At least 15 animals - including lions, tigers and bears - were saved from war zones in the Middle East and have found shelter at a sanctuary in northern Jordan, as documented by EPE-EFE on Sunday.

Since 2014, the animals have been flown from Iraq, Syria and the Gaza Strip to the Ma'awa for Nature and Wildlife Sanctuary located at the top of Mount al-Manara, which overlooks the ancient Roman city of Jerash, 40 kilometers north of the capital Amman.

"We're proud about our humanitarian role here. It's a great pleasure," Mark Trela, the sanctuary's executive manager, said.

"We enjoy looking after them, as these animals were left without care in the midst of the turmoil of politics," the manager added.

"For them, it is tantamount to paradise here, compared to their suffering through years of captivity," he explained, as many of the zoos in which they had lived were in poor shape before finally sending their animals to a safer country.

<img alt="brown bear" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="44b480d8-ba60-4ba0-90f7-7391fecebe59" src="/sites/default/files/inline-images/brown-bear-jordan-sanctuary.jpg" />

Ma'awa is a non-profit sanctuary that was officially launched in 2016 over a space of 70 hectares donated by the Jordanian state, and is run in partnership with a royal Jordanian foundation and Four Paws International, an animal welfare NGO.

The sanctuary is meant to provide a permanent home for animals that cannot be sent to their country of origin or released into the wild, Trela explained.

"Species-specific enclosures ensure the animals have enough space and the appropriate conditions to best suit their natural needs," Trela, a Polish citizen affiliated with Four Paws, added.

One female bear named Lula was rescued from the northern Iraqi northern city of Mosul in 2017, amid fighting by Iraqi troops to liberate the city from the Islamic State terror organization.

Lula had been trapped in a private zoo whose owner fled the city, and most of its animals died.

"The story of these animals should inspire political leaders to unite for peace instead of sliding into wars," Trela said.

At least 15 animals - including lions, tigers and bears - were saved from war zones in the Middle East and have found shelter at a sanctuary in northern Jordan, as documented by EPE-EFE on Sunday.

At least 15 animals - including lions, tigers and bears - were saved from war zones in the Middle East and have found shelter at a sanctuary in northern Jordan, as documented by EPE-EFE on Sunday. Since 2014, the animals have been flown from Iraq, Syria and the Gaza Strip to the Ma'awa for Nature and Wildlife Sanctuary located at the top of Mount al-Manara, which overlooks the ancient Roman city of Jerash, 40 kilometers north of the capital Amman. "We're proud about our humanitarian role here. It's a great pleasure," Mark Trela, the sanctuary's executive manager, said. "We enjoy looking after them, as these animals were left without care in the midst of the turmoil of politics," the manager added. "For them, it is tantamount to paradise here, compared to their suffering through years of captivity," he explained, as many of the zoos in which they had lived were in poor shape before finally sending their animals to a safer country. Ma'awa is a non-profit sanctuary that was officially launched in 2016 over a space of 70 hectares donated by the Jordanian state, and is run in partnership with a royal Jordanian foundation and Four Paws International, an animal welfare NGO. The sanctuary is meant to provide a permanent home for animals that cannot be sent to their country of origin or released into the wild, Trela explained. "Species-specific enclosures ensure the animals have enough space and the appropriate conditions to best suit their natural needs," Trela, a Polish citizen affiliated with Four Paws, added. One female bear named Lula was rescued from the northern Iraqi northern city of Mosul in 2017, amid fighting by Iraqi troops to liberate the city from the Islamic State terror organization. Lula had been trapped in a private zoo whose owner fled the city, and most of its animals died. "The story of these animals should inspire political leaders to unite for peace instead of sliding into wars," Trela said.

Animals from Middle East war zones find peace at sanctuary in Jordan

By Bill Law

We are at a very low point for journalism in the Gulf and the wider Middle East.

My thoughts are with Hatice Cengiz and Jamal Khashoggi’s family at this very painful time.

The job of journalists is to ask questions, to speak truth to power, to question authority. This has always been a very difficult struggle in the Gulf and wider Middle East, but this is what Jamal Khashoggi was committed to. He believed with great courage and passion that the way to achieve a better place for his country and society was to strive for an independent and free media. He was a pragmatist who understood well the limits of just how far he could push that narrative on, but he never ever gave up pushing.

He was a brave and dedicated journalist and a warm and funny man.

The murder of Jamal Khashoggi does tremendous damage to the struggle to create a free and independent media in the Gulf and Arab worlds. It has already suffered so many grievous setbacks. To name but one, the Bahraini news site Al Wasat, the only truly independent voice in the Gulf, was shuttered by the authorities in the summer of 2017 with scarcely a murmur here in the West.

In 2011, Karim Fakhawi, Al Wasat’s co-founder, was beaten to death in detention by the police when he went to complain about his house being bulldozed. How quickly Karim’s fate was forgotten. In 2017 the UAE sentenced a Jordanian journalist Tayseer Al Najjar to three years in jail and a huge fine for “insulting the symbols of the state.” In January of this year, Lebanese journalist Hanin Ghaddar was sentenced in absentia by a military court for insulting the armed forces. How discouraging is that given the relative level of freedom the media enjoys in Lebanon?

Under the guise of security, open criticism and free media are being inexorably crushed. A friend of mine in the region said it is as if the walls are closing in: “We cannot breathe.” It has become a grim narrative arc, one that began with modest gains and hope for a freer media environment in the early part of this century but — especially after 2011 and the events of what has been called the Arab Spring — spirals downward to the appalling murder of Jamal Khashoggi.

It is telling that a chief demand of the Saudis and the Emiratis when they launched their land, air and sea blockade of Qatar last June, joined by the Egyptians and the Bahrainis, was the shuttering of Al Jazeera. The news network is not without its faults, but thank goodness that Qatar has withstood the siege — even Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, or MBS, has had to acknowledge that — and Al Jazeera remains safe.

