ability of foreign monied interests to hide their wealth).  All three states have enormous sovereign wealth funds. At a Dubai Conference, Trump’s Conflicts Take Center Stage

Having much to offer in the way of financial deals, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE are uniquely positioned to attract Trump's interest. In return for its investment in the United States, the UAE is set to become a major player in the development of Artificial Intelligence and cryptocurrency. Huge AI data centers will be constructed there, and also in Saudi Arabia, despite the region's extreme heat which will require these centers to consume enormous amounts of water to keep them running. Sam Altman, president of OpenAI, and Jensen Hwang, Nividia CEO,  announced that their companies will support the development of these centers. 

As Forbes noted: "Trump’s visit to the Middle East, so far, has centered around economic investments, rather than broader geopolitical strategy. The region is home to multiple new projects by Trump’s family businesses, including a Trump golf resort in Qatar and Trump residential towers in Dubai and Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. An investment fund backed by the United Arab Emirates, MGX, also used $2 billion in stablecoin issued by the Trump family’s World Liberty Financial to invest in Binance earlier this year." U.S. Will Build Massive AI Data Center In Abu Dhabi: See The List Of Deals Trump Announced In The Middle East

With Trump's return to he White House and Iran's military defeat and struggling economy, the Middle East has changed significantly since the brutal October 7, 2023 HAMAS attack on Israel. As the Gaza War progressed, Israel destroyed 3 of Iran's main proxies in the Arab world. After a year and a half of Israeli bombing of Gaza, HAMAS today is a shell of its former military self. Like HAMAS, Hizballah's leadership has been eviscerated, including the killing of Hasan Nasrallah, the militia's charismatic leader. The Asad regime, which allowed Iranian arms to flow into Lebanon to bolster Hizballah, has been toppled.

Iran itself has been severely weakened. Its ineffectual missile attacks on Israel in 2024 showed it to be a paper tiger, not a regional military power.  Israeli counterattacks destroyed Tehran anti-missile defense system and severely damaged its natural gas infrastructure, cutting off electricity to homes and crippling industrial production. The Trump regime's threat to increase what are already onerous sanctions and attack Iran if it doesn't curtail its enrichment of uranium has forced it to come to the table and negotiate curtailing its nuclear weapons program.

All of this seemed to bode well for Benjamin Netanyahu once Trump returned to office.  Trump's threat to turn Gaza into a "Mediterranean Riviera"  after expelling the Palestinian population delighted him and his far-right cabinet ministers, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Minister of National Security Itamar Ben Gvir Trump's "Mediterranean Riviera".

A changing policy towards Israel?  But Netanyahu and the Israeli far-right has since discovered that Trump is not in their court. He increasingly sees Netanyahu as a "loser" (one of his favorite designations of those he dislikes or whose behavior he sees as failing).  Netanyahu's far-right consiglieres' vision of a Greater Israel which would include not just the West Bank and Gaza but Greater Syria as well as Jordan doesn't interest Trump, if only for the reason that it offers no financial benefit to him. Suddenly Trump Is No Longer Buying What Bibi Has Been Selling

Recent decisions by Trump indicate a divergence between Netanyahu's goals and those of the United States.  First, the Trump regime has backed away from the idea of expelling the Palestinian populace from Gaza and turning the strip into an international tourist destination. Trump himself has recently criticized Netanyahu for the uptick in bombings in Gaza which has resulted in ever large numbers of civilian deaths, now at more than 50,000, including one family which recently lost 9 of its 10 children, with the father and remaining child in critical condition Gaza doctor loses 9 children as Israel bears down on war amid growing pressure

In a direct slap to Netanyahu, Trump reached out to HAMAS, without consulting him, to free Edan Alexander, a dual Israeli-American who enlisted in the IDF and was subsequently captured by HAMAS. Alexander is the last hostage with American citizenship held by HAMAS. His release underlined the lack of attention which the Netanyahu regime has placed on freeing the remaining hostages HAMAS holds, an issue which is at the top of mind of the majority of Israelis. It didn't help Netanyahu's standing when Alexander refused to meet with him after HAMAS freed him. Large and Increasing Majority of Israelis Prioritize Bringing Hostages Home Over Toppling Hamas

Houthi attacks on shipping near the Bab al-Mandab, the entrance to the Red Sea, and in the southern Red Sea, led to intense US bombing of the militia's forces and missile launch sites. After two weeks of devastating damage, and many civilian casualties, the Houthis came to an agreement with the US.  The Houthis would end their attacks on American ships in exchange for an end of the bombing campaign.

However, the bilateral negotiations between the Trump regime and the Houthis did not include Israel. The Houthis indicated that they retained the right to attack Israeli ships to which Trump seems not to have raised any objections. Once again.Netanyahu was excluded from American contact with an Iranian proxy.

Soon after Trump was sworn in, Netanyahu proposed an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. Because such an attack could not proceed without American logistical support, Netanyahu required Trump's permission.  However, Trump refused. Trump blocked Israeli-proposed joint attack on Iran to pursue nuclear deal — report

To add insult to injury, Trump subsequently proposed to Iran to that it enter talks to end its nuclear enrichment program which would eventually allow it to develop nuclear weapons. While he told Iran that failure to begin talks would result in a devastating American attack, Netanyahu, to his chagrin, was left out of the decision-making. Instead, Trump seeks to negotiate an end to the ongoing conflict with the Iran (which threatens his closest Arab allies, namely Saudi Arabia and the Arab Gulf states in which he maintains important financial interests).

For Netanyahu, an attack on Iran would further shelter him from attacks that he is keeping the Gaza War going to placate his far-right ministers, Smotrich and Ben Gvir, without whose support he can't sustain his political coalition and remain prime minster.  In his mind, attacking Iran would divert public opinion away from his efforts to eviscerate Israel's Supreme Court by stripping it of its right of constitutional review of laws passed by the Israeli Knesset as well as prevent his ongoing trial for corruption leading him to go to jail.

Perhaps most telling of all was Trump's recent trip to the Middle East. He visited Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates but avoided a stop in Israel. Indeed, Israel was hardly mentioned during the trip. Increasingly, it seems that Trump views Netanyahu as playing the United States. The Israeli leader continues to press ahead with a war which his military and intelligence chiefs say no longer has any strategic value.

Finally, Netanyahu's two month blockade of food and medical aid entering Gaza has led to severe criticism from some of Israel's closest allies, including the U.K. (which has frozen trade relations with Israel), France, Canada, and its staunchest European ally, Germany. It is noteworthy that Trump has not disavowed any of this criticism and has also called for a quick end to the war. 

