How is the War in Ukraine Affecting the Middle East?

Russian arms at the Dubai Arms Fair in 2023

What impact is the war in Ukraine having on the Middle East?  How have key states in the Middle East affected the progress of the war?  What do these developments tell us about the future of the MENA region and the role and influence of the United States in it?

One key takeaway from the Ukraine's war and its impact on the Middle East is the lack of any support by the countries of the region for United States policy towards the war.  There have been no condemnations of Putin's invasion of a sovereign country and the attempt to overthrow a duly elected government.  Indeed, a number of the regions' countries have shown a predisposition towards Russia in the war.  

The foreign policy posture by MENA region states underscores their authoritarian nature and natural disposition to support a dictatorial regime rather than a democracy.  A defeat for Putin in the war - not an unlikely scenario - might encourage citizens in MENA region countries to act more vigorously to promote democracy.  Of course, the threat of democracy is what keeps repressive rulers in the Middle East up at night.

Another takeaway is the declining influence the United States has in the MENA region. Even the United States' closest ally, Israel - who some would argue is a 51st state - has refused to vigorously oppose Putin's brutal invasion or supply Ukraine with meaningful arms, e.g., fighter jets which would allow Ukrainian forces to challenge Russia's dominance of the air.

Other supposed American allies - Turkey, Saudi Arabia the UAE and Egypt - have also been very equivocal in their foreign policy positions towards the war.  President Erdogan has benefitted enormously from the war.  At the beginning of the conflict, Turkey sold large numbers of Bayrakdar mini drones to Ukraine.  These low flying drones were critical in devastating tank columns sent across the Russian-Ukraine border to seize Kyiv.

As is well known, southern Russia and Ukraine serve as the "breadbasket" to the MENA region and much of Africa. Erdogan's role in helping to broker a deal between Putin and Ukraine to allow grain shipments to travel through the Black Sea and then through Turkey's Dardanelles Straits was critical to preventing widespread hunger in countries which regularly import Ukrainian and Russian wheat,  fertilizers and other agricultural products.

Turkey has also become a place of (temporary?) exile for many Russian oligarchs.  Becase a number of prominent oligarchs have died to Russia under mysterious circumstances, large numbers of oligarchs have travelled outside Russia in an attempt to protect their physical safety and their wealth.  Russian yachts dot the Istanbul harbor. 

Despite being a member of NATO, Erdogan has yet to directly criticize Putin for his illegitimate and brutal invasion of Ukraine. Instead, Erdogan has in effect declared his "neutrality" and offered his services as a mediator to bring the war. to an end.  Of course, Putin hasn;t taken him up on his offer because that would force him to negotiate with Ukraine and derail his effort to place the country's under Russian control.

Another supporter of Putin's war is the United Arab Emirates.  On February 23, 2022, A day after the invasion began, the United States and its Western allies asked the United Nations Security Council to demand an immediate withdrawal of Russian troops.  Russia vetoed the resolution but the UAE, together with India and China, abstained on the vote  

In February, 2023, Russia was welcomed at a UAE arms fair where it was allowed to exhibit a wide variety of military arms and equipment.  Eight Russian arms manufacturing firms were exhibiting at the fair, including the Kalashnikov Group and Rosoboronexport.  In 2022, trade between the UAE and Russia increased by 68%. Despite claiming to be "neutral," the UAE has decidedly supported the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The UAE is on team Russia in war against Ukraine

The UAE has benefitted from the Ukraine war in unexpected ways.  A flood of Russian oligarchs have made Dubai their new home in the hope of evading Western sanctions on the Putin regime.  One Dubai real estate firm saw a 100% increases in property sales during 2022. Real estate merchants have received hundreds of millions of dollars in commissions in selling properties to oligarchs such as Roman Abramovich,  former owner of the Chelsea Football club.  

That thousands of Ukrainians have been killed as a result of Putin's illegitimate war, often in the most brutal manner, means nothing to those UAE merchants who are profiting from the deaths happening far beyond their shores. Villas by the sea: Rich Russians fleeing sanctions are pumping up Dubai’s property sector

In neighboring Saudi Arabia, realtions with the Putin regime have changed from hostility duo to its support for the Bashar al-Asad's brutal dictatorship which is propped up by the kingdom's enemy Iran to a warm relationship since 2017.

Saudi Arabia, historically a staunch ally of the United States, has recently cooperated with Russia to sustain high oil prices through the so-called OPEC+ agreement between the two states.  Together the 2 states are the largest producers of oil in the world.  Saudi Arabia, along with other Arab states, such as the UAE, continue to purchase large amounts of refined oil from Russia and often resell it in the international market. Russia is the largest exporter of natural gas to Saudi Arabia.

Although Saudi Arabia voted with he majority of countries in the United Nations against Russia's annexation of 4 regions in Ukraine and another resolution calling on Russia to end the war the kingdom has invested millions of dollars in the Russian economy since the war began through its Kingdom Holding Company.  

Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman has moved to develop cooperation with Russia on arms purchases.  In March 2022, six internationally sanction arms companies were allowed to exhibit weapons systems at World Defense Show in Riyadh. This track record demonstrates considerable Saudi political and economic suport which helps Putin continue to pursue his brutal war in Ukraine.

Finally, there is the important impact of the Ukraine war on Iran.  Its hardline president, Ebrahim Raisi, has been unable to improve the country's economy.  Growth is stagnant, inflation is increasing and the rial has lost much of its value.  One of the key problems is that Iran is suffering from United Nations and Western sanctions and has been cut off from the international banking system and other critical sectors of the global economy.

The war in Ukraine, however, has allowed Iran to find new political support from Russia.  In return for delivering its Shahed-136 drones and other UAVs to Russia, Putin has provided Iran with discounted oil supplies and fighter aircraft. The Shahed costs about $20,000 and is used as a "suicide" aircraft designed to destroy civilian infrastructure and housing.  While the Ukrainian air defenses have been very successful in shooting down these drones, each effort to bring a drone uses precious anti-aircraft missiles.  Thus, waves of Shahed drones have enabled Russia to deplete Ukraine's air defense system.

 Although this project began prior to the invasion of Ukraine, Russia is also helping Iran build a nuclear reactor which will facilitate development of its nuclear weapons program. Iran's acquisition of a nuclear weapon, especially its parallel development of ballistic missiles able to carry a nuclear warhead, have a high probability of prompting an attack by Israel. That Putin is helping Iran circumvent its international isolation due to its nuclear weapons program and human rights record, constitutes a destabilizing factor in the MENA region.  

Egypt represents another untrustworthy US and Western ally in the MENA region.  Leaked Pentagon documents indicate that Egypt was planning in 2023 to send 40,000 rockets to Putin as well large amounts of artillery shells to be used by the Russia armed forces in Ukraine.  Only when the United States discovered this plan did Egypt abandon these efforts.  Perhaps Egypt thought it might receive Russian grain if it assisted Putin, in light of the struggle it's having with acquiring grain to feed its population which has added to the country's high inflation rate.Egypt agreed to supply arms to Ukraine after US talks: Report

That the country which is the second largest recipient of American foreign aid, after Israel, was ready to ignore international sanctions against the Putin regime should lead American leaders to rethink its support of the 'Abd al-Fattah al-Sisi regime.  Egypt is a key sources of intelligence in the MENA region. However, if it is to work against the international community in supporting Putin, it should face consequences for such behavior.

The United States and the West should be concerned with developments in the MENA region following Putin's invasion of Ukraine. That the three most powerful countries in the region - Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the UAE - have come to Putin's rescue is disconcerting. Ironically, the US' "turn to the East to confront China - has led to a significant decline in its influence in the Middle East.  

Apart from China's doing an end run around the United States (see my May 2023 post: "Will China Become the New Hegemon in the Middle East"), Russia's ties to Iran, Turkey Saudi Arabia and the UAE have not only allowed him to more effectively pursue his invasion of Ukraine but pose serious problems for the MENA region's future relationship to the United States and the West. Will China Become the New Hegemon in the Middle East?