Nonetheless, we are at a very low point for journalism in the Gulf and the wider Middle East. In my nearly 20 years of covering the region, I can think of no time when the struggle for free media has been so grievously wounded and so seriously set back.

The killing of Jamal Khashoggi — especially if the man I and many others believe is responsible for his death, MBS — is allowed to get away with it, as I fear now seems the case, his killing will only empower further atrocities and reprisals. The tame media will reflect the views and attitudes of the ruling families. Those journalists who want to ask questions dare not.

And silence will not be an option. Those who stay silent because they cannot stomach parroting lies will be seen as traitors or, as the president of the United States calls honest journalists, “enemies of the people.” In Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain the media are the slaves of their masters. It is a new form of Stalinism — &nbsp;Gulf Stalinism — whereby the media become the mouthpiece of the rulers.

For the sake of my murdered colleague, I do not want to end on a note of pessimism, because to do so would be to acknowledge his death was in vain. It was not. What he believed in, what he stood for and wrote about, and what he died for is the way forward. The Gulf and its citizens and those throughout the Middle East will only realize their full potential in a society where a free media flourishes. That is what Jamal passionately believed. And he was right. Jamal is a martyr to that noble cause.

Dictators and their lies do not endure. Speaking truth to power, even with all the terrible consequences it entails for journalists, ultimately brings their lies crashing down around them.

Thank you, Jamal, for your great and courageous journalism, your dedication, your commitment, your humour and your kindness. Know that you will not be forgotten and that your death is not in vain. In your name, the cause of free media in the Gulf and wider Middle East will carry on. Its victory will be your lasting legacy. 
 
(Bill Law is an award-winning journalist. He joined the BBC in 1995 and since 2002 has reported extensively from the Middle East)

(This article was originally published on Fair Observer. Read the <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/region/middle_east_north_africa/jamal-khashoggi-murder-media-freedom-gulf-middle-east-news-16421/">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

&nbsp;

By Bill Law We are at a very low point for journalism in the Gulf and the wider Middle East. My thoughts are with Hatice Cengiz and Jamal Khashoggi’s family at this very painful time.

By Bill Law We are at a very low point for journalism in the Gulf and the wider Middle East. My thoughts are with Hatice Cengiz and Jamal Khashoggi’s family at this very painful time. The job of journalists is to ask questions, to speak truth to power, to question authority. This has always been a very difficult struggle in the Gulf and wider Middle East, but this is what Jamal Khashoggi was committed to. He believed with great courage and passion that the way to achieve a better place for his country and society was to strive for an independent and free media. He was a pragmatist who understood well the limits of just how far he could push that narrative on, but he never ever gave up pushing. He was a brave and dedicated journalist and a warm and funny man. The murder of Jamal Khashoggi does tremendous damage to the struggle to create a free and independent media in the Gulf and Arab worlds. It has already suffered so many grievous setbacks. To name but one, the Bahraini news site Al Wasat, the only truly independent voice in the Gulf, was shuttered by the authorities in the summer of 2017 with scarcely a murmur here in the West. In 2011, Karim Fakhawi, Al Wasat’s co-founder, was beaten to death in detention by the police when he went to complain about his house being bulldozed. How quickly Karim’s fate was forgotten. In 2017 the UAE sentenced a Jordanian journalist Tayseer Al Najjar to three years in jail and a huge fine for “insulting the symbols of the state.” In January of this year, Lebanese journalist Hanin Ghaddar was sentenced in absentia by a military court for insulting the armed forces. How discouraging is that given the relative level of freedom the media enjoys in Lebanon? Under the guise of security, open criticism and free media are being inexorably crushed. A friend of mine in the region said it is as if the walls are closing in: “We cannot breathe.” It has become a grim narrative arc, one that began with modest gains and hope for a freer media environment in the early part of this century but — especially after 2011 and the events of what has been called the Arab Spring — spirals downward to the appalling murder of Jamal Khashoggi. It is telling that a chief demand of the Saudis and the Emiratis when they launched their land, air and sea blockade of Qatar last June, joined by the Egyptians and the Bahrainis, was the shuttering of Al Jazeera. The news network is not without its faults, but thank goodness that Qatar has withstood the siege — even Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, or MBS, has had to acknowledge that — and Al Jazeera remains safe. Nonetheless, we are at a very low point for journalism in the Gulf and the wider Middle East. In my nearly 20 years of covering the region, I can think of no time when the struggle for free media has been so grievously wounded and so seriously set back. The killing of Jamal Khashoggi — especially if the man I and many others believe is responsible for his death, MBS — is allowed to get away with it, as I fear now seems the case, his killing will only empower further atrocities and reprisals. The tame media will reflect the views and attitudes of the ruling families. Those journalists who want to ask questions dare not. And silence will not be an option. Those who stay silent because they cannot stomach parroting lies will be seen as traitors or, as the president of the United States calls honest journalists, “enemies of the people.” In Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain the media are the slaves of their masters. It is a new form of Stalinism — Gulf Stalinism — whereby the media become the mouthpiece of the rulers. For the sake of my murdered colleague, I do not want to end on a note of pessimism, because to do so would be to acknowledge his death was in vain. It was not. What he believed in, what he stood for and wrote about, and what he died for is the way forward. The Gulf and its citizens and those throughout the Middle East will only realize their full potential in a society where a free media flourishes. That is what Jamal passionately believed. And he was right. Jamal is a martyr to that noble cause. Dictators and their lies do not endure. Speaking truth to power, even with all the terrible consequences it entails for journalists, ultimately brings their lies crashing down around them. Thank you, Jamal, for your great and courageous journalism, your dedication, your commitment, your humour and your kindness. Know that you will not be forgotten and that your death is not in vain. In your name, the cause of free media in the Gulf and wider Middle East will carry on. Its victory will be your lasting legacy. (Bill Law is an award-winning journalist. He joined the BBC in 1995 and since 2002 has reported extensively from the Middle East) (This article was originally published on Fair Observer. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The walls are closing in on free media in the Arab world

The murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi could alter the power dynamic in the Middle East by strengthening Turkey's influence at Saudi Arabia's expense as they compete for leadership of the Islamic world, analysts say.