As a final comment, the negative impact the continued war in Gaza is having on the Israeli economy is often ignored. In its 2024 report on the war's impact on a critical sector of Israel's economy, the Israel Innovation Authority noted that the high tech sector has seen a significant drop in investment capital, the loss of profits due to 30,000 or 7% of high tech company employees called up for military service, the relocation of some companies' operations to Europe, and that the sector is no longer seen as a desirable partner by many foreign companies as a result of the decline in Israel's global standing, The War on Gaza and Israel’s Technology Sector

If Netanyahu had proposed cooperation with Israel's allies, especially Egypt and Jordan, which have powerful armies, and the UAE which has enormous financial resources, and agreed to begin talks on establishing a Palestinian state, administered by a revised (read non-corrupt) Palestinian National Authority, he could have rid Gaza of HAMAS forces (see my post: The Middle East is in Crisis: Where Are the Leaders?) and secured the release of Israeli hostages a long time ago. Because Qatar hosts and funds HAMAS' political leadership, it could have pressured the organization to agree to release the hostages.

Such actions by Netanyahu would have allowed Israel to normalize relations with Saudi Arabia and the new regime in Syria.  It would have provided an huge economic windfall if Israel had been included in the many high tech projects recently agreed upon during Trump's visit to the Middle East.

Arab League summit, Baghdad, Iraq, May 17, 2025

Ironically, Israel's defeat of Iran and its proxies and the toppling of the Asad regime has led to renewed inter-Arab cooperation. Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Jordan, Qatar and the UAE  are the core of s new economically focused alliance.  Arab states which recently were at odds are now cooperating across boundaries on a host of new economic ventures.  This new coalition is even bringing Lebanon into the fold now that Hizballah has lost its dominant role in Lebanese politics. Across Arab Mideast, a new alignment rises: An axis of cooperation

While Netanyahu and his messianic, far-right, ultra-nationalist regime pursue a fantasy which is eroding Israel's social cohesion, sharpening political cleavages and harming Israel's economy, the Arab world seems ready to put aside sectarianism, politicized religion and fantasies such as Pan-Arabism (and hopefully open more paths to democracy). No wonder Trump views the deals to be made residing in the Arab world, not in Israel.Tom Friedman on Why Life Is Getting Much, Much Harder for Benjamin Netanyahu

How the Weaponization of Anti-Semitism is Undermining the Rule of Law in the United States and Thwarting the Peace Process Between Israel and the Palestinians

Why is the Trump regime accusing US universities of not protecting Jewish students from anti-Semitic activity on their campuses? Why have these attacks begun?  Are they really concerned with anti-Semitism or are other hidden motives propelling these attacks?

This post argues that the reasons the Trump regime has given for the attacks on American universities, all of which are elite institutions of higher education, are disingenuous. Its weaponization of anti-Semitism provides a cover for the Trump's real intent which is to place American universities under federal control.  As such, the attacks are just one of Trump's many processes designed to turn our country into an authoritarian state.

Conflating Anti-Semitism, Zionism and the State of Israel Anti-Semitism is a scourge which has plagued Western society for centuries. Its most horrible impact was the unspeakable destruction of human life during the Holocaust in which 6 million Jews perished. Because the Holocaust was the direct outcome of the Nazi's virulent hatred of the Jewish people, anti Semitism must be recognized for the enormous tragedy it engendered during WWII.  It should never be politicized and exploited by a particular leader for political gain.

Yet the Trump regime's attack on the American higher education system purports to be defending Jews from anti-Semitism on college campuses. On February 3, 2025, Trump created the Federal Taskforce to  Combat Anti-Semitism. It has been tasked to visit college campuses and investigate anti-Semitic  incidents. The first group of 10 universities which are in the Task Force's crosshairs are Columbia; George Washington; Harvard; Johns Hopkins; New York University Northwestern; the University of California, Los Angeles; the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Minnesota; and the University of Southern California.

Apart from the fact that anti-Semitism exists on US college campuses (I have had Jewish students who have encountered hate speak), this Taskforce is not about combatting anti-Semitism. Instead, it is part of a blatant effort to undermine, if not control, the United States' higher education system.  It is also part of a battering ram to undermine the rule of law in the United State, a theme discussed in more detail below. 

The disingenuous nature of the effort to rid college campuses of anti-Semitism clear from the actions taken by the Task Force since it began its work this past winter. First, without any due process, over $11 billion dollars in federal grants from many of the top research universities in the United States have been cancelled. Second, the Trump administration has demanded that Columbia University and Harvard University yield to federal oversight of hiring, faculty governance, curricula and provide periodic reports on whether these demands are being net.

Placing anti-Semitism in context Anti-Semitism is often conflated with criticism of Zionism and the existence of the State of Israel itself. However, this argument is flawed. First, anti-Semitism means hatred of Jews and has nothing inherently to do with Israel. Second, because there are several variants of Zionism, criticizing Zionism is not the same as challenging the right of Israel to exist.  Finally criticizing a particular Israeli government, such as the current far-right and ultranationalist Netanyahu regime, is in no way anti-Semitic.

Historically, the prominent form of Zionism was socialist Zionism which dominated the Yishuv (the immigrant Zionist community in Palestine prior to the formation of the Israel) and then Israeli politics from 1948 until 1977 when the right-wing Likud coalition won its first national elections.  

While socialist Zionists were left of center and had relatively little contact with or desire to interact with the local Palestinian population, they supported a democratic, secular political system.  Israeli Palestinians were treated as second class citizens but were able to form political parties and elect members to Israel's parliament (Knesset).The Jewish religion was still given priority in the national education system. and personal status law was largely controlled by religious authorities. 

During the Yishuv, a second strain of Zionism developed which, albeit limited in support, called for a bi-national state in Palestine. What made this perspective prominent was the support it received from prominent members of the Yishuv. One was Dr. Judah Magnes, the first president of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem who was an advocate for a bi-national state.  It was also supported by the famous philosopher, Martin Buber, author of I and Thou and many other influential books.

A proponent of a unity state was the Hashomer Hatzair (the Young Guard) which was a youth organization formed in the Austria-Hungarian Empire in 1913.  At the left wing of the Labor Zionist movement, it argued that Palestine should be converted to a commonwealth after the British Mandate ended in 1948 with Jews as a majority but with equal rights for all its citizens.

But there also was a much darker side to the Zionist Movement. In the 1920s and 1930s, Zev Jabotinsky (1860-1940) was the architect of what came to be known as Revisionist Zionism.  The Revisionists, who were a distinct minority in the Yishuv, argued that Israel had the right to populate nd control all of what ite deemed "Greater Israel.  This included what came to be pre-1967 Israel, the West Bank, Jerusalem and even parts of the Sinai Peninsula and southern Lebanon.

Jabotinsky was an admirer of Benito Mussolini's fascist corporatist regime who he felt would help the Zionist movement . Embracing corporatist model of society, which denied any internal cleavages in Jewish society, Jabotinsky Revisionist Zionism became the ideological and political foundation of the Herut Party which was formed after Israel was established.  