As I argued in my May 2023 post, it is clear that the MENA region will no longer remain a primary sphere of United States influence. New thinking is needed.  Resurrecting the idea of a League of Democracy, which John McCain proposed in the 2008 presidential elections, could create an international coalition which could act in tandem to prevent authoritarian regimes like Russia and China from further destabilizing the MENA region.

Will China Become the New Hegemon in the Middle East?

Joe Biden meet with Xi Jinping, November 2022

Much ink has been shed over China's success in reestablishing diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, the Middle East's most antagonistic powers. China's role in MENA region politics hasn't just been limited to bringing two antagonists together to reestablish diplomatic relations.  Since 2005, China has invested $273 billion in the region, more than any other country. Do developments in the first 2 decades of the 21st century point to China becoming the main power in the MENA region?

Should we be rushing to anoint it regional hegemon?

There is little doubt that China represents a major component of the economic fabric of the MENA region.  Further it supplies weapons to several countries in the Middle East. In 2017, the People's Liberation Army built its first regional base in Djibouti.  In 2013, China launched its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) which is designed to provide funds for infrastructural development to the countries of the Global South.  BRI is helping Egypt develop a new (highly over budget) capital east of Cairo and it built a metro in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.

Analysts have failed, however, to consider what constraints domestic developments in China itself might place on its desire to play a more central role as a political and economic power broker in the MENA region.  I would argue that, under the rule of Xi Jinping, China, is shooting itself in the foot.  Xi's policies, together with structural changes over which he and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) have little control, suggest that China may very well face a decline in its global power in the decades to come.

Leadership How has China achieved the position of a global superpower today?  If Mao deserves credit for seizing control of China from Chang Kai-shek and the Kuomintang, he doesn't receive high marks for developing the Chinese economy after 1949.  Mao's disastrous Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution were ideologically driven policies which severely cramped China's economic growth.

It was Deng Xiaoping's decision in 1978 to open the Chinese economy to market forces which led to China's economic miracle reflected in growth rates which reached between 6 and 8% per year. Reacting to Mao's lengthy rule, the CCP adopted a policy of two terms for the Party Secretary. While China remained an authoritarian state, state policies became more pragmatic and less ideological in orientation.

Under current president and party secretary, Xi Jinping, the pendulum haas swing back to a Mao style rule. If Mao had his little Red Book, Xi has his 14 Points which every Chinese citizen must learn by heart.  Xi seeks total control over the CCP, the state apparatus and the economy. China Puts Spymaster in Charge of Overseeing Western Businesses

Fearful that the prosperous entrepreneurial class has attained too much power and present a challenge to his rule, Xi has cracked down on private enterprise.  The result has been the disappearance of a number of prominent business men, the arrest and trail of others on charges of corruption and tax evasion, and the moving of many businesses out of China to safe havens like Singapore and the United States.

Xi's hostile policies towards private enterprise have slowed and even, in many instances, reversed, foreign investment in China.  Xi ignores the fact that it was China's economic growth and large market which attracted foreign capital and catapulted China into its position as a global power. China’s Fading Recovery Reveals Deeper Economic Struggles  

Structural change China is experiencing an aging population.  Workers are harder to come by and thus wages have been pushed upward.  The main incentive for foreign capital to invest in China was not just its large market, but its large workforce and low wages.  As wages have risen, many foreign firms were already leaving China and moving to Vietnam, Cambodia, Indonesia and Malaysia where labor costs are lower.  Even before Xi's intervention in the Chinese economy, foreign capital was beginning to turn negative on producing its products in China. China’s Shrinking Population Is Deeper Problem Than Slow Growth for Its Economy

Much of China's rapid economic growth was based upon the expansion of its housing market.  However, that market has now been saturated.  Many Chinese can't afford the cost of new apartments, leaving large numbers of housing projects sitting empty throughout the country's major cities. That many large cities face thousands of empty apartment buildings indicates the distorted nature of China's economic growth which has been powered by housing and infrastructure.

A critical issue which has not received adequate attention is China's looming water crisis.  As a 2022 report from the Lowy Institute noted, approximately half of China's aquifers are too polluted for farming or industrial use. and 80-90% of its groundwater is unfit for drinking. The Himalayan glaciers are rapidly melting.  Because waters from the Himalayan mountains feed China's Yangtze River, this development poses a major threat to water security. Water security will require much more focus on domestic rather than foreign affairs by the Xi regime. Water scarcity challenges China’s development model

Chinese youth Xi's authoritarian style extends to youth who have been exhorted to adhere to the "9-9-6" work schedule, i.e., 9 am to 9 pm, 6 days a week.  Xi has also stipulated that young Chinese should be limited in the number of hours they spend each day on social media and playing video games.

Given an aging population, educated youth have become an ever more important component of China's workforce.  It is clear, however, that Chines youth c=don;t want to become the "economic shock troops" for Xi's ultra-authoritarian order. In fact, large numbers of youth have created an ingenious response to the "9-9-6" protocol.  It is, in effect "lying flat," namely prone on a couch or bed for large parts of the day involved in leisure activities like consuming social media or reading.

Given the example of large numbers of Russian youth - the best and the brightest of its rising professional, technocratic and scientific class - who have fled Russia as a result of Putin's invasion and war in Ukraine, Xi's threat to forcibly seize Taiwan is not well received by the next generation.  Indeed, one result of Xi's authoritarianism may be to lead young Chinese with needed skills to leave the country and take up residence in the West. China’s Young People Can’t Find Jobs. Xi Jinping Says to ‘Eat Bitterness’

What makes matters worse is the high unemployment rate among Chinese youth. Even students university degrees are having great difficulty finding employment. One problem is that universities have been graduating students with degrees which don't match China's needs. The outcome is a souring on the Chineses economy by its youth 1 in 5 Young Chinese Is Jobless, and Millions More Are About to Graduate

Competition with the West With the United States building an International coalition to deny China access to cutting edge technology in the manufacture of semiconductor chips, China will lag behind the West in developing in producing this critical resource.  Xi's efforts to extend China's influence in the South China Sea through building military bases, often on artificially created islands, his bellicose language and posture towards Taiwan, his repression of Hong Kong democracy demonstrators, and his crackdown on private enterprise, including foreign firms, is one reason why the United States has become more concerned with China's foreign policy intentions .

Based on denying China access to the latest chip technology, its weapons systems will be less effective and thus less desirable to countries like Saudi Arabia. We also need remember that Chinese arms have not been used in any large scale conflict since the Korean War.  Thus, there is still much doubt about how effective it really is compared to American and European weapons.  This consideration means the United States, European (and possibly Israeli) weapons systems will remain the default source of arms for most MENA region states. Investors Have Soured on China’s Stocks, Renewing Fears About Economy

Negotiating the complexities of MENA region rivalries and conflict It is one thing for China to facilitate Saudi Arabia and Iran reestablishing diplomatic relations.  It is quite another for it to create a balance in which its is able to maintain close realtions with both countries.  Muhammad bin Salman sees close ties with Iran as a means of extricating Saudi Arabic from the disastrous war in Yemen and reducing its dependency on the United States which it views as an unreliable ally.  

However, the recent rapprochement between the 2 enemy states should be viewed more as a latter day Molotov-von Ribbentrop Pact, namely a temporary policy of convenience which will not last.  It is only a matter of time before renewed tensions emerge putting Iran and Saudi Arabia at loggerheads.

Iran continues to develop weapons grade uranium. It possesses 6 times the amount allowed under the 2016 JCPOA nuclear agreement. Israel has vowed that it will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons,  especially with Iran having developed ballistic missiles which could carry a nuclear warhead. Iran nuclear: IAEA inspectors find uranium particles enriched to 83.7% Published

What if Israel attacks Iran in a preemptive strike against its nuclear facilities? Would China come to the aid of Iran? Almost certainly, China would condemn the Israeli attack but, I suspect, do little more. Would such lack of support anger the Tehran regime and undermine its relationship with China?