This certainly appears to be the goal of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the main regional supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, which Saudi Arabia and its allies Egypt and the United Arab Emirates consider a terrorist group.

The killing inside the kingdom's consulate in Istanbul by a team sent from Riyadh on October 2 has already severely tarnished Saudi Arabia's global reputation.

But it is the potential involvement of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, the oil-rich Gulf nation's de facto leader known by his initials MBS, that could permanently damage Riyadh's influence in the region.

After initially insisting Khashoggi left the consulate unharmed, then saying he died in a brawl, the Saudi regime finally stated he was killed by a "rogue operation" and arrested 18 suspects, some with links to the crown prince.

Analysts say Erdogan could use the ensuing crisis to weaken the 33-year-old prince, even potentially leading to the royal family removing him from power -- though that seems unlikely.

"The killing of Khashoggi has proven to be a golden opportunity for President Erdogan to pressure Saudi Arabia and work towards presenting Turkey as the new leader of the Muslim world," said Lina Khatib, director of Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House.

"The Khashoggi crisis is a big geo-political gamble for Turkey and so far it looks like it is playing the game masterfully. But Turkey alone will not be able to push for the removal of MBS. The ball lies in the American court," she added.

'Opportunity' for Erdogan

For Erdogan, promoting the Muslim Brotherhood -- which Saudi Arabia has sought to marginalise in the Arab world and which was ousted from power and brutally repressed in Egypt in 2013 by current President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi -- is at the heart of this power struggle.

The Turkish leader could also try to extract concessions from Riyadh for its ally Qatar, facing a Saudi blockade backed by the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Egypt since 2017.

"I think that Erdogan sees this as an opportunity to push back against a triple entente in the Middle East that opposes his policies. That triple entente is composed of MBS, MBZ's (Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al-Nahyan) UAE and Sisi's Egypt," said Soner Cagaptay, director of the Turkey Research Program at the Washington Institute.

"These three countries, all Arabs, oppose Erdogan's policies of supporting the Muslim Brotherhood. Now Erdogan sees a golden opportunity because MBS is vulnerable."&nbsp;

But Sinan Ulgen, president of the Centre for Economics and Foreign Policy, said "it remains to be seen whether Ankara can continue to leverage this conjuncture and turn it into a permanent advantage raising Turkey's regional influence to the detriment of Saudi Arabia".

Nicholas Heras, an analyst at the Center for a New American Security, said the Khashoggi case was the "latest chapter in Turkey and Saudi Arabia's ongoing contest over which country is better" to lead the Muslim world.

'Cut MBS down to size'&nbsp;

"Erdogan clearly seems to believe that he can use the Khashoggi crisis as a way to cut Prince Mohammad bin Salman, and by extension, Saudi Arabia, down to size," Heras added.

By not directly pointing the blame at the crown prince over Khashoggi, Erdogan is seeking to keep him under pressure, according to Karim Bitar of the Paris-based French Institute for International and Strategic Affairs think-tank.

"Erdogan knows that he still has ammunition that could weaken MBS in the international arena so basically he is rolling the dice these days trying to figure out how to maximise his profit after this huge Saudi blunder," he told AFP.

While the Muslim Brotherhood is important to Turkey, the West -- especially the United States -- is wary of the group and wants to focus any pressure on the crown prince towards ending the Yemen war and lifting the blockade on Qatar, the experts said.

"I expect the blockade on Doha will likely come to an end in the near future and the Saudis find a way to support the UN's efforts in Yemen," said Steven Cook of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Bitar noted that the US administration relies on Prince Mohammed's support for any possible peace plan for the Israel-Palestinian conflict as well as containing Iran, long a Saudi foe.&nbsp;

Washington could also push the crown prince towards "a rapprochement with Israel and to maintain a hawkish line towards Iran", Bitar added.

The murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi could alter the power dynamic in the Middle East by strengthening Turkey's influence at Saudi Arabia's expense as they compete for leadership of the Islamic world, analysts say.

The murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi could alter the power dynamic in the Middle East by strengthening Turkey's influence at Saudi Arabia's expense as they compete for leadership of the Islamic world, analysts say. This certainly appears to be the goal of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the main regional supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, which Saudi Arabia and its allies Egypt and the United Arab Emirates consider a terrorist group. The killing inside the kingdom's consulate in Istanbul by a team sent from Riyadh on October 2 has already severely tarnished Saudi Arabia's global reputation. But it is the potential involvement of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, the oil-rich Gulf nation's de facto leader known by his initials MBS, that could permanently damage Riyadh's influence in the region. After initially insisting Khashoggi left the consulate unharmed, then saying he died in a brawl, the Saudi regime finally stated he was killed by a "rogue operation" and arrested 18 suspects, some with links to the crown prince. Analysts say Erdogan could use the ensuing crisis to weaken the 33-year-old prince, even potentially leading to the royal family removing him from power -- though that seems unlikely. "The killing of Khashoggi has proven to be a golden opportunity for President Erdogan to pressure Saudi Arabia and work towards presenting Turkey as the new leader of the Muslim world," said Lina Khatib, director of Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House. "The Khashoggi crisis is a big geo-political gamble for Turkey and so far it looks like it is playing the game masterfully. But Turkey alone will not be able to push for the removal of MBS. The ball lies in the American court," she added. 'Opportunity' for Erdogan For Erdogan, promoting the Muslim Brotherhood -- which Saudi Arabia has sought to marginalise in the Arab world and which was ousted from power and brutally repressed in Egypt in 2013 by current President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi -- is at the heart of this power struggle. The Turkish leader could also try to extract concessions from Riyadh for its ally Qatar, facing a Saudi blockade backed by the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Egypt since 2017. "I think that Erdogan sees this as an opportunity to push back against a triple entente in the Middle East that opposes his policies. That triple entente is composed of MBS, MBZ's (Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al-Nahyan) UAE and Sisi's Egypt," said Soner Cagaptay, director of the Turkey Research Program at the Washington Institute. "These three countries, all Arabs, oppose Erdogan's policies of supporting the Muslim Brotherhood. Now Erdogan sees a golden opportunity because MBS is vulnerable." But Sinan Ulgen, president of the Centre for Economics and Foreign Policy, said "it remains to be seen whether Ankara can continue to leverage this conjuncture and turn it into a permanent advantage raising Turkey's regional influence to the detriment of Saudi Arabia". Nicholas Heras, an analyst at the Center for a New American Security, said the Khashoggi case was the "latest chapter in Turkey and Saudi Arabia's ongoing contest over which country is better" to lead the Muslim world. 'Cut MBS down to size' "Erdogan clearly seems to believe that he can use the Khashoggi crisis as a way to cut Prince Mohammad bin Salman, and by extension, Saudi Arabia, down to size," Heras added. By not directly pointing the blame at the crown prince over Khashoggi, Erdogan is seeking to keep him under pressure, according to Karim Bitar of the Paris-based French Institute for International and Strategic Affairs think-tank. "Erdogan knows that he still has ammunition that could weaken MBS in the international arena so basically he is rolling the dice these days trying to figure out how to maximise his profit after this huge Saudi blunder," he told AFP. While the Muslim Brotherhood is important to Turkey, the West -- especially the United States -- is wary of the group and wants to focus any pressure on the crown prince towards ending the Yemen war and lifting the blockade on Qatar, the experts said. "I expect the blockade on Doha will likely come to an end in the near future and the Saudis find a way to support the UN's efforts in Yemen," said Steven Cook of the Council on Foreign Relations. Bitar noted that the US administration relies on Prince Mohammed's support for any possible peace plan for the Israel-Palestinian conflict as well as containing Iran, long a Saudi foe. Washington could also push the crown prince towards "a rapprochement with Israel and to maintain a hawkish line towards Iran", Bitar added.

Khashoggi crisis may tip Middle East power balance towards Turkey

The fate of missing Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, assuming that his disappearance was the work of Saudi security and military officials, threatens to upend the fundaments of fault lines in the Middle East.

At stake is not only the fate of a widely respected journalist and the future of Turkish-Saudi relations.

Khashoggi’s fate, whether he was kidnapped by Saudi agents during a visit to the kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul to obtain proof of his divorce or murdered on its premises, threatens to severely disrupt the US-Saudi alliance that underwrites much of the Middle East’s fault lines.

A US investigation into Khashoggi’s fate mandated by members of the US Congress and an expected meeting between President Donald Trump, and the journalist’s Turkish fiancée, Hatice Cengiz, could result in a US and European embargo on arms sales to Saudi Arabia and impact the kingdom’s brutal proxy war with Iran in Yemen.

It also would project Saudi Arabia as a rogue state and call into question US and Saudi allegations that Iran is the Middle East’s main state supporter of terrorism.

The allegations formed a key reason for the United States’ withdrawal with Saudi, United Arab Emirates and Israeli backing from the 2015 international agreement that curbed Iran’s nuclear program and the re-imposition of crippling economic sanctions.

They also would undermine Saudi and UAE justification of their 15-month-old economic and diplomatic boycott of Qatar that the two Gulf states, alongside Egypt and Bahrain, accused of supporting terrorism.

Condemnation and sanctioning of Saudi Arabia by the international community would complicate Chinese and Russian efforts to walk a fine line in their attempts to ensure that they are not sucked into the Saudi-Iranian rivalry.

Russia and China would be at a crossroads if Saudi Arabia were proven to be responsible for Khashoggi’s disappearance and the issue of sanctions would be brought to the United Nations Security Council.

Both Russia and China have so far been able to maintain close ties to Saudi Arabia despite their efforts to defeat US sanctions against Iran and Russia’s alliance with the Islamic republic in their support for Syrian president Bashar al-Assad.

A significantly weakened Saudi Arabia would furthermore undermine Arab cover provided by the kingdom for Trump’s efforts to impose a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that would favour Israel at the expense of the Palestinians.

Finally, a conclusive determination that Saudi Arabia was responsible for Khashoggi’s fate would likely spark renewed debate about the wisdom of the international community’s support for Arab autocracy that has proven to be unashamedly brutal in its violation of human rights and disregard for international law and conventions.

Meanwhile, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has suffered significant reputational damage irrespective of Khashoggi’s fate, raising the question of his viability if Saudi Arabia were condemned internationally and stability in the kingdom, a key tenant of US, Chinese and Russian Middle East policy, were to be at risk.

The reputational damage suffered by Prince Mohammed embarrasses UAE Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, who together with his aides and representatives in world capitals, worked hard to project his Saudi counterpart as the kingdom’s future.

Saudi Arabia has so far done itself a few favours by flatly rejecting any responsibility for Khashoggi’s disappearance with no evidence that the journalist left the consulate at his own volition; asserting that claims that it was involved were fabrications by Turkey, Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood; seeking to defame Khashoggi’s fiancé and supporters; and refusing to fully cooperate with Turkish investigators.

Saudi reluctance to cooperate as well as the US investigation and Cengiz’s expected meeting with Trump complicate apparent Turkish efforts to find a resolution of the escalating crisis that would allow Saudi Arabia to save face and salvage Turkey’s economic relationship with the kingdom.