The Herut Party later became the larger Likud Party which won elections in 1977.  It is noteworthy that Menachem Begin, Herut and later Likud's leader, engaged in terrorist activities in the 1936 against Palestinian Arabs, and the British and a United Nations envoy through his Irgun Zvai Leumi (National Military Organization).  The most infamous attacks was the July 1946 bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. Another terrorist group, Lehi (known as the "Stern Gang") and the assassination of UN Envoy Count Folke Bernadotte in September 1948.  These attacks were an extension of Jabotinsky's Revisionist ideology.

Revisionist Zionism is also the ideology which has shaped the career of Benjamin Netanyahu. The current prime minister's career has been devoted to preventing the establishment an independent Palestinian state. Despite the Palestine Liberation Organization's recognition of Israel's right to exist with the 1993 Oslo Accords, Netanyahu has done everything, including funding HAMAS terrorists to offset the power of the PLO, to prevent a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict from becoming a reality.

Thus, we can see from this overview that Zionism as an ideology has been multifaceted.  To criticize Zionism begs the question: which Zionism. are you criticizing? If it is the Zionism of Yitzhak Rabin, Ehud Barak or Ehud Olmert, who were all willing to pursue a two state solution, such criticism requires a nuanced.  Each of these leaders came to support a two state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.

West Bank settlements, which are illegal under International law, was begun by the Labor Party shortly after the June 1967 War when Israel captured East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Thus, criticism is valid here.  But ift was Labor Party leaders and Olmert, haed of the liberal Kadima Party who accepted a two state solution.  

This has never been the case of the Likud Party and certainly not of the far right members of Netanyahu's current government. Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben Gvir, and Finance Minster, Bezalel Smotrich who seek to annex the Wert Bank and the Gaza Strip.  Criticizing the nationalist and far-right ideology the Netanyahu government represents is completely legitimate and has nothing to do with anti-Semitism. Thus, equating criticism by students on American college campuses of Israel's far-right and the manner in which has pursued the war in Gaza is bogus. 

The Middle East is in Crisis: Where Are the Leaders?

Even a superficial look at the Middle East shows that the region is facing a series of crises like none it has encountered before.  Is the problem one that Orientalists once proposed, namely the incompatibility of Islam and politics,. which inevitability leads to political instability? Or are there more complex explanations required to make sense of the crises plaguing the Middle East?

A core answer to this question is captured by the saying that "the fish rots from the head down." In other words, throughout the Middle East, political leaders has failed miserably to improve the lives of their citizens and implement tolerant and democratic governance. Had a number of political leaders made different decisions over the past several decades, the Middle East would look very different today.

Whether we're talking about Iran, Israel, HAMAS, Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Sudan, Syria, Yemen or Tunisia, everywhere one looks politics is repressive, unstable or both. And lurking in the shadows are extremist groups like the Islamic State waiting to pounce once the moment is ripe with instability.   

Where to begin? The five most volatile MENA region crises are, in my view:1) Iran's foreign policy in the region; 2) the Israeli-HAMAS War; 3) the Sudanese civil war; 4) the policies of the post-Asad regime in Syria; and 5) Recep Tayyip Erdogan's repression at home and meddling in Syrian politics and other MENA region issues beyond Turkey. I Am the Turkish President’s Main Challenger. I Was Arrested.

In this post, I focus on the two most dangerous crises. Iran's continued effort to develop nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them threatens to provoke a massive Israeli attack with serious regional consequences. If the Gaza War continues, that too presents a major threat to regional stability. It will encourage more Gazan youth to join HAMAS and embolden the Israeli far-right to demand the Gaza Strip's annexation and expulsion of its residents.

Iran's threat to regional stability Iran created a so-called "Axis of Evil" comprising a number of regional proxy militias: Hizballah in Lebanon, HAMAS in the Gaza Strip, the Popular Mobilization Units            (al-hashad al-sha'bi) in Iraq, and Houthi rebels in Yemen. As the Tehran regime has spread its political influence throughout the Eastern MENA region (al-Mashriq), its actions has been among the most destabilizing in the Middle East. See my post: Last Man Standing: What is the Fate of Iran's Proxy Militias in Iraq?

The culmination of Iran's overreach, all legitimized by its efforts to destroy Israel and "liberate" Jerusalem, was the brutal HAMAS attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. Although it seems the Iranian regime was not informed of the attack, it was responsible for arming HAMAS, funding the organization, and even training some of its fighters in Iran.

But after a year and a half of the Gaza War, Iran's proxy forces lie in shambles. Hizballah and HAMAS have been seriously degraded with their senior leadership killed. Bashar al-Asad's regime in Syria, which supported Iran and provided a land bridge to Lebanon, has been toppled. Meanwhile, Iraq's PMUs are engaged in a struggle over how closely they should be tied to Tehran.  Meanwhile, Houthi forces in Yemen are subject to an ongoing air attack by the United States. US airstrikes pound Yemen overnight, killing at least 3, Houthi rebels say

Iran has recently indicated a willingness to discuss, via indirect talks, its nuclear enrichment program with the Trump administration. Because most analysts see Iran attempting to develop nuclear weapons, Israel has made clear its intention to strike Iran if its uranium enrichment reaches a level which would allow to to produce a bomb. Given hardliners' political control, and that fact that Iran's nuclear program is one of the last cards it holds, it is doubtful such talks would produce any meaningful results.

Complicating matters is the weakness of Iran's current president, Masoud Pezeshkian, a moderate who was elected on a reformist platform.  Iran's presidency is a largely symbolic position because real power lies in the hands of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Further, hardliners have used Pezeshkian's desire for direct talks with the United States as an excuse to attack him and remove his allies from power. Meanwhile, his popularity has fallen due to his failure to confront Iran's decaying economy. President Pezeshkian: Already a lost cause?

Because no solution is in sight, the probability is that the United States will give Israel the green light to attack Iran sometime in the near future.  During its attacks in April and October, 2024, Israeli jets destroyed not only the Russian supplied air defense system around Tehran but key components of Iran's natural gas infrastructure. The October attacks seriously disrupted  electricity generation and reduced industrial production to 30% of normal output. Iran's currency has tanked, electricity is rationed and prices for consumer goods have skyrocketed.  The regime is aware that its popularity has dropped precipitously.

How Iran would respond to an Israeli attack designed to destroy its nuclear enrichment program is difficult to predict.  However, it would certainly add to the MENA region's instability.  Because China (and India) are dependent on Iranian oil, exports of crude could drop sharply, incentivizing China to become more involved in the Persian Gulf.  