If the Yemen civil war erupts again, and Saudi Arabia is drawn into the conflict leading the pro-Iranian Houthi forces to repeat their shelling of the kingdom, would China intervene to support MBS' regime?  Again, little more than verbal support for Saudi Arabia could be expected.

If a renewal of the Yemen war brought Saudi Arabia and Iran to blows, what policy would China follow? While it would probably seek to mediate the conflict, it would find itself immersed in a conflict which is stoked by a larger regional rivalry.  Xi's regime would be drawn into a web of conflicting interests with little possibility for reaching any long-term solution.

Finally, what if Saudi Arabia acquires nuclear weapons?  In light of China's current assistance to help the kingdom develop what is said to be a peaceful nuclear program, many observers, including the United States, think the program is ultimately aimed at developing nuclear weapons. As an ally of both Iran and Saudi Arabis, how would China preclude what could be a catastrophic war between the two Gulf powers? Inside Saudi Arabia’s Global Push for Nuclear Power  

Is the Concept of a Regional Hegemon Outdated? The United States has been criticized, both in the MENA region and elsewhere, for "withdrawing" from the region.  Putting aside China entry into the region's politics, can the United States sustain its traditional role as a hegemon given the massive changes affecting the Middle East?

In the Israeli-Palestine dispute, the United States has lost almost all its historic influence in affecting the crisis.  In Saudi Arabia, MBS is developing a new type of authoritarian rule which rejects traditional Sa'ud family and tribal rule in favor of a model which characterizes Russia and China.  The US still has influence through its arms sales to Saudi Arabia, but much less ability to influence MBS' decision-making and policies.

The United States has been unable to prevent the reversal of democracy in Tunisia, the one success story which emerged from the Arab Spring. In neighboring Libya, civil strife still prevails, despite NATO intervention in 2011 to help overthrow the Qaddafi regime. The Biden administration has had little success in changing 'Abd al-Fattah al-Sisi's intolerance towards dissent as Egypt's prison population continues to grow.

In short, it is no longer possible for one power to play the role of hegemon in the Middle East.  The spread of political repression, corruption, civil strife and failed states presents a level of challenges that no one superpower can effectively move the region in ways which accord with its national interests.

In the 2008 presidential election, John McCain proposed the creation of a "League of Democracies." While not my preferred candidate, McCain did have a good idea. The United States, Canada, European democracies and democracies from other parts of the world need to create an organization which can use both the carrot and the stick to promote democracy and civically minded leaders who seek to raise the standard of living of their citizens, not line their own pockets.

While this proposal may seem naive, let's remember that Western support of repressive authoritarian regimes has been  an abject failure. Having a League of Democracies promote social democracy which affords citizens a decent standard of living and personal freedoms would give them hope in the future and go a long way towards ending the rising level of conflict that consumes the MENA region.

Sudan and the Crisis of Failed States in the Arab World

Fighting in the Sudanese capital Khartoum

The Arab world is well known for its "democracy deficit."  This problematic state of affairs may be soon surpassed by an even more dubious distinction, namely the crisis of failed states.  Across the Arab world, Yemen, Libya, Syria, and Lebanon are all failed states.  Given the intense fighting between two rival generals in Sudan, we may soon see the largest country in sub-Saharan Africa join the list. It is not a stretch to envision Tunisia joining the list as well.

Why are so many Arab states unable to preserve their sovereignty and national security? More ominously, does the Arab experience suggest that the problems the region is facing are spreading to other regions of Africa and South Asia as well? The answer is that the problems undermining political authority in the Arab world are larger than the region. Thus, an analysis of the region helps us comprehend a larger dynamic which is affecting much of the Global South.

In explaining failed states in the Arab world, we need to focus on three stages: the collapse of secular ideology, the onset of foreign direct investment (FDI), and the development of neoliberalism accompanied by massive corruption and criminality. 

The collapse of secular ideology  The legacy of colonial rule demonstrated that the collaborative neo-colonial regimes which Great Britain, France and other European powers established after ceding independence lacked legitimacy. Despite the pretense of democratic elections, these post-WWI regimes were dominated by landowners and merchants and incipient industrialists which did little or nothing to improve the conditions of the mass publics over which they ruled.

The military and single party coups which began after WWII promised revolutionary change, especially under the banner of Pan-Arabism.  Despite high hopes, the Pan-Arab slogan of "unity, democracy and socialism" failed to materialize. As Egyptians noted, with their ingrained sense of humor, all Jamal 'Abd al-Nasir (Nasser)'s revolution accomplished was to spread Egypt's poverty more evenly.

The Pan-Arab social contract offered political stability and economic security in return for political quiescence.  University education would be free and college graduates would be guaranteed a government job. Citizens would receive monthly food rations at minimal cost. Transportation would be subsidized.  To undermine Islamist movements and appear more modern to the West, gender equality was emphasized, although women remained second class citizens.*

The Pan-Arabist Social Contract was short lived.  Repression  of dissent, the institutionalization of the military in nationalized industry, the defeat in the 1967 war, and the struggle between Egypt, Syrai and Iraq for control of the Pan Arabist movement all delegitimized the ideology.  The slow growth of the state public sector prevented regimes from continuing to provide social entitlements, except through accumulating large debts.

The onset of foreign direct investment (FDI) Following the disastrous June 1967 Arab -Israeli War, Egypt found itself cut off from Suez Canal and sizable tourist revenues, while bearing the burden of residents forced to leave the Suez Canal and move west to Cairo and other urban areas.  When Jamal 'Abd al-Nasir died in September 1970, his Vice-President, Anar Sadat, replaced him.  

Sadat, as is well known, put Egypt on a very different foreign policy and domestic trajectory than that of al-Nasir.  He terminated military ties with the Soviet Union, released Nasir's arch enemies, the Muslim Brothers, from jail (so they could attack the left-wing of the Nasserite movement), and proclaimed his al-infitah - the "Open Door" policy to the US and the West.  The Open Door was an attempt to attract foreign investment to Egypt to overcome its sluggish economic growth.

At the Eighth Party Congress of Iraq's Ba'th Party in 1974, Saddam Husayn moved away from the socialism and "anti-imperialism" which characterized the party's ideology since it seized power in 1968, and began to seek foreign investment in the Iraq's economy.  When I arrived in Iraq for a two month stay in May and June of 1980, my minders at the Ministry of Information took me to a number of Western projects, such as a steel mill being built by San Francisco based Bechtel Corporation and France's Creusot-Loire engineering conglomerate.

Syria waited longer to seek Western FDI.  Between 2000 and 2010, Syria's legal system underwent significant change, offering tax holidays and other market-based incentives. During the first decade of the 20th century, there was sharp uptick of FDI which reached a peak in 2009.  The primary countries which invested in Syria were Russia and Germany.  The main areas of FDI were telecommunications, banking and electricity sectors.

The rise of the corporate-criminal state Pan-Arabism slipped from Arab collective memory during the 1970s and 1980s.  As globalization spread, Arab elites in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Libya and elsewhere became increasingly involved with foreign capital. The standard of living and general well-being of mass publics became an afterthought.  State subsidies for food and transportation, and benefits such as government employment based on a university degree, declined as Arab states sought to lower national debt to increase their attractiveness as investment targets.

Arab leaders of the 1990s lacked the experience of having participated in the anti-colonial struggle of the inter-war and post WWII eras.  In Tunisia, for example, Habib Bourguiba had ruled as an autocrat. Still, he allowed the formation of government controlled labor unions, promoted women's rights and allowed state-supervised civil society to form. After he was deposed in 1987, his successor Zine al-Din Ben Ali established an incredibly corrupt regime.  In is no coincidence that the Arab Spring began in Tunisia when a frustrated vegetable and fruit vendor, Muhammad Bouazizi, immolated himself when he no longer could afford the daily brides in the town in which he lived to conduct his business and support his extended family.