Turkey, despite deep policy differences with Saudi Arabia over Qatar, Iran, and the Muslim Brotherhood, has so far refrained from statements that go beyond demanding that Saudi Arabia prove its assertion that Khashoggi left the Istanbul consulate at his own volition and fully cooperate with the Turkish investigation.

Reports by anonymous Turkish officials detailing gruesome details of Khashoggi’s alleged murder by Saudi agents appear designed to pressure Saudi Arabia to comply with the Turkish demands and efforts to manage the crisis.

Widely acclaimed, Khashoggi’s fate, irrespective of whether he as yet emerges alive or is proven to have been brutally murdered, is reshaping the political map of the Middle East. The possibility, if not likelihood is that he paid a horrendous price for sparking the earthquake that is already rumbling across the region. 
&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The fate of missing Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, assuming that his disappearance was the work of Saudi security and military officials, threatens to upend the fundaments of fault lines in the Middle East.

The fate of missing Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, assuming that his disappearance was the work of Saudi security and military officials, threatens to upend the fundaments of fault lines in the Middle East. At stake is not only the fate of a widely respected journalist and the future of Turkish-Saudi relations. Khashoggi’s fate, whether he was kidnapped by Saudi agents during a visit to the kingdom’s consulate in Istanbul to obtain proof of his divorce or murdered on its premises, threatens to severely disrupt the US-Saudi alliance that underwrites much of the Middle East’s fault lines. A US investigation into Khashoggi’s fate mandated by members of the US Congress and an expected meeting between President Donald Trump, and the journalist’s Turkish fiancée, Hatice Cengiz, could result in a US and European embargo on arms sales to Saudi Arabia and impact the kingdom’s brutal proxy war with Iran in Yemen. It also would project Saudi Arabia as a rogue state and call into question US and Saudi allegations that Iran is the Middle East’s main state supporter of terrorism. The allegations formed a key reason for the United States’ withdrawal with Saudi, United Arab Emirates and Israeli backing from the 2015 international agreement that curbed Iran’s nuclear program and the re-imposition of crippling economic sanctions. They also would undermine Saudi and UAE justification of their 15-month-old economic and diplomatic boycott of Qatar that the two Gulf states, alongside Egypt and Bahrain, accused of supporting terrorism. Condemnation and sanctioning of Saudi Arabia by the international community would complicate Chinese and Russian efforts to walk a fine line in their attempts to ensure that they are not sucked into the Saudi-Iranian rivalry. Russia and China would be at a crossroads if Saudi Arabia were proven to be responsible for Khashoggi’s disappearance and the issue of sanctions would be brought to the United Nations Security Council. Both Russia and China have so far been able to maintain close ties to Saudi Arabia despite their efforts to defeat US sanctions against Iran and Russia’s alliance with the Islamic republic in their support for Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. A significantly weakened Saudi Arabia would furthermore undermine Arab cover provided by the kingdom for Trump’s efforts to impose a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that would favour Israel at the expense of the Palestinians. Finally, a conclusive determination that Saudi Arabia was responsible for Khashoggi’s fate would likely spark renewed debate about the wisdom of the international community’s support for Arab autocracy that has proven to be unashamedly brutal in its violation of human rights and disregard for international law and conventions. Meanwhile, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has suffered significant reputational damage irrespective of Khashoggi’s fate, raising the question of his viability if Saudi Arabia were condemned internationally and stability in the kingdom, a key tenant of US, Chinese and Russian Middle East policy, were to be at risk. The reputational damage suffered by Prince Mohammed embarrasses UAE Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, who together with his aides and representatives in world capitals, worked hard to project his Saudi counterpart as the kingdom’s future. Saudi Arabia has so far done itself a few favours by flatly rejecting any responsibility for Khashoggi’s disappearance with no evidence that the journalist left the consulate at his own volition; asserting that claims that it was involved were fabrications by Turkey, Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood; seeking to defame Khashoggi’s fiancé and supporters; and refusing to fully cooperate with Turkish investigators. Saudi reluctance to cooperate as well as the US investigation and Cengiz’s expected meeting with Trump complicate apparent Turkish efforts to find a resolution of the escalating crisis that would allow Saudi Arabia to save face and salvage Turkey’s economic relationship with the kingdom. Turkey, despite deep policy differences with Saudi Arabia over Qatar, Iran, and the Muslim Brotherhood, has so far refrained from statements that go beyond demanding that Saudi Arabia prove its assertion that Khashoggi left the Istanbul consulate at his own volition and fully cooperate with the Turkish investigation. Reports by anonymous Turkish officials detailing gruesome details of Khashoggi’s alleged murder by Saudi agents appear designed to pressure Saudi Arabia to comply with the Turkish demands and efforts to manage the crisis. Widely acclaimed, Khashoggi’s fate, irrespective of whether he as yet emerges alive or is proven to have been brutally murdered, is reshaping the political map of the Middle East. The possibility, if not likelihood is that he paid a horrendous price for sparking the earthquake that is already rumbling across the region. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Fate of Jamal Khashoggi rejiggers the Middle East at potentially horrible cost

By Bill Law

On October 2, Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi went into his country’s consulate in Istanbul. He has not been seen since. The Saudis claim he left the consulate the next day. But if that is true, why did he not immediately contact his fiancée who was waiting outside the building?

Turkish authorities say they have examined CCTV footage, and there is no evidence that Khashoggi did leave the consulate. They insist he is still inside, and, if that is the case, then he is being held against his will. The fear is that he may have already been spirited out of the country and flown to Saudi Arabia. The Saudis have a form for such shenanigans: In the past two years, three princes, members of the ruling House of Saud, have disappeared from European cities and turned up in Riyadh, victims of state-organised kidnappings.