It took intense pressure from the Biden administration in 2021 to prevent China from building a military base in the United Arab Emirates near Abu Dhabi. An Israeli attack on Iran could lead China to renew its efforts to court Saudi Arabia and the Arab Gulf states. Because many Arab states see the Trump administration as giving the Netanyahu regime carte blanche in attacking Gaza and Lebanon, and even expelling the Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza, they may view expanding their alliances with China as increasing their ability to extract more concessions from Trump Work on ‘Chinese military base’ in UAE abandoned after US intervenes – report

An Israeli attack would undermine efforts by Israel and the United States to normalize relations between the Jewish state and Saudi Arabia.  As with the Gaza War, Israel's ties with the Arab states with which it already has relations have become much more chilly. Thus, it isn't possible to separate Iran's nuclear program from the other big regional crisis, the ongoing conflict between Israel and HAMAS.

Apart from Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right coalition partners, such as Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, there is little appetite in Israel and the rest of the Middle East for the war in Gaza to continue. Nevertheless, many hostages still remain under HAMAS control and Netanyahu uses its failure to release them to legitimize his continuation of bombing Gaza which has raised the Palestinian death toll to over 50,000 at the time of this writing.

Meanwhile, the attacks on Palestinians in the Occupied West Bank continue. Anyone who has seen the 2024 Oscar winner for Best Documentary film, No Other Land, cannot fail to find the brutality of Israeli soldiers and West Bank settler repulsive.  Unlike the Biden administration which sanctioned some West Bank settlers for their violent acts, Trump remains silent, only angering the Arab-Americans who voted for him and the MENA region's Arab populations. Film academy apologizes for not naming ‘No Other Land’ co-director in response to attack on him

Where are the leaders? As these two major crises underscore, little or nothing is being done to solve them in the West. In the past, the United States has played a major role in addressing the MENA region's problems (although often not in a constructive manner). While the Trump administration, to its credit, is attempting to bring Iran to the negotiating table, it has undermined its credibility with its threat to take over the Gaza Strip, expel its residents and turn the region into a tourist destination, a so-called "Riviera of the Middle East."

Netanyahu has made clear, as numerous Israeli analysts - many in the military and security services - have argued, that his policies towards peace with the Palestinians are shaped by his political ambitions, not his concern for the well being of the Israeli people, let alone the Palestinians. HAMAS has only brought suffering and destruction to the Palestinians of Gaza. But Netanyahu's continued bombing of the area will not bring political change to the Strip. It will only help HAMAS recruit more Gazan youth to its ranks.

Netanyahu has still to own up to his role in promoting HAMAS' 2023 attack. He funded HAMAS to weaken the Palestine National Authority with the goal of preventing moderate Palestinians making any progress towards the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. ‘Buying Quiet’: Inside the Israeli Plan That Propped Up Hamas

Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan A third group of leaders who have the ability to be more actively involved in defusing the two major crises facing the MENA region are Arab countries, particularly Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan. Although Saudi Prime Minister Muhammad Bin Salman has hosted multiple talks to end the war in Ukraine, he has expended little effort to mediate between Iran and the United States, or to help end the war in Gaza.

Egypt, on the other hand, has offered its services to bring the Gaza War to an end and have the remaining Israeli hostages which HAMAS holds released.  Representatives of Israel and HAMAS have negotiated indirectly through Egypt's auspices for several months. Qatar has also served in this capacity and hosted delegations, especially because it has allowed HAMAS senior political leadership to live in Doha. (At this writing, the hostage crisis appears on the verge of a possible breakthrough).

However, the key stumbling block to a final end to the war in Gaza is removing HAMAS as a military force. Here there are only two Arab states who could accomplish this end - Egypt and Jordan. Egypt has the largest army in the Arab world and Jordan's military is one of the best trained. 

Given recent Gaza protests and HAMAS' military and political weakness, Arab military forces could occupy the Gaza Strip. Egyptian and Jordanian forces would gain much more cooperation from the Gazan Palestinians than an Israeli occupying force.  One of the key to defeating HAMAS would be locating the tunnels in which HAMAS fighters hide. Identifying tunnel openings and air ducts requires help from the Gazan residents. If they could be effectively blocked, HAMAS fighters would need to surrender or face death by starvation or lack of oxygen.

Also central to the success of an Arab military mission would be the promise that the Egyptian and Jordanian forces would give the Gazan Palestinians that they would no longer face the prospect of being expelled from the Gaza Strip. The United States and Israel would need to give their blessing to a military incursion by Arab forces.  

If Egypt and Jordan would commit to keeping the Gaza Strip free of HAMAS fighters, and Saudi Arabia would agree to fund the military operation, the Gaza War would give Donald Trump a win.  It would prevent the Israeli far-right from annexing the Strip to Israel and expelling Gaza's residents. With HAMAS neutralized, Netanyahu could claim victory and the United States could return to its efforts to normalize diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Ridding the Gaza Strip of HAMAS, preventing the Israeli far-right from expelling its residents, and allowing Saudi Arabia ands the Arab Gulf states to help the Gazan Palestinians rebuild their society would be the best outcome we could expect at the moment.  

The Trump administration has no creative ideas for ending the Israeli-HAMAS War or for the future of Gaza's residents. Netanyahu can't be trusted to pursue an agreement which would end the war and lead to long-term stability in Gaza. Thus, the question of the hour is the following: Will Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan step up to the plate and bring the horrors which the Palestinians of Gaza have now suffered for a year and a half to an end?

Last Man Standing: What is the Fate of Iran's Proxy Militias in Iraq?

al-Hashad al-Sha'bi fighters on parade

What is the future of Iran's proxy militias in Iraq? The militias - known as the Popular Mobilization Forces (al-Hashad al-Sha'bi) - have been wielding extensive political and economic power in Iraq ever since they played an important role, together with Iranian, US and Iraqi forces, in protecting Iraq  and defeating the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq between 2014 and 2019. 

Since HAMAS' surprise attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, there has been a major shift in power relations in the Middle East. Following well over a year of Israeli air and ground attacks, the Gaza War seriously degraded HAMAS' military strength. Hizballah, once the most powerful political and military force in Lebanon, is a shell of its former self.  Syria, formerly Iran's closest Arab ally, is no longer ruled by the al-Asad family. 

With the fall of the al-Asad regime, Iran has lost a critical land bridge which allowed it to extend its political control to the Mediterranean.  The loss HAMAS, Hizballah and Syria has ended Iran's ability to surround its arch-enemy, Israel, with loyal forces. After Iran attacked Israel in May 2024, Israeli airstrikes subsequently degraded Iran's air defenses and seriously damaged its energy sector by destroying natural gas pipelines, creating a severe economic crisis.  

Only Iraq's Popular Mobilization Units (PMUs) have avoided the negative consequences of. the Israel-HAMAS War.  While some militias have fired rockets at Israel, the PMUs have largely remained on the sidelines of the conflict. Most of their attention continues to be directed at forcing the United States to withdraw its last troops from Iraq through rocket attacks on Iraqi air bases where US troops are stationed. As the last member of Iran's so-called Axis of Resistance, what is its future?