The Arab Spring uprisings quickly spread from Tunisia to Egypt, Syria, Libya and Yemen.  Only Tunisia experienced any meaningful transition to democracy with Ben Ali's ouster.  Nevertheless, the inability of successive governments to improve Tunisia's economy. combined with the spread of corruption. allowed President Qa'is Sa'id to seize power in 2020, restructure the constitution, and centralize power in his hands.  In effect, Tunisia has once again become an autocracy.

Shorn of ideology and befitting from lucrative contacts with foreign corporations, an ever widening gap has developed between political elites and the citizenry at large. During the Arab Spring, the Syrian and Egyptian regimes used the argument that the opposition was comprised of radical Islamists and therefore needed to be repressed.  The violent strife which accompanied the Arab Spring led to a large number of displaced persons. In Syria, half of the population has been affected by the ongoing civil war.

The large influx of refugees into neighboring countries has caused additional political turmoil. Over 4 million Syrians moved to Syria.  However, it was the influx of over 2 million Syrians into Lebanon which has pushed it the verge of fiscal collapse.  The storied Lebanese banking system, has run out of funds. The result has been that depositors can't accessing their bank accounts, leading to attempts to "rob" banks to obtain their funds.

Th extent of corruption in Lebanon's political elite became manifest after a huge amount of ammonium nitrate, over 2700 hundred tons, which had been illegally stored in Beirut's post for 6 years, exploded in August 2020. The explosion destroyed a large part of the city, killing 218, injuring 7000 and displacing over 300,00 residents.

Despite determined efforts of Lebanese judges, all efforts to investigate the crime and bring those who caused it to justice have failed.  The political elites from a wide variety of confessional groups - Christian and Muslim - and Hizballah, which controls the most seats in parliament and half the cabinet ministers, have stymied all attempts to move the investigation and trials forward.

Egypt -a Proto-Failed State? Egypt represents the archetypical military-corporate state.  It is a bifurcated state.  On the one hand, there is the Egyptian government appointed by General 'Abd al-Fattah al-Sisi, Egypt's dictatorial ruler. This consists of the usual array of ministries with limited budgets. On the other, there is the military-financial complex in which military officers and business elites close to the al-Sisi regime enjoy all the benefits of Egypt's wealth while leaving millions of their fellow citizens in abject poverty. Egyptian Armed Forces, Inc.: the Middle East's New Janissary Corps

The great gap in wealth is combined with spatial segregation. The military-financial elite lives in upscale neighborhoods or in gated communities and socializes in exclusive clubs. There is minimal interaction between the elites and the populace at large.  Indeed, only those Egyptian's who possess al-wasta (political influence) have any hopes of entering the elite's ranks. 

Just like the Rapid Support Forces and the national army in Sudan, and the all powerful militias supported by Iran in Iraq, the Egyptian military is deeply compromised by its control of Egypt's economy.  This control is symbolically codified in an Egyptian  law which makes publishing the military's budget a crime.  Estimates are that the military controls at least 1/3 of Egypt's economy.  Egypt’s Military Now Controls Much of Its Economy. Is This Wise?

Meanwhile, the Sisi regime has done little to generate the jobs needed for a rapidly growing population, now almost 108 million. University graduates are frustrated and angry because they can't find employment based on their merits.  Instead, they see youth who have wasta receiving the premium positions.  

Poverty is a major problem in Egypt with almost 30% of the population suffering from low incomes, access to food and shelter and healthcare.  The war in Ukraine has raised the cost of living because Egypt imports most grains which it needs to feed its population.  Thus, current statistics surely underestimate the current rate of poverty.

Despite building one of the largest solar farms in the south near the border with Sudan, Egypt has done little to address another serious problem, that of global warming.  The rising sea level of the Mediterranean is beginning to push its waters up the two tributaries of the Nile River.  The resulting salinization of the water and soil is adversely affecting agricultural production in these regions.  Ironically, Egypt was given the presidency of the United Nations' COP27 Meeting which was an international embarrassment in light if its having ignored to date its domestic environmental problems.

Egypt is also facing a dangerous threat to the south where Ethiopia has built the Grand Renaissance Dam on the Nile River which will hamper the flow of critically needed water resources downstream.  Egypt has declared the dam to be a national security threat and warned of possible military action to attack it if Ethiopia begins to fill the lake behind it.  

However, Egypt is doing little to modernize its agrarian sector and teach farmers how to better allocate water used for irrigation. It could make better use of the model developed by the Egyptian firm, Karam Solar, which provides solar panels to farmers which enables them to avoid use polluting and expensive diesel fuel and allows them to access and pump water from deeper in the ground to use for irrigating their crops.

Like most MENA region autocracies, the Sisi regime lacks an ideology and hence any meaningful legitimizing mechanism. The military-financial elite demonstrates no civic consciousness. Its only goal is increasing its profits and wealth.  This state of affairs has engendered considerable dissent among the educated classes.  Unable to tolerate any criticism, the Sisi regime has arrested large numbers of Egyptians, resulting in an estimated 60,000 prisoners held under horrific conditions in its infamous prisons. COP27 shines spotlight on Egypt's political prisoners

One reason the Egyptian political class has been able to weather a number of storms, including the ignominious defeat in the June 1967 six day war, Anwar al-Sadat's assassination in 1981 of threats from radical Islamism and the 2012 Arab Spring uprisings has been the cohesion derived from its social base. 

As Leonard Binder documented years ago in his study, In a Moment of Enthusiasm: Political Power and the Second Stratum in Egypt, the Free Officers movement which led the July 1952 coup which overthrew the monarchy under King Faruq was rooted in a rural middle class of notables and middle level landowners. This social stratum has provided the social base of the al-Nasir (Nasser) and subsequent regimes.

Will the military-financial elite be able to rely upon oppression to maintain its current grip on power and prevent Egypt from becoming a failed state?  While Egypt's elite did successfully negotiate the Arab Spring uprisings, the toppling of President Husni Mubarak notwithstanding, it is doubtful that it can sustain its rule if it continues to ignore the serious challenges facing Egypt.

Sudan had its own uprisings in 2019. However, its military-financial elite was not about to allow power to flow into the hands of democratic leaders who might expose and break up its corrupt hold on the country's economy. Even though the military-financial elite in Egypt is still largely unified politically, it too could experience schisms developing within it if pressures from below emerge, such as large scale protests demanding a change in the authoritarian status quo. Meet Sudan's web of warlords, foreign backers and their tangled alignments

Foreign powers, whether from Russia or China, or from the West, will continue to pressure MENA region states which possess critical economic resources, whether oil, natural gas, gold, other precious metals, or agricultural products. Any hope for a move towards democratization of MENA region nation-states seems unlikely indeed.

____________

 *Although it should be noted that, when I visited Baghdad in May and June of 1980, the majority of physicians in the capital were female. 

What is the Legacy of the United States' 2003 Invasion of Iraq?

"Shock and Awe" - Baghdad March 20, 2023

Twenty years ago today, the Bush Administration launched the United States invasion of Iraq.  What is the legacy of the invasion?  Was it justified and what was its impact on Iraq?  What are the lessons learned by the invasion and toppling of Saddam Husayn's regime?

To begin, there is no question that Saddam Husayn was one of the world's most notorious war criminals and guilty of massive human rights abuses.  It is estimated that Saddam killed 3 million Iraqis during his rule between 1968 and 2003.  This is equal to 15% of Iraq's population, and doesn't take account of all the Iraqis killed due to Saddam's invasion of Iran in September 1980 and seizure of Kuwait  in August 1990 which killed thousands of Iraqi troops and innocent civilians.