Jamal Khashoggi has a long career as a distinguished journalist. In 2003, he was appointed editor-in-chief of the leading Saudi newspaper Al Watan. The job didn’t last long. Barely two months in, he was sacked for publishing articles critical of the conservative religious elite. His subsequent career followed the same trajectory. He is a brilliant journalist with a fiercely independent mind but with a wily pragmatism to know just how close to the red lines he could go. He returned to Al Watan in 2007 and managed to remain at its helm for three years. His general strategy was to survive in his post until an article that was just a tad too critical got him into trouble. Then he would lie low before re-emerging. That takes a great deal of courage, especially in a country like Saudi Arabia.

In 2010, Saudi business magnate Prince al-Waleed bin Talal asked Khashoggi to head his new media project, Al-Arab News Channel. It was envisioned as an independent, privately-funded Arabic news broadcaster, designed to offer objective, agenda-free coverage of current events in the region. Five years later it was finally launched in Bahrain’s capital Manama but was almost immediately shut down after airing an interview with a Bahraini opposition leader.

In September of 2017, Khashoggi, with other colleagues, left Saudi Arabia in the midst of a wave of arrests of clerics, academics and human rights activists. Amongst those arrested, and now facing charges that could lead to the death penalty, is the moderate cleric Salman al-Awdah.

Radical transformation

The Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, or MBS as he is known, has embarked on a radical transformation of the Saudi economy and society called Vision 2030. Its intention is to wean the kingdom of oil dependency while at the same time creating a vibrant private sector with a diversified economy. And while Vision 2030 talks a good deal about transparency and fulfilling the wishes of the people, in reality, the model that MBS likes best is China’s, with its command economy controlled by an elite shaping a society where criticism is fiercely repressed.

Mohammed bin Salman followed up on the September 2017 arrests with what was called a campaign against corruption. Over 200 leading businessmen, including Waleed bin Talal, as well as senior members of the ruling family, were detained in a series of raids in November of last year. They were held at Riyadh’s five-star Ritz-Carlton Hotel and only released after agreeing to turn over the bulk of their assets and control of their companies to the government. Though the authorities claimed due process was followed, it was, in fact, a classic shakedown.

MBS had generated favourable global headlines with his decision to allow women to drive. However as the deadline approached in June of this year, he proceeded to arrest women activists who had campaigned for their rights. The message was clear: It wasn’t the pressure of activists that led to the decision, it was only the generosity of the crown prince that enabled the only women in the world banned from driving to finally be allowed to get behind the wheel.

Further arrests followed, including that of Samar Badawi, the sister of the jailed blogger Raif Badawi. Raif’s wife had fled to Canada with their children in 2012, and they are now Canadian citizens. When the government of Canada protested Samar’s arrest, as well as that of other women activists, the Saudis reacted with fury. Claiming infringement on their sovereignty, they recalled their ambassador, gave his Canadian counterpart 24 hours to get out of Riyadh and froze all new business and investment deals. Thousands of Saudi students studying at Canadian universities were ordered to come home.

In September, in a move with eerie and disturbing echoes of Stalinism, satire was banned: “Producing and distributing content that ridicules, mocks, provokes and disrupts public order, religious values and public morals through social media … will be considered a cybercrime punishable by a maximum of five years in prison and a fine of three million riyals ($800,000),” the kingdom’s public prosecution announced in a tweet.

And now Jamal Khashoggi has disappeared. In his first article for The Washington Post after leaving the kingdom, he had written: “My friends and I living abroad feel helpless. We want our country to thrive and to see the 2030 Vision realized. We are not opposed to our government and care deeply about Saudi Arabia. It is the only home we know or want. Yet we are the enemy.”

Repression deepens

Indeed as Vision 2030 shows signs of faltering, repression deepens. One of the ironies of the Mohammed bin Salman regime — and for those affected, it is a cruel one — is that individuals who were supportive of the vision very quickly fell under the suspicious gaze of this impetuous young man who started to see enemies everywhere.

The message that the young crown prince strives to impart in the West, at least, is that the kingdom is open for business; that it has returned to moderate Islam; allowed movie theatres to open; that it displays progressive thinking by, for example, granting women the right to drive; but arrests the women activists who campaigned for that right. The disconnect between many of the good economic reforms MBS wants to secure and the way he is using his power to crush dissent grows ever wider by the day. And it begs the question, What is he afraid of?

Was he worried that women campaigners, by seeking more rights, would undermine his authority? Did he think that Salman al-Awdah, with his 14 million Twitter followers, would seek to turn them against him? Did he fear that a fearless journalist writing for an influential Washington publication would weaken his standing in DC?

All of these people supported Vision 2030. They could have been his allies as he launched this bold and necessary project to transform the country. Instead, as Jamal Khashoggi wrote, he treated them as if they were the enemy. These are the anxieties not of a powerful leader, but of a man who is, in point of fact, displaying grave weakness.

I fear for Jamal Khashoggi, who went to the Saudi embassy in Istanbul in good faith. He is a good man and a fine journalist. His is a voice of reasoned criticism and wise comment that the Saudi crown prince should listen to. The thought that he might be forcibly repatriated back to the kingdom to face charges that could lead to a long prison sentence, or worse, fills me with dread. So I hope that good sense and common decency will prevail and he will be allowed to leave.

(Bill Law is an award-winning journalist)

(This article was originally published on The Fair Observer. Read the <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/region/middle_east_north_africa/jamal-khashoggi-disappearance-istanbul-saudi-arabia-mohammed-bin-salman-middle-east-news-headlines-72519/">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

By Bill Law On October 2, Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi went into his country’s consulate in Istanbul. He has not been seen since. The Saudis claim he left the consulate the next day.