The defeat of the Axis of Resistance With Israel's destruction of Iran's proxies in Gaza and Lebanon and indirectly causing the collapse of the al-Asad regime,.  As a result, the political winds in Iraq are beginning to change. Iraq's Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein has stated that it's time for the PMUs to be integrated into the Iraqi Army, something that was supposed to happen several years ago. 

With the government aware that the PMUs' benefactor, Iran, faces serious economic crisis and has lost of much of its regional political clout, now is the time in the view of many of Iraq's political elite to reign in the Tehran regime's local agents. 

In November 2024, following a stark warning from Israel, stop the drone attacks. Fearful of suffering the same fate as HAMAS and Hizballah, the PMUs cut back on their drone attacks on Israel.  The Iraqi government, on the other hand, has tried, without success, to end PMU attacks on the United States Embassy in Baghdad and the airbase where US troops are stationed.

A state within a state  PMUs are despised by much of the Iraqi population.  They promote Iranian interests in Iraq such as the sale of Iranian goods which compete with Iraqi companies.  Militias have seized houses, agricultural land and businesses, and threatened families and lawyers who have attempted regain possession of their property.

In the Jurf al-Sakhr region along the Tigris River in Babel Governorate, the PMUs expelled the local farmers and establish a large limits area which they store illicit goods which are sold on the black market throughout Arab Iraq.  Even Iraq's Prime Minister and Armed Force Chief of Staff are forbidden from entering this area.  

In 2023, the PMUs won 101 of 285 seats in Iraq's Provincial Council elections. Using a carrot and stick, the PMUs used their extensive resources to offer voters jobs in construction and road paving industry, contracts to business interests, government employment to local residents and other bribes.  Candidates who opposed PMU candidates were threatened in an effort to force them to drop out of the elections.  The Leadership and Purpose of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces

Iraqis have responded to PMU corruption by boycotting Iranis goods which they see aas competing with Iraqi products. While Iraqis welcome the 1000s of Iranian pilgrims who visit Iraq's Shi'a shrine cities each year, they resent the PMUs using their politcial power to privilege Iranian products in local markets.

As an example of the kind of corruption in which the PMU is involved, a scandal was recently discovered in which the Islamic University of Lebanon in Beirut had awarded more than a 1000 PMU militia members doctoral degrees in engineering and other specialized degrees.  

The problem with these degrees is that those who received Ph.D.s never attended any classes at the Islamic University of Lebanon.  With 40% of Iraqis living below the poverty level and thousands of Iraqi youth who have graduates but haven't been able to find gainful employment, this type of corruption infuriates the Iraqi people. New Corruption on the Part of the Islamists: More than 1000 Doctorates for al-Hashad al-Sha'bi

Cracks in the PMU alliance The impact of the Gaza War and Iran's economic crisis has seriously undermined the PMUs power in Iraq.  Already three years ago, the head of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps informed the PMUs that they could no longer count on financial support from Iran given the poor state of its economy. 

With the colapse of the Axis of Resistance and weakened Iran, a schism has developed within the PMU ranks.  Efforts are underway to remove Falih Fayyadh, the PMU commander, from his post.  Qa'is al-Khazali, head of the Asa'ib Ahl al-Haqq militia, is using Fayydh's call for a more moderate posture on the PMUs part towards cooperating with the Iraqi government to accuse him of undermining the PMUs' mission.  

US foreign policy in Iraq and Syria What should the Trump administration do to undermine the last militia movement in the so-called Axis of Resistance? First, Trump must abandon the lens through which he views American foreign policy. There is no "deal" to be made in Iraq. Unlike Iram there are no sanctions or tariffs which can be levied on Iraq to rid it of the PMUs.

Second, if Trump wants to eventually eliminate the threat Iran's proxy militias pose to American interests in the Middle East and the region's security, he must maintain current troop levels in Iraq and Syria.  If he withdraws these troops, it will be "penny wise and pound foolish."  Without US forces to support our closest ally in the MENA region, the Syrian Democratic Forces, Islamic State terrorist cells will be able to reestablish bases Eastern Syria.

Third, if the Islamic State establishes more bases in Syria, it will not only strengthen the its attempted comeback there, but facilitate the terrorists' ability to increase its already numerous attacks in North Central Iraq.  While it makes sense to support replacing some US troops  in Iraq with NATO forces, there is no substitute for the logistical and intelligence support the US can provide the Iraqi government.  

Current US forces in Iraq have a lengthy experience fighting the Islamic State terrorists  and training Iraq's counter-terrorism forces.  Should US forces be withdrawn from Iraq, Iran would claim a victory over the "Great Satan."

Equally important, US forces withdrawal from Iraq would encourage Islamic State fighters to increase their attacks in Iraq. They would view such a withdrawal as evidence of American weakness and lack of interest in defending Iraq.  

Precisely when the PMUs are weak isn't the time to strengthen their control of Iraqi politics and its economy.   We need remember that the PMUs achieved their original legitimacy not only from the fatwa Ayatollah 'Ali al-Sistani issued in 2014 justifying their creation, but from their success in preventing Islamic State forces from reaching Baghdad in 2014.With US forces no longer in Iraq, the PMUs can argue that they are needed once again to assure the Islamic State doesn't reestablish itself in Iraq. 

Needless to say, Trump's withdrawal of US forces in Iraq will have a domino effect.  It will also embolden the Islamic State in Syria placing greater pressure on our key ally, the Syrian Democratic Forces, which is a large prison camp and other prisons in Eastern Syria which hold over 60,000 Islamic State fighters and their families.

After the Gaza Ceasefire: A New "Trail of Tears" or a March Towards Peace?

The immediate question following the ceasefire in Gaza is whether it will hold. However, the larger question still remains: can Israel and Palestinians come to terms and establish a peaceful solution to the Forever War which has persisted since 1948? Can the elusive goal of a two state solution, where both sides live in peace and security, be realized? Beyond Historical Amnesia, Revenge and the Good-Evil Binary: Solving the Israeli-Palestinian Dispute Once and For All

Displaced Palestinians fleeing to Lebanon during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War

Israel and the Palestinians are at a critical juncture. Gaza can either be rebuilt with funds from Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates and HAMAS replaced with a joint Palestinian National Authority and Arab states, e.g., Egypt and Jordan, . Or the territory can be seized by the Israeli far-right and the Gazan Palestinians be expelled for the second time in their lives (the first in 1948 when Palestinians along Israel's Mediterranean Coast were forced into the Gaza Strip, then controlled by Egypt).Causes of the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight

Unfortunately, HAMAS is still in control in the Gaza Strip which presents a major impediment to moving towards peace. The Arab League should establish an interim administration comprised of Jordan and Egypt.  The Jordanians and Egyptians should make clear to HAMAS that it needs to shed its weapons and then become one of several political parties in Gaza which will win or lose in fair and free elections. If HAMAS refuses, the Arab League should sponsor a military force dispatched to Gaza to remove its weapons and disarm it.