The Bush administration's invasion of Iraq was an illegal operation.  The United Nations dod not authorize the attack.  The time in which to remove Saddam from power was in March 1991 when a majority of the Iraqi population rise up against Saddam.  

The uprising (Intifada) in the Kurdish north and the Arab south at the time would have deposed Saddam had not the United States intervened to allow Iraqi helicopter gunships to take to the air and suppress the Intifada.  Had Saddam's regime been toppled, while United States were in Iraq, would have prevented the brutal United Nations sanctions of 1991-2003.  The sanctions destroyed the Iraqi education system and the professional middle classes.  In short, the first mistake made by Bush the Elder was not to end Saddam's regime in 1991.

The 2003 invasion was based on a lie.  The CIA and Bush administration knew that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Unfortunately, Saddam refused to admit Iraq had no WMD because he was afraid if he did Iran would consider Iraq as weak and be encouraged to invade and overthrow his regime.

The US occupation was initially directed by General Jay Garner, someone who had some knowledge of Iraq and the Arab world.  However, he was considered to "pro-Arab" and soon repealed by an arrogant official, Paul Bremer, who had no experience in the Arab world and was ignorant to navigate complex situation of a country which had suffered 2 major wars and the mist severe sanctions regime ever imposed on a nation-state in the modern era.

Bremer who was appointed to head the new Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in 2003.  As CPA Administrator, his first decisions began a long list of destructive policies.  The dissolution of Iraq's 400,000 man strong conscript army (separate from Saddam's Republican Guards or Special Republican Guards) included large number of soldiers who were battle trained, having fought in the 8 year Iran-Iraq War (1980-88) and Gulf War (1991), created the basis for the insurgency which Saddam had planned if US forces were successful in deposing him.

Now that large numbers of soldiers were unemployed, even if they received salaries for a period after having been released from military service, were available for mobilization against US forces. According to a study of the impact of the army's dissolution, the firing of 400,000 troops had a negative impact on an estimated 10 million Iraqis, taking into account the families which these soldiers salaries had supported.

By the fall of 2003, an insurgency was underway, even if Bush's Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, continued to deny its existence. Not only did the insurgency include ex-Ba'thists but also former conscript army members who were paid to fight and kill American troops.  Ominously, it also began to attract radical Islamists and members of al-Qa'ida who saw in Iraq an opportunity to take up arms against the United States. 

The second consequential decision Bremer took was to fire all members of Iraq's Ba'th Party, not taking into account those who were forced to join to maintain their government employment (when included a large segment of the Iraqi population).  This decision deprived Iraq of large numbers of critically needed professionals for the reconstruction of Iraq, whose economy and infrastructure had been destroyed in two wars of bombing of Iraq and the United Nations sanctions regime.

Beyond the CPA's forst 2 decisions, other problematic decision were being made in Washington, DC, primarily by Vice President Dick Cheney and members of the Defense Department, especially Assistant Secretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz and his assistant, Under Secretary of Policy Planning, Douglass Feith.

The Bush administration's cooperation with Iraqi exiles who had maintained close ties to the so-called Islamic Republic of Iran was. mind boggling.  Had not George w Bush included the Tehran regime as one of three countries who comprised the "Axis of Evil" (the other 2 being Saddam's Iraq and North Korea). Why then would the United States invite someone like Abd al-Aziz al-Hakim, head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) to visit Paul Wolfowitz in Washington and become a post-2003 power broker in Iraq?

The Bush administration's policies also laid the foundation for the extensive corruption which plagues Iraq today.  Because there was no banking system in 2003, cash in US dollars was flown into Iraq and distributed in large bundles to finance reconstruction projects.  Under these circumstances, huge amount of funds disappeared.  When the amount estimated about $16-18 billion could not be accounted for, George Bush finally agreed to appoint a Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGAR).  

His choice for the position was a friend, Stuart Bowen, who he had know for years. Little did he know that Bowen woulds take his job very seriously. To Bush's chagrin, Bowen discovered massive corruption in both the awarding of contracts for reconstruction projects and further lost funds for many projects once completed. 

Bowen also discovered that many projects were never in Iraq's interests but were intended instead to maximize the profits of American corporations such as Halliburton which they realized.  Others were never completed. Key projects, such as repairing and expanding Iraq's decrepit electric grid, were avoided.  Instead, projects such as a hospital with expensive medical equipment which was difficult to maintain and service which, in any event, was never completed. In short, the bold statements about rebuilding Iraq after the 2003 invasion bore little fruition.

Paul Bremer also contributed to undermining confidence in  democracy in Iraq - one of the purported goal of the toppling of Saddam - by trying to fix the outcome of the first elections held in post-Saddam Iraq in January 2005.  When Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani learned of Bremer's efforts, he intervened to prevent his machinations.  Throughout Bremer'd tenure as CPA Administrator, al-Sistani refused to meet with him.

One of the Bush administration's last but more egregious decisions was to appoint the arch-sectarian Nuri al-Maliki as Iraqi prime minister in 2006. This decision would lead to al-Maliki's alienation of Iraq's Sunni Arab population which set the stage for the seizure of Mosul and much of North Central Iraqi in June 2014.

Ironically, the most effective American policy in Iraq was not initiated by the Pentagon but by middle rank officers in the field. What came to be known as the Commander's Emergency Response Program (CERP) was based on a simple idea.  Whenever there was an uptick in violence in an Iraqi town or urban quarter, middle range officers would take money in safes on their bases which had been confiscated from Ba'thists attempting to flee the country in 2003 and use it to put local residents to work in the areas experiencing conflict.

One US Army captain told me that he avoided using small bulldozers and employed shovels instead so that he could give the maximum number of men jobs sand a salary.  Work included repairing sewer and water lines, refurbishing schools, building simple sports centers, and cleaning up the neighborhood.

The United States should have used Saddam's massive human rights abuses to mobilize an international coalition under United Nations auspices to remove Saddam from power and bring to trial in an international court.  However, to single out Saddam would have laid the Bush administration open to the question of why other dictators the US supported were also not removed from power.

Ultimately, the removal of Saddam was not about establishing a true democracy in Iraq.  It seemed instead to be mostly concerneed with intimidating neighboring Iran and Syria, and giving US energy corporations access to high quality Iraq oil.  If there were the true reason for the invasion, they both present one of the worst failures of US foreign policy in modern American history.   

The Fracturing of National Identity: Iran and Israel between Secular Liberalism and Politicized Religion - Part 2

Demonstrations protesting efforts to sideline Israel's Supreme Court

This post represents Part 2 of a two effort to analyze the fracturing of national identity in Iran and Israel and its possible consequences for the MENA region. See Part 1 at: https://new-middle-east.blogspot.com/2023/01/the-fracturing-of-national-identity.html 

As I argued in Part 1 of this post, Iran and Israel are both confronting a fracturing of their respective national identities. In Iran, there is a strong desire among the majority of the population, especially the under 40 demographic which represents 80% of Iranians, for democracy and personal freedoms, including freedom of expression, freedom for women not to be forced to wear the hijab, and for the right to develop civil society organizations not under the control of the state.

In Israel, the sociopolitical cleavage is quite different.  Here we find a democracy marching towards majoritarian rule. Having won parliamentary elections this past November by a ew percentage points, the most far right government in Israel's history is quickly pushing through the Knesset (parliament) laws that will in effect end the ability of the country's Supreme Court to declare laws unconstitutional and give politicians greater control over the appointment of judges.

The efforts to radically restructure Israel's democracy has not gone down well among secular Israelis who fear the damage the far right government will do to the country.  It includes many ultra religious ministers and supporters who, in effect, want to make Israel a theocratic state.

From 1948 when the State of Israel was founded, it was dominated by the MAPAI or Labor Party which, in partnership with the much smaller MAPAM Party, represented the dominant political movement under the Yishuv (the pre-state Zionist community in Palestine).  At its founding, a cleavage already existed between secular, left leaning Zionists and the religious community in Israel and, the right wing revisionist parties, which would later coalesce to become the Likud Party.