By Bill Law On October 2, Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi went into his country’s consulate in Istanbul. He has not been seen since. The Saudis claim he left the consulate the next day. But if that is true, why did he not immediately contact his fiancée who was waiting outside the building? Turkish authorities say they have examined CCTV footage, and there is no evidence that Khashoggi did leave the consulate. They insist he is still inside, and, if that is the case, then he is being held against his will. The fear is that he may have already been spirited out of the country and flown to Saudi Arabia. The Saudis have a form for such shenanigans: In the past two years, three princes, members of the ruling House of Saud, have disappeared from European cities and turned up in Riyadh, victims of state-organised kidnappings. Jamal Khashoggi has a long career as a distinguished journalist. In 2003, he was appointed editor-in-chief of the leading Saudi newspaper Al Watan. The job didn’t last long. Barely two months in, he was sacked for publishing articles critical of the conservative religious elite. His subsequent career followed the same trajectory. He is a brilliant journalist with a fiercely independent mind but with a wily pragmatism to know just how close to the red lines he could go. He returned to Al Watan in 2007 and managed to remain at its helm for three years. His general strategy was to survive in his post until an article that was just a tad too critical got him into trouble. Then he would lie low before re-emerging. That takes a great deal of courage, especially in a country like Saudi Arabia. In 2010, Saudi business magnate Prince al-Waleed bin Talal asked Khashoggi to head his new media project, Al-Arab News Channel. It was envisioned as an independent, privately-funded Arabic news broadcaster, designed to offer objective, agenda-free coverage of current events in the region. Five years later it was finally launched in Bahrain’s capital Manama but was almost immediately shut down after airing an interview with a Bahraini opposition leader. In September of 2017, Khashoggi, with other colleagues, left Saudi Arabia in the midst of a wave of arrests of clerics, academics and human rights activists. Amongst those arrested, and now facing charges that could lead to the death penalty, is the moderate cleric Salman al-Awdah. Radical transformation The Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, or MBS as he is known, has embarked on a radical transformation of the Saudi economy and society called Vision 2030. Its intention is to wean the kingdom of oil dependency while at the same time creating a vibrant private sector with a diversified economy. And while Vision 2030 talks a good deal about transparency and fulfilling the wishes of the people, in reality, the model that MBS likes best is China’s, with its command economy controlled by an elite shaping a society where criticism is fiercely repressed. Mohammed bin Salman followed up on the September 2017 arrests with what was called a campaign against corruption. Over 200 leading businessmen, including Waleed bin Talal, as well as senior members of the ruling family, were detained in a series of raids in November of last year. They were held at Riyadh’s five-star Ritz-Carlton Hotel and only released after agreeing to turn over the bulk of their assets and control of their companies to the government. Though the authorities claimed due process was followed, it was, in fact, a classic shakedown. MBS had generated favourable global headlines with his decision to allow women to drive. However as the deadline approached in June of this year, he proceeded to arrest women activists who had campaigned for their rights. The message was clear: It wasn’t the pressure of activists that led to the decision, it was only the generosity of the crown prince that enabled the only women in the world banned from driving to finally be allowed to get behind the wheel. Further arrests followed, including that of Samar Badawi, the sister of the jailed blogger Raif Badawi. Raif’s wife had fled to Canada with their children in 2012, and they are now Canadian citizens. When the government of Canada protested Samar’s arrest, as well as that of other women activists, the Saudis reacted with fury. Claiming infringement on their sovereignty, they recalled their ambassador, gave his Canadian counterpart 24 hours to get out of Riyadh and froze all new business and investment deals. Thousands of Saudi students studying at Canadian universities were ordered to come home. In September, in a move with eerie and disturbing echoes of Stalinism, satire was banned: “Producing and distributing content that ridicules, mocks, provokes and disrupts public order, religious values and public morals through social media … will be considered a cybercrime punishable by a maximum of five years in prison and a fine of three million riyals ($800,000),” the kingdom’s public prosecution announced in a tweet. And now Jamal Khashoggi has disappeared. In his first article for The Washington Post after leaving the kingdom, he had written: “My friends and I living abroad feel helpless. We want our country to thrive and to see the 2030 Vision realized. We are not opposed to our government and care deeply about Saudi Arabia. It is the only home we know or want. Yet we are the enemy.” Repression deepens Indeed as Vision 2030 shows signs of faltering, repression deepens. One of the ironies of the Mohammed bin Salman regime — and for those affected, it is a cruel one — is that individuals who were supportive of the vision very quickly fell under the suspicious gaze of this impetuous young man who started to see enemies everywhere. The message that the young crown prince strives to impart in the West, at least, is that the kingdom is open for business; that it has returned to moderate Islam; allowed movie theatres to open; that it displays progressive thinking by, for example, granting women the right to drive; but arrests the women activists who campaigned for that right. The disconnect between many of the good economic reforms MBS wants to secure and the way he is using his power to crush dissent grows ever wider by the day. And it begs the question, What is he afraid of? Was he worried that women campaigners, by seeking more rights, would undermine his authority? Did he think that Salman al-Awdah, with his 14 million Twitter followers, would seek to turn them against him? Did he fear that a fearless journalist writing for an influential Washington publication would weaken his standing in DC? All of these people supported Vision 2030. They could have been his allies as he launched this bold and necessary project to transform the country. Instead, as Jamal Khashoggi wrote, he treated them as if they were the enemy. These are the anxieties not of a powerful leader, but of a man who is, in point of fact, displaying grave weakness. I fear for Jamal Khashoggi, who went to the Saudi embassy in Istanbul in good faith. He is a good man and a fine journalist. His is a voice of reasoned criticism and wise comment that the Saudi crown prince should listen to. The thought that he might be forcibly repatriated back to the kingdom to face charges that could lead to a long prison sentence, or worse, fills me with dread. So I hope that good sense and common decency will prevail and he will be allowed to leave. (Bill Law is an award-winning journalist) (This article was originally published on The Fair Observer. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Disappearance of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi confirms a dangerous trend

Saudi Arabia and Turkey, despite being on opposite sides of Middle Eastern divides, are cooperating in Syria to enable youth and women to acquire skills that would either allow them to compete in the job market or turn them into entrepreneurs.