A new "Trail of Tears? The alternative to the scenario just described is the Israeli far-right's plan to either force or have Gazans "voluntarily" evacuate the Gaza Strip. The far right settlers would take control of it. This would constitute a latter day "Trail of Tears," as was implemented during the Andrew Jackson administration in 1830. Native American tribes were removed from their ancestral lands east of the Mississippi River and forced to move westward to government controlled reservations in regions, such as present-day Oklahoma, which were not yet states. 

The brutal HAMAS attack on Israel on October 7, 2023 upended Middle East politics.  Over 1200 Israelis were killed during the attack, and a wrenching hostage crisis ensued with 250 Israelis were seized by HAMAS and taken to Gaza (many of whom died while in captivity). Israeli survivors recount terror at music festival, where Hamas militants killed at least 260 

At least 47,000 Palestinians living in Gaza, mostly women and children, have been killed, although recent excavation of bodies from destroyed buildings will make that figure much higher. Over 80% of the Gaza Strip's buildings and infrastructure has been destroyed by Israel's bombing campaign.

What has the violence over the past 75 years accomplished? Perhaps we should answer this question by invoking the colloquial definition of insanity: "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result." When will more rational heads prevail to end the never ending cycle of violence?

The Gaza War's cost to Israel and the Palestinians Israel has secured its position as nation-state in the Middle East, but at great the cost. While it won all the Arab-Israeli wars, save for the 1956 tripartite invasion of Egypt, it has done less well in conflict with asymmetric forces.  

After invading Lebanon in 1982 to destroy the Palestine Liberation Organization bases in South Lebanon and its leadership in Beirut, Israel was forced to withdraw from the south in 2000 following repeated guerrilla attacks on its forces. The 2006 war with Hizballah ended in a draw. And HAMAS still controls the Gaza Strip following the ceasefire.

With the January 2025 Ceasefire in place, Israeli politics has entered a new phase. The far-right minister of national security, Itamar Ben Gvir, resigned in protest. Bezalel Smotrich, the Minister of Finance, also on the far-right, has threatened to resign as well if the ceasefire becomes permanent. It is unclear whether the Netanyahu government will continue its efforts priro to the HAMAS attack to strip Israel's Supreme Court of its power to declare laws passed by the Knesset (parliament) as unconstitutional.

Tensions have increased between religious and secular Israels as a result of the Gaza War.  The 2024 court order that Haredim (orthodox males who dedicate their lives to religious studies) must join the military provoked outrage among many orthodox rabbis and their followers. The Haredim, who receive state subsidies to conduct their religious studies, are not required to pay taxes and, until now, have been exempt from serving in the armed forces. Given their large families, they will constitute a majority of Israel's population by 2050.

Apart from the technology sector, Israel's economy has suffered a s result of the war.  A large percentage of the employed males, who are overwhelmingly secular and taxpayers, were called up to serve in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).  Economic growth has slowed and the government has faced severe budget constraints to fund the war and the Israelis displaced by the conflict with Hizballah in southern Lebanon along Israel's northern border.How Benjamin Netanyahu and the Extremist Far Right are Leading Israel Along a Path to Ruin

Perhaps most significant, and difficult to quantify, is Israel's loss of international support as a result of the ferocious bombing campaigning in Gaza. Those who have suffered most are not the HAMAS terrorists but innocent civilians. The international loss of legitimacy, especially in light of the Netanyahu government's failure to reign in West Bank settlers on the West Bank whose terrorist attacks have wounded and killed innocent Palestinians (more than 600 deaths as of this writing) and destroyed their property and crops. The war is in Gaza, but Palestinians in the West Bank are targeted with violence too 

Israel will find it difficult, if not impossible, to reestablish its international legitimacy in the short term.  That Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu, and former Defense Minster, Yoav Gallant, have been indicted on war crimes charges by the International Criminal Court in the Hague, further undermines Israel's credibility in prosecuting the war against HAMAS in the Gaza Strip.  

This image captures Gaza's destruction during the Israel-HAMAS war

 
The current status of Palestinians is dire. With over 80% of the Gaza Strip completely destroyed, most of the two and a half million residents lack homes, jobs, food, healthcare and security. In addition to the 47,000 plus Gazans who have been killed, many residents have lost limbs and youth have no access to education because all schools and universities have been destroyed. These maps and images show what's left of Gaza, 1 year into the Israel-Hamas war

In the West Bank , Palestinians have been subject to increasing violence from settler terrorists who destroy their houses (which subsequently aren't legally allowed to be rebuilt) and crops and even murder them. Over 600 West Bank Palestinians have lost their lives since the HAMAS October 2023 attack on Israel. Mapping 1,800 Israeli settler attacks in the West Bank since October 2023

The Palestine National Authority (PNA) is headed by an 89 year old autocrat, Mahmoud Abbas, who hasn't allowed elections to be held in the PNA's areas of control in the West Bank since 2013. President Abbas is extremely corrupt, diverting millions of dollars in funds designated for the Palestinian people to his sons, Yasser and Tariq. His current approval rating hovers at 13%.

The Gaza War presents the opportunity to remove Abbas from his illegally held office and create a new PNA leadership.  One name which has been proposed is Dr. Salam Fayyad, who served as Prime Minister from 2007 until 2013, but who was removed from office by Abbas because he wouldn't support the PNA president's corrupt behavior. Fayyad, who holds a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Texas at Austin, is highly respected among West Bank Palestinians and internationally.Salam Fayyad

The need to move quickly to rebuild Gaza Recently, President Donald Trump proposed that Gaza's Palestinian residents be relocated to Jordan and Egypt. His rationale for this proposal is that Gaza has been largely destroyed and thus it's best to "clean out the territory."  Unsurprisingly, this proposal has been universally rejected by all Arab countries.  However, with the Gaza Strip in ruin, the idea of removing its residents does possess some logic, however perverse. Trump says to ‘clean out’ Gaza, urges Arab countries to take more refugees

Thus, time is of the essence.  The longer the Gazan Palestinians remain without water, electricity and housing, the louder the chorus of those who want to remove them from their homes and land will become.

Here is where the "rubber meets the road."  If the Arab states, who have manipulated the Palestinian cause for decades to serve their own national interests, truly want to promote peace and a meaningful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, they must put their money where their mouth is - walk the walk, not just talk the talk. 