To address this cleavage, the Labor Party controlled foreign policy, including the post of Prime Minster, and of ministries of Foreign Affairs and Defense.  However, the National Religious Party was given control of the Ministry of Education.  This balancing between secular and religious Israelis was sustained until the Likud Party, under the leadership of Menachem Begin, won a stunning victory in 1977.  

While the Labor Party was able to win some subsequent elections, the rise of the right wing has continued since 1977.  Today, a majority of Israelis identify with the right, whether nationalist or religious, while the Labor Party has all but disappeared.

Only 29% of Israelis Believe that the Elections Will Break the Political Stalemate

Increasingly, it is almost impossible for a secular center-left coalition to come to power in Israel. The extreme nationalist and religious right control 72 of the Knesset's 120 seats.  Thus, any Israeli government must be established through building some type of coalition with right wing parties. 

How did the right in Israel replace the left of center Labor Party coalition? Already before the Likud's victory in 1977, the Labor Party had been ripe with corruption in state run entities such as the Histradut, the large public sector union.  As in other democracies around the world, Labor governments had moved towards more neoliberal policies which undermined the power of the working class.  It also did little to incorporate Jews from Arab countries, the so-called Mizrachim ("Easterners").

During the 1980s, Israel witnessed increased immigration of Russian Jews.  Having experienced discrimination as Jews and repression for political activities, these immigrants hardly viewed the USSR as a "progressive," Marxist state.  Their experiences in Russia made them more inclined to join right wing parties.  This political tendency set them apart  from the Russian and East European Jews who had immigrated to Palestine during the Yishuv and joined the Labor and MAPAM parties.

The growth of the settler movement in the West Bank after Israel seized it from Jordan in the June 1967 Six Day War created a new constituency which had no interests in seeing a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian crisis.  As the settlements grew, they increasingly encroached on Palestinian land, which was often seized without compensation and legal redress. At the same time, the Israeli government has refused to issue permits to Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem to build new homes. indicating to many Palestinians that their hoped for independent state wasn't in the cards.

Human Rights Watch - A Threshold Crossed Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution  

Settlements have also gained strength through support from Evangelical Christians in the United States.  Evangelicals believe that the Messiah will reappear in the area currently constituting the Israeli state when Judgment Day occurs.  As a result of shrewd lobbying by the settler movement in the US, the Republican Party, whose social base includes large numbers of Evangelical Christians, has strongly supported the settlement movements retaining their land in the West Bank.  

Settle movement lobbying has been focused on the American Israel Politcal Action Committee (AIPAC) as well.  Also, significant funding for the settlers has come from US donors.  David Friedman, who served as US ambassador to Israel during the Trump administration, is just one of many wealthy Jewish Americans who have contributed to the settler movement.

Just Security - Hidden In Plain Sight: US Nonprofits as Drivers of Illegal Israeli Settlements

The right received a political boost from the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in 2005.  In elections held after the withdrawal, the more moderate Fatah Party was soundly defeated by the Islamist Hamas movement which seized power and has been ruling it ever since.  On a number of occasions, Hamas has fired rockets into Israel, especially after upsurges of violence in Jerusalem and the West Bank.

In 2000, Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon which it had occupied since the 1982 invasion designed to destroy Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) bases in the south,  During its occupation of the south, Israeli forces had been in constant conflict with Hizballah, a powerful Shi'a militia backed by Iran. In July 2006, Hizballah killed 8 Israeli soldiers during a cross-border raid into northern Israel. Two other soldiers were kidnapped and later killed. These events led to the 2006 Israeli war.  The Israeli response led to extensive bombing of southern Lebanon and the extensive destruction of infrastructure.  

The Israeli bombing resulted in a fusillade of rockets launched by Hizballah forces from the southern Lebanese mountains.  In the ensuing war, thousands of Israelis were forced to leave the north of the country to be out of range of Hizballah rockets.  The war shook both Lebanon and Israel and raised concerns among civilians on both sides of the conflict about the future of their security in the regions in which they resided.

In May 2021, a simmering crisis in the Shaykh Jarrah section of East Jerusalem came to a head.  Palestinians were worried about an imminent Supreme Court decision which would evict them from their homes.  Demonstration began leading Israeli police to enter the compound of al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem where violence broke out between the police and demonstrators. 

Hamas demanded that the police leave the mosque, one of the holiest sits in Islam.. When they didn't, Hamas began a rocket campaign with some rockets reaching far into Israel, some near Jerusalem.  Israel began a bombing campaign of the Gaza strip and fighting broke out in Lod and several other Israeli cities between Jewish and Palestinian Israelis.  

Synagogues and mosques were attacked and businesses burned.  Many Israelis, both Jewish an Arab, were severely wounded.  The inter-ethnic conflict left deep scars` in Israeli society.  For those on the right, the violence provided support for their narrative that Israel's Arab citizens could not be trusted

When studying the rise of the Israeli right wing nationalists, an issue which has not received enough attention is demographic change.  Orthodox Jews in Israel have a much higher birth rate than secular Israelis. Among what is often referred to a "traditional religions," the ultra-orthodox have on average 6.8 children per family, while the orthodox have 3.7 per family.  However, among secular Israelis, the birthrate is only 2.9 children per family. Thus the religious community, much of which supports right-wing nationalism, is becoming an ever larger percentage of the population.

CSIS -Israel's Rightward Shift

At the same time, education for orthodox students is implicitly politicized.  Because the Land of Israel belongs to the Jewish people, it cannot accommodate the Palestinians.  Further, the orthodox definition of who is Jewish excludes conservative and reform Jews,  thus, threatening to create a deep split in world-wide Jewry.

Netanyahu’s New Ministers Have Very Strict Ideas About Who Is a Jew    

With the installation of the most far-right government in Israel's history, the trends discussed above have finally come to dominate Israeli politics.  The former government of Yair Lapid and Naftali Bennett, which included right wing centrist and left wing parties, as well as an Arab Islamist party seemed like Israel might have found a formula to bridge the secular-religious divide. However, the Naftali-Lapid government ran afoul of disagreements with the right wing coalition parties and collapsed.

With the far right now ascendant, we can see some of the future outcomes of Israel's politics. Israel investment finds are already leaving Israel. Without a national legal system which enjoys autonomy from political interference, investors are loathe to invest in a financial environment which is overshadowed by uncertainty arising from political conflict and potential instability, e.g., a standoff between the Supreme Court and the Netanyahu government over constitutional authority.

Exit strategy? 90% of entrepreneurs: If we start a company today, it will be outside of Israel

Israel is suffering from an identity crisis.  A growing chasm exists between two visions of the future.  One sees a secular liberal democratic Israel which will try to build a society for all its citizens and hopefully find a solution to the Israel-Palestinian dispute.  The other sees an illiberal democracy where a majoritarian rule is the order of the day. and a nationalist politicized form of Judaism determines public policy. 

We already see huge demonstrations on an almost daily basis by Israelis who are fiercely opposed to the changes in the legal system which the Netanyahu regime is attempting to oppose on Israel's judicial system.  While it may be an exaggeration, some Israels speak of a possible civil war as members of the military are threatening not to obey orders if the Supreme Court's authority is drastically curtailed.

Poster opposing Netanyahu's changes to the judicial system 

In Iran, the majority of the country is demanding a dramatic transformation of their political system.  Protestor demands call for a secular democracy with elections and freedom of expression assembly and, for women, of dress.  The existing regime would be dismantled and its phony, politicized version of Islam would be tossed in the trash can of history. 

As the sporadic protests persist and women's refusal to wear the hijab, the legitimacy of the so-called Islamic Republic" sinks to its lowest level since the 1978-79 Iranian Revolution.