Saudi leader Muhammad Bin Salman would do better using the $600 billion he has promised Donald Trump he will invest in the United States to rebuild Gaza instead. Qatar and the UAE should follow suit. Quick action by these wealthy Arab oil producers could have the critical impact of cutting off the Israeli far-right's attempt to seize yet more Palestinian land.Saudi Prince promises Donald Trump $600 billion trade, investment boost

The Syrian Earthquake: What Role Should the United States Play الزلزال السوري: ما هو الدور الذي يجب أن تلعبه الولايات المتحدة؟

Syrians celebrating the downfall of Bashar al-Asad's regime

The Middle East never fails to surprise. The despotic al-Asad regime's fall is no exception. No one would have predicted in late November that the regime was about to be toppled, and then in little more than a week. Now that Bashar al-Asad and the sclerotic regime he ruled is gone, what is Syria's future? How will the ancien regime's fall affect the larger Middle East and beyond? What role should the US play in a post-Asad Syria?

Above all, the central question is whether the new regime, dominated by the Hayat Tahrir ash-Sham (HTS), will be able to rule a country which has experienced 13 years of a devastating civil war.  Statements made by HTS leader Ahmad al-Shara' (nom de guerre, Abu Muhammad al-Julani) have emphasized that the new order will not be based on radical Islamism to which HTS once adhered. Ideology, he says, is one thing, ruling a multi-ethnic and multi-confessional state is another. If symbols matter, al-Shara' has already shed his military uniform for a suit and tie. 

al-Shara' has sought to reassure Syria's minority populations, especially Christians, Alawites and Druze, that they have nothing to fear from the new regime and that their traditions and religious practices will be respected. HTS' relation to Syria's Kurdish population (the Rojava or "Western" Kurds) is less clear. Its military, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), control one-third of the northeastern portion of the country. 

The threat posed by the Islamic State The new Syrian regime lacks adequate human resources to rule the entire country. This means that a power vacuum has opened in different parts of the country. There is a reason why, shortly after Bashar al-Asad was deposed, the United States bombed Islamic State camps in Central and Eastern Syria. The US messaged the IS that it would not tolerate the change in regimes leading to a return of the IS' "caliphate" which could plunge Syria into yet another protracted conflict.

Most importantly for the Syrian people's sake, it is critical that the Islamic State not be allowed to capture territory that it once controlled after Syria's Arab Spring uprisings. But the concern with the reestablishment of the Islamic State also has regional and international implications. Should the Islamic State reconstitute itself, it would present a threat not only to Syria but to Iraq, Jordan and other parts of the Arab world as well. 

Currently, there are 60,000 Islamic State fighters and their families being held in prisons in Eastern Syria, mostly in the al-Hawl (al-Hol) Camp and the al-Hasakah Prison.  Despite limited resources, it is the SDF which struggles to keep order inside the detention centers, particular at the large al-Hawl Camp. Few countries have agreed to repatriate their imprisoned citizens, leaving the Rojava Kurds to deal with the problem. CENTCOM Commander General Michael Kurilla says ISIS Detainees are "an army in waiting"

The Future of the Rojava Kurds Syria's Kurdish population in the north and northeast of the country was horribly mistreated by the al-Asad regime, both Hafez al-Asad (1973-2000), and then Bashar. The Ba'thist regime in Damascus considered the Kurds non-Syrian and refused them citizenship and landownership rights. Under the al-Asad regimes, Kurds could lose their land at any time and be imprisoned without cause.

The Arab Spring uprisings, which began in Syria in 2011, allowed the Rojava Kurds to break away from Damascus' control and establish a quasi-state in 3 non-contiguous areas along the Turkish border in the north and northeastern parts of the country. The Kurds, in cooperation with local Arabs, established the Autonomous Administration in North and North East Syria (ANEES) in 2012.  

When United States, Iraqi and Iranian forces began their assault on the Islamic State, the SDF's military arm, the YPG (People's Protection Unit), which includes male and female units, played an essential role in helping to fight and later defeat the Islamic State.  The YPG was able to prevent the Islamic State from seizing the city of Kobane on the Northern border with Turkey after a 9 month battle in 2015. Their forces rolled into Raqqa, the Islamic States's capital, which they seized in 2017.The People’s Protection Units’ Branding Problem Syrian Kurds and Potential Destabilization in Northeastern Syria

Why do the Rojava Kurds need international protection? The reasons are domestic, regional and international. Most importantly, the Kurds have been critical in preventing the return of the Islamic State.  Should they lose international support, particularly from the United States which maintains a force of almost 2000 troops in Eastern Syria, the SDF would have difficulty containing a resurgent Islamic State.

When the Islamic State began to expand its grip on large areas of east and central Syria, the SDF, working with American and Iraqi forces, played a key role in the ultimate collapsed of the Islamic State's so-called Caliphate in March 2019. The ability of the SDF and allied forces, such as its female militia the YPJ, earned the AANES the gratitude of all ethnic and confessional groups in eastern and northern Syria for ridding the region of Islamic State terrorists.

Erdogan, HTS and the Islamic State The two villains in Syria's ongoing political crisis have been Bashar al-Asad and President Recip Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey.  Bashar al-Asad ruled a tyrannical regime. His war on the Syrian people led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands and the displacement of half the country's population.  His prisons, such as the notorious Saydnaya prison in Damascus, were known as slaughterhouses where tens of thousands of prisoners died under horrible conditions, including the widespread use of torture.

But Bashar is finished, having fled Syria on December 8th for Russia where he was granted political asylum.  The key leader standing in the way of a potentially positive transition to a more tolerant and even democratic country is Turkiye's Recip Tayyip Erdogan.  Turkiye's president is determined to destroy the experiment in self-rule that the Kurds and other ethnic groups enjoy in the AANES.

Erdogan's attitude towards Islamist extremists has been highly equivocal. As an example, during the 9 month siege of Kobane, Turkish troops stood by with their tanks overlooking the town from the Turkish side of the border while hundreds of SDF fighters were wounded and died repulsing continued Islamic State assaults. Had the Turkish army intervened on the side of the SDF, the IS would have been quickly defeated.

Because Erdogan has been a strong backer of HTS, and funds Syrian militias, such as the Syrian National Army, whose name belies its complete control by Turkiye's armed forces, he now wields significant influence in post-Aaad Syria. Erdogan has threatened on numerous occasions that he will invade northeastern Syria if the SDF do not lay down their arms. Speaking to the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), Erdogan said on December 24th that: “The separatist murderers will either bid farewell to their weapons, or they will be buried in Syrian lands along with their weapons.” Erdogan says YPG ‘will be buried’ in Syria if it doesn’t lay down arms

The US role in post-Asad Syria. The US is central to preventing a reconstituted Islamic State from gaining power again in Syria.  Not only is the US the most important military force in Eastern Syria, but it has the backing of NATO and the European Union in containing the Islamic State. If the new Syrian regime wants to be internationally recognized and receive the desperately needed foreign aid to rebuild the Syrian state, it will depend in this process on the US and the West.