The regime has completely lost the younger generation, including many young clerics, who oppose the regime's brutal suppression of protests.

In Israel, what Thomas Friedman calls "messianic religious zealots" seek to impose their own form of a phony, politicized religion.  They seek to establish a far-right nationalist and quasi-theocratic state which is alien to democratic political culture. These zealots, including several sitting cabinet ministers, promote violence as a means to implement the sociopolitical change they seek. 

The recent political protests in Iran and Israel represent stunning developments.  The outcome of these developments will have serious consequences for the MENA regime for years to come

 

The Fracturing of National Identity: Iran and Israel between Secular Liberalism and Politicized Religion - Part 1

This post represents Part 1 of a two effort to analyze the fracturing of national identity in Iran and Israel and its possible consequences for the MENA region. See Part 2 on Israel: https://new-middle-east.blogspot.com/2023/02/the-fracturing-of-national-identity.html 

No two countries in the MENA region exhibit more hostility to one another than Iran and Israel.  It might seem odd, but both these countries suffer from similar problems which afflicts many countries in the world today, namely the fracturing of national identity. Neither Iran nor Israel possess a unified national political culture. Instead, both societies have been diverging long different paths resulting its sharp cleavages among its citizenry. What are the implications of these developments for the MENA region?

Iran has never had the opportunity to exercise democracy except for a short period after World War 11.  The overthrow of the duly elected Iranian prime minister, Muhammed Mossadegh in 1953 was carried out by a CIA coup supported by Iran's military and much of its clerical class, The coup led to the reinstatement of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi who subsequently developed an extremely repressive regime.

The toppling of the Shah's regime by the Iranian Revolution of 1978-79 was never intended by most participants to replace a secular tyrant with a clerical tyrant. However, the most conservative forces in the revolutionary coalition led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini were able to consolidate power by1983.  Iran now became an Islamic Republic. 

Iranians mourning Mahsa Zina Amini fired on by the police

For several years after Khomeini's consolidation of power, Irans' economy improved, contributing to the popularity of the regime.  However, this economic improvement didn't last and the regime's increasingly oppressive policies such as mandating that women wear the hijab began to erode its power. 

The one element which gave some Iranians hope that the regime might moderate itself was the existence of periodic elections for the the national parliament and the presidency of the country.  With the emergence of a growing cleavage between moderate and hardline clerics after Khomeini's death, the hope of reform was actualized in the election of Mohammed Khatami as Iran's president in 1997.  

Khatami, who ran on a platform of freedom of expression, strengthening civil society, and a platform of "Dialogue Among Civilizations," in response to Samuel Huntington's well-known book, The Clash of Civilizations, embodied the hopes of liberal minded clerics, professionals, the business sector which wanted to ope the Iranian economy to foreign investment, leftists and youth.  In 2001, the United nations named the year as that of "Dialogue of Civilizations," following Khatami's suggestion.

Despite very little media attention, Khatami defeated his conservative rival winning 70% of the vote.  The election itself saw a remarkable 80% turnout.  Even in the conservative theological seminary city of Qum, Khatami received 70% of the vote.  Clearly the election indicated that Iranians wanted a new, more open and democartic political system.

After winning 2 terms, Khatami stepped down in 2055 after serving the limit of 2 terms. He was succeeded bu a har-liber Mahmoud Ahmedinejad.  In 2009, he threw his support to his colleague, another reformer, Mir-Hossein Mousavi. Most observers believe the election was fraudulent and characterized by massive  voting irregularities as Ahmedinejad was proclaimed to have won a second term.  The result was an outpouring of opposition in the streets to the election.  In the repression of the demonstrations, thousands of Iranian protestors, the vast majority of whom were peaceful, were arrested or killed by security forces. The Other Iran

Ahmedinejad's presidency was characterized by increased human rights violations.  The number of death sentences for juveniles tripled under his rule and attacks on the LGBTQ community were commonplace.  Indeed, Ahmedinejad asserted that there were no LGBTQ Iranians at all. His consistent attacks on Israel which threatened to destroy the state raised international fears as Iran continued its nuclear energy program which was viewed by most international analysts to really constitutes an effort to develop nuclear weapons.

In 2006, the United Nations Security Council began imposing sanctions on Iraq when it refused to terminate its uranium enrichment efforts.  These sanctions were increased in 2007 and 2008 and in 2010, Iran was subject to a complete arms embargo. Ahmedinejad argued that the sanctions were "illegal," adding power to his hardline supporters.

The sanctions, combined with widespread corruption among the clerical elite and expenditures on Iran's nuclear program and support for allies in Lebanon and Iraq and Syrian president Bashar al-Asad's regime, undermined the economy.  Youth found it difficult to find employment and careers, even with a university degree, unless they had ties to the regime.

In 2013, centrist reformer, and well respected cleric, Hassan Rouhani, won the presidency. Although he maintained close ties to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Rouhani grained the support from reformers and youth given his promises to open Iran to foreign investment, improve the economy and seek to resolve its conflicts with the international community.  His close ties not just to the regime but to the Green Movement which had contested the 2009 elections results led to a decisive victory.

By 2017, when Rouhani sought a second term, hardliners nominated Ebrahim Raisi to run against him.  Raisi, is infamously known as the "hanging judge" for his brutal repression of dissidents in 1988 when Ayatollah Khomeini ordered the mass executions of members of the opposition group, Mujahidin al-Khalq and large numbers of leftists.  The estimates of those executed were as high as 30,000 people. Raisi ran a lackluster campaign. Rouhani beat him with an impressive 57% of the vote in an elections that saw a 71% voter turnout rate.

Having had enough of reformers, Iran's Guardian Council, which must approve all candidates for public office, disqualified anyone with reformist credential from running in the 2021 presidentail elections.  Meanwhile, Raisi, now seen as a possible successor to Khamenei, who is ill with leukemia, ran for president again,  This time he was successful, winning 65% of the votes but with a voter turnout of 48% and 3,7 million ballots left blank as protests votes.

High school girls are leading protests in Iran

Raisi is part of the gentrifications of Iran's clergy who are increasingly out of touch with the younger generation, 80% of which is under the age of 40.  His support for strict sex segregation and reference to same sex marriage as "savagery" is rejected by large numbers of Iranian youth, especially urban educated youth.  His support for amputation as a punishment for theft and refusal to accept that the Holocaust occurred underscores his hardline and rigid approach to political and social affairs.

On September 9, 2023, a young woman, Mahsa Jina Amini, was traveling to Teheran from her home in Iran's Kurdish region in the northwest, when she was stopped by Iran's "morality police." She was accused of wearing her hijab improperly.  Amini was arrested and taken to prison where she was beaten. Taken to a hospital, she died the next day.Protests in Iran Spread, Including to Oil Sector, Despite Violent Crackdown

Once the news began to circulate, thousands of Iranians too to the streets to protest Amini's death, including large numbers of female youth.  Wide scale demonstrations brought sections of many of Iran's major cities to a halt. As of the writing of this post, security forces still face sporadic protests throughout the country.

In Iran, the majority of the country is demanding a dramatic transformation of their political system.  Protestor demands call for a secular democracy with elections and freedom of expression assembly and, for women, of dress.  The existing regime would be dismantled and its phony, politicized version of Islam would be tossed in the trash can of history. 

As the sporadic protests persist and women's refusal to wear the hijab, the legitimacy of the so-called Islamic Republic" sinks to its lowest level since the 1978-79 Iranian Revolution.

The regime has completely lost the younger generation, including many young clerics, who oppose the regime's brutal suppression of protests.

From Bad to Worse: The Globalization of Middle East Autocracy

Arab-China Summit, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Dec 9, 2022

More than any other region of the world, authoritarian rule is pervasive and institutionalized in the Middle East (MENA).  In the one Arab Spring success, Tunisia is now ruled by Ka'is Said, a quasi-dictator who has eviscerated its constitution and created a rubber-stamp parliament.  This week the Algerian military shut down Radio M, the last free media outlet in the country. 