The US maintains a force of roughly 2000 troops in Eastern Syria. It should make clear to the new regime in Damascus that it has no desire to permanently station troops in Syria. Because the HTS has fought the Islamic State in the area it controlled surrounding the city of Idlib in northern Syria, it is committed to eliminating the IS as is the US and its Western and Arab allies, Iraq and Jordan. 

Meanwhile, the chaos caused by the rapid collapse of the Syrian Army in face of the HTS attacks meant that considerable weaponry was abandoned.  Many Syrian Army units saw little reason to confront the HTS and simply abandoned their posts, shedding uniforms and weapons. Thus, a large amount of weapons fell into the hands of Islamic State terrorists. Their threat to Syria's new regime has only increased since Bashar al-Asad's ouster. Fears Grow of Islamic State’s Re-Emergence in Syria

Working together with the new regime to defeat the IS would serve to create new ties and trust between the US and the HTS. A relationship of trust will be crucial if the US is to wean the new regime away from its traditional dependence on Turkiye. Erdogan will use every tool he has to use the HTS to undermine the AANES and the SDF in Eastern Turkey.

Beyond establishing a working relation ship with Ahmad Shara' and the HTS regime, the US must make clear to Erdogan that it will not tolerate a Turkish military incursion into northeastern Syria. If the SDF was attacked by Turkish forces and many of its fighters killed or wounded, that would constitute a severe setback in the effort to prevent the Islamic State from using the resulting power vacuum to reestablish more bases in central and Eastern Syria.

Donald Trump has indicated that he "wants nothing to do" with the current political upheaval in Syria.  Fortunately, both Senator Marco Rubio, Secretary of State designate, and former congressman Michael Waltz, National Security Advisor designate, both understand the danger that the Islamic State still poses.  

Their job should be to convince Trump that withdrawing US forces from Syria would have grave consequences for Syria and the larger MENA region. It would send a message to Islamic State terrorists in Iraq that they now enjoy greater latitude of action in north central Iraq as well as in Syria.  Trump must be informed that use of airpower again the IS is no substitute for American boots on the ground.

Even before he assumes office, Donald Trump is learning that isolationism is not a viable policy when it comes to dealing with terrorism.  The Islamic State continues to mount attacks in in Syria and Iraq and has large sums of money hidden away with which to purchase arms and compensate its fighters. The IS-inspired attack in New Orleans in the early morning hours of New Year's Day, which killed 14 people and wounded dozens, underscores how its global reach still threatens countries around the world. What to Know About the Islamic State

Climate Migration and the Populist Threat to Europe

Egyptian migrants crossing the Mediterranean Sea

The Climate Emergency is upon us. Extreme weather events, droughts, wildfires and rising sea levels which were predicted to occur between 20-230 and 2050 are already running rampant globally.  No region is most prone to global warming than the Middle East (MENA).  What are the political implications of the Climate Emergency for MENA and what will be the affect on regions beyond?

The most significant impact of the Climate Emergency on the MENA region is to dramatically increase climate migration.  The core problem is increasing temperatures and drought which are producing a regional water crisis.  In Iraq, home of the storied Fertile Crescent, the country's water shortage is reaching a crisis level.  Salt water from the Mediterranean is encroaching on the Nile's 2 tributaries rendering adjacent farm land uncultivable. Jordan's aquifer is being depleted while Tunisia's agricultural sector is facing collapse due to lack of irrigation. Jordan gets $250m funding to tackle water crisis

In the Gulf region, Iran has been forced to move residents 2 of its southwest provinces becase water resources have dried up.  It is rated as the country with fourth most sever water crisis.

Middle East is home to 1/2 billion with roughly 40% under the age of 18.  The combination of a "youth bulge," authoritarian rule, widespread corruption and few options for employment without "wasta" (elite connections), MENA youth are highly discontented. Add the deleterious impact of rapid climate change, ad we see a toxic brew.

Many regimes in the Middle East used their purported revolutionary bona fides to establish political legitimacy. While Nasser's Arab socialism, or the Ba'th Party's vow in Syrian and Iraq to reestablish the glory of the ancient Arab-Islamic empires, or the National Liberation Front (FLN) in Algeria. 

The so-called Islamic Republic of Iran is one of the few regimes which still keeps up the illusion of revolutionary change.  However, its "revolutionary" activity is to have crated a network of militias in Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen and to have propped up the sclerotic regime of Bashar al-Asad in Syria. Domestically, its "revolutionary" activity involves arresting, imprisoning ans sexually abusing women who fail to adhere to the regime's hijab law and to executing males who dare to criticize the regime's repression. 

Instead, most regimes in the Middle East, whether republican or monarchical, no longer pretend to be pursuing major political-structural change. Ideology is dead. Instead, a corrupt crony capitalism defines the nature of rule in the MENA region. Even in Turkey, which once posed a "neo-Ottoman" Islamism, ideology has given way to force and imprisonment. Antonio Gramsci once defined hegemony as "an iron fist clothed in velvet."  In the MENA region today, no regime enjoys hegemonic control.

In his classic study, Exit, Voice and Loyalty, Albert O. Hirschman argued that firms or political systems in decline offered its members 3 options, leave the troubled venue, protests against the crisis, or keeping a stiff upper lip and accepting the status quo. For youth in the MENA region, protest has been violently suppressed, whether the Arab Spring uprisings or the Green Revolution in Iran. For youth who desire a better future, exit is the only possible response 

Even the 2005 Cedars Revolution in Lebanon, which forced the Syrian Army o leave Lebanon, and the 2022 Hirak protests in Algeria, which ousted President Abdel Aziz Bouteflika, failed to bring about meaningful political change. Tunisia, the one purported success story of the Arab Spring uprisings, reverted to authoritarians under the rule of President Ka'is Said in 2021.  Under these circumstances - political repression and unemployment or underemployment, the climate crisis will only exacerbate the problems facing youth in the MENA region.  

There are 3 routes to Europe for migrants leaving the MENA region. Two are no longer viable. It is difficult to cross Turkey and Greece and then travel to the European Union through the the Balkans. Crossing the Mediterranean from Morocco to Spain is also no longer an option given border controls in place in both countries. Thus, the main route is to cross the Mediterranean from Libya to Italy, either to the Island of Lambadusa to to Sicily.

Officials have struggled to estimate the number of migrants who have crossed the Mediterranean Sea.  Many migrants have travelled in non-seaworthy vessels and died as a result. We do know that 157,631 migrants arrived in Italy in 2023.  The vast majority of migrants who leave North Africa do so from the beaches of Tunisia and to a lesser extent, from Libya