In Egypt, 'Abd al-Fattah al-Sisi has imprisoned thousands of dissidents for mild criticism of his regime. In the country's notorious prisons, they suffer brutal conditions including torture.  In Iran, youth are hung in public for demonstrating against the government (accused of "warring against God") while young women demonstrators are raped in security forces detention facilities.

Saudi dictator Muhammad bin Salman (MBS) represents a new type of autocrat in the mold of Saddam Husayn. Gone is the norm of consultation among Saudi royals with the king acting as primus inter pares.  After fleecing all Saudi princes who might be future opponents, MBS has offered the Saudi people "bread and circus," such as Western wrestling matches and rock concerts while simultaneously engaging in massive human rights abuses.

MBS has ordered mass executions of Saudi citizens, most of whom are innocent of any crime, and the jailing of dissidents.  The execution of 81 Saudis , 41 of whom were from the Kingdon's Shi'a minority, occurred 3 days before former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson's visit in May 2022. During the visit, MBS hypocritically discussed the need for human rights with the British leader. And let's not forget MBS' ordering the murder and dismemberment of the respected Washington Post journalist, Jamal al-Khashoggi, a dual national with US and Saudi citizenship, for which the Saudi dictator has suffered no consequences.

Meanwhile, the few traditional democracies in MENA have collapsed or are in the process of collapsing. Lebanon is a failed state which is under the control of Hizballah, an armed militia supported by Iran. An estimated 80% of the population lives in poverty and Lebanese citizens can't even withdraw funds from their bank accounts.  Grain imports are tenuous and serious food insecurity is on the rise throughout the country. 

In Turkey, Recip Tayyib Erdogan has transitioned from a mild-mannered Islamist who supported the trappings of democracy to a full-on autocratic.  Turkey enjoys the dubious distinction of having the largest per capita imprisonment of journalists of any country in the world.  To ensure that he wins this coming year's presidential elections, Erdogan engineered the 2 and a half year imprisonment of his strongest rival, Ekrem Imamoglu, the popular mayor of Istanbul.

Israel, long touted as the MENA region's only democracy, is now ruled by a hard right government which seeks to marginalize the judiciary by giving parliament the right to override Supreme Court decisions.  Because Israel lacks a formal constitution, the Court has been the main institution in Israel which has protected minority rights and the rule of law. 

With the Ministry of Defense and new Ministry of National Security, which controls the police, under ministers who seek to expel Palestinians from the West bank and East Jerusalem and potentially annul the citizenship of Israel's Palestinian Arab citizens if they engage in "anti-national" behavior, Israel is on the road to autocracy.  Meanwhile, talk of annexing the West Bank - the Palestine National Authority - grows, as do plans for dramatically expanding illegal settlements on Palestinian land.

If these examples of increased authoritarian rule in the MENA region weren't bad enough, a new development threatens to further strengthen the rule of local autocrats.  This threat stems from the increased involvement of Russia and China in MENA region affairs.

Russia has been supporting the scelrotic Syrian regime of Bashar al-Asad, primarily to protect its sole Mediterranean naval base at Tartus and its Khmeimim airfield near Latakia.  Russia has sent the Wagner Group, a brutal mercenary organization, to help the al-Asad regime fight radical jihadists in Syria.

However, after Putin's invasion of Ukraine, the degree to which Russia and Saudi Arabia under MBS have formed an alliance in OPEC+. is clear.  In a major snub to the United States, one almost unheard of in past Saudi-US relations, MBS refused to increase oil output to dampen rising global energy prices. Instead, the Saudis maintained a small increase in production which helped keep prices high, providing higher revenues for Putin with which to pursue his brutal war in Ukraine.  

Facing an unexpected protracted war in Ukraine, Putin recently turned to Iran (and North Korea) to bolster his forces with munitions and arms as Russian supplies have dwindled. The most serious threat to Ukraine has come from Iran which has supplied hundreds of Shahed 129 drones to Russia.  These drones have been used to attack Ukraine's electrical, water and other infrastructure to devastating effect.

Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has been training Russian forces how to use the drones in occupied Crimea and there is a proposal to build a factory in Russia to produce the drones.  In exchange, Russia has promised  the Iranian regime that it will supply it with fighter aircraft, adversely impacting the balance of military power in the Gulf region. 

As other NATO members have imposed sanctions on Putin's regime following the invasion of Ukraine, Turkey has drawn closer to the Russian dictator.  Russian oil sales to Turkey have dramatically increased, providing Putin with desperately needed revenue to pursue his illegitimate war. Istanbul has become a refuge for Russian oligarchs and their wealth, e,g., their super yachts.

Turkey isn't the only MENA region state to assist Putin in his war making. Neither Saudi Arabia nor the any of the Arab Gulf states have imposed sanctions on Russia.  Indeed, Dubai has become a desired destination for Russian oligarchs who need not worry that their assets will be seized while staying there.

A greater threat is the increased presence of China in the MENA region.  Xi Jinping's recent visit to Saudi Arabia stood out for the extravagance and pageantry with which the Chinese president and his delegation were received by MBS, compared to the much more muted and low-key reception of President Biden during his state visit to the Kingdom this past July.

This year Saudi Arabia made a $10 billion investment through its oil company, Aramco, to develop a refinery and petrochemical complex in China’s northeast.  That Xi's visit led to a joint statement following 3 days of meetings which stressed the future of Saudi-Chinese energy cooperation demonstrates the degree to which the United States has been shoved aside by the kingdom in its traditional role of providing security in exchange for purchasing Saudi oil. 

What was left unsaid in the Saudi-Chinese joint statement at the end of Xi's visit was whether China will supply its highly sophisticated surveillance technology to Saudi Arabia and other Arab Gulf states with which it is cultivating relations.  This technology would place a weapon in the hands of MENA region dictators which would greatly enhance their capacity to intensify repression of their respective populations.   

It is ironic that, with the United States emphasizing its "shift to the East," namely to confront growing Chinese power in East Asia, China has moved to fill the vacuum in the MENA region caused the downgrading of American policy in the MENA region. Disturbed by what they see as growing threats from Iran's influence in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, and a feeling that the United States can no longer be trusted to protect their security, Saudi Arabia and its Gulf neighbors are looking to China for arms sales.

Are there potential problems with MENA region autocrats shifting their policy towards Russia and China?  First, how is Putin going to reconcile his closer military ties with Iran and the close relations he wants to maintain with Saudi Arabia in the context of OPEC+? Second, neither Russian weaponry, which has performed terribly in Ukraine, nor untested Chinese weaponry, can serve as a substitute for much higher quality American and Western arms.  China likewise will need to find ways to balance its Arab ties with those it maintains with Iran.

Third, will Arabs and Iranians view these new ties favorably? The populations of most MENA region countries are comprised of youth under the age of 30.  Will Russian and Chinese culture and the authoritarian policies they embody be attractive to these highly Westernized demographics?  Will MENA region youth find the Chinese 9/9/6 model acceptable, namely working 9 am to 9 pm, 6 days a week? 

Could expanded ties with Russia and China, potentially leading to even intensified repression, encourage a large "brain drain" from the region? While a growing brain drain might not harm a country like Egypt, the Arab Gulf states suffer from small populations and can ill afford their youth leaving the country for Europe, the United States and other countries where political and cultural freedoms are less restrictive.

What is clear is that the United States does itself no favors but focusing on China and East Asia to the exclusion of the MENA region.  Xi promised MBS that China would help the Kingdom develop nuclear energy. Could that assistance lead to a nuclear arms race between the Saudi and Iranian regimes?  With the war in Ukraine, global inflation and supply chain problems, and the ongoing Covid pandemic, the Biden administration has a lot on its plate. But its neglecting the MENA region is a policy that is penny-wise and pound foolish.