The Saudi-funded, Turkish-executed projects potentially highlight a newly found degree of pragmatism and fluidity among seemingly entrenched alliances in the Middle East that largely pitch Turkey, Iran and Qatar against Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Saudi Arabia and Turkey differ on some of the Middle East’s most important divides. Turkey backs Qatar in its 15-month-old dispute with a Saudi-United Arab Emirates-led alliance that is boycotting the Gulf state economically and diplomatically and is competing with Saudi Arabia, and even more so with its closest ally, the UAE, for influence in the Horn of Africa.

While Turkey and Saudi Arabia are closer in their approach towards Syria, Turkey hosts members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a group that has been banned in the kingdom and is at the centre of its conflict with Qatar. It also opposes US sanctioning of Iran that has been embraced by Saudi Arabia.

Turkey further has exploited Saudi reluctance to aggressively oppose US President Donald Trump’s pro-Israel policy to position itself as the leader of the Islamic world in supporting the Palestinians. Turkish officials have suggested that the UAE had funded a failed 2016 military coup.

The projects are but one indication of the seeming emergence of a degree of pragmatism on the part of parties on all sides of the Middle Eastern divide. Other indications include differences between Turkey, Russia and Iran over how to handle Idlib, the last rebel-held stronghold in Syria; Bahraini trial balloons suggesting a softening of the boycott of Qatar; and Turkish-German efforts to mend fences with one another.

The signs of flexibility are as fragile as the alliances themselves. They are being put to a test with the disappearance in Istanbul of prominent Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a critic of the kingdom’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, who disappeared this week during a visit to the Saudi consulate.

Khashoggi, known for his close ties to the ruling family, went a year ago into self-exile in Washington, after being banned from publishing, which he feared was a prelude to arrest.

Neither Saudi Arabia nor Turkey has so far commented on Khashoggi’s disappearance. A Saudi Press Agency report said an unidentified Saudi national accused of having signed cheques that bounced had been deported to the kingdom on the basis of an arrest warrant issued by Interpol. The agency gave no further details.

While it is unknown whether the agency was referring to Khashoggi, many fear that he may have been kidnapped. It would not be the first time that Saudi Arabia has forcibly repatriated its critics.

A Saudi detention or nabbing of Khashoggi in Istanbul without at least tacit Turkish cooperation would embarrass Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and likely spark a further deterioration of Turkish-Saudi relations. If Turkey was complicit, it would bear testimony to increasing pragmatism.

Meanwhile, Saudi-Turkish cooperation in Syria goes beyond relief and development aid. It helps Turkey create a sphere of influence in areas of Syria near Turkey’s border that are controlled by Turkish troops and administered by Turkey.

In a bid to compliment Turkish hard power in Syria with soft power and counter Kurdish influence, Erdogan’s Religious Affairs Directorate or Diyanet has trained Syrian religious personnel, according to a 104-page report published by the directorate.

The report said that the directorate had spent a total of $34.1 million dollars in Syria on thing like repairing mosques, distributing Kurdish-language Qurans, and educating 11,250 students.

Journalist Amed Dicle said that Diyanet had recruited 5,686 teachers from the ranks of rebels opposed to the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad whose curriculum emphasized Turkey’s synthesis between Islam and nationalism and included anti-Kurdish teachings. “Kurds are portrayed as atheists, and the PKK, YPG and other Kurdish fighters are infidels,” Dicle said, referring to the outlawed Kurdish Workers Party and its Syrian offshoot, the People’s Protection Units.

A Syrian imam told Al-Monitor, “We're getting paid by the Turkish government. We're grateful to them and we see that the local population here are happy to be under Turkish rule. For Turkey, religious and national allegiances are one and the same. But our interpretation of Islam may not always be the same. Turkey keeps Kurds under control and that's good for us. Plus, one day Syrians in Turkey may come and settle in these areas.”

Saudi cooperation with Turkey and its anti-Kurdish agenda in Syria has not prevented the kingdom from establishing ties to Iraq’s autonomous Kurdish region that borders on Iran with the opening of a consulate in Erbil, initiation of Saudia flights from Jeddah to Erbil, and a visit by Saudi businessmen.

Bahrain reportedly hinted last month that the Gulf states boycotting Qatar may re-open airspace to flights bound from and to Doha. The continued closure has forced Qatar Airways to fly longer routes to circumvent Saudi, UAE and Bahraini airspace at considerable cost to the airline. The report was widely seen as a trial balloon.

Similarly, Erdogan travelled last week to Germany with which it has had strained relations in a bid to increase his options following a summit with Vladimir Putin and Hassan Rouhani, the presidents of Russia and Iran, in which he for now delayed a Syrian-Russian assault on Idlib that would have sent hundreds of thousands, if not millions fleeing towards the Turkish border.

The limitations of the notion, apparently shared by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Erdogan, that deep differences can easily be put aside to pragmatically focus on issues of common interest, a key pillar of Middle Eastern alliances, were on display with the European Parliament this week voting to withhold 70 million euros in pre-accession funding because Turkey had failed to reverse its moves towards authoritarianism.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

Saudi Arabia and Turkey, despite being on opposite sides of Middle Eastern divides, are cooperating in Syria to enable youth and women to acquire skills that would either allow them to compete in the job market or turn them into entrepreneurs.

Saudi Arabia and Turkey, despite being on opposite sides of Middle Eastern divides, are cooperating in Syria to enable youth and women to acquire skills that would either allow them to compete in the job market or turn them into entrepreneurs. The Saudi-funded, Turkish-executed projects potentially highlight a newly found degree of pragmatism and fluidity among seemingly entrenched alliances in the Middle East that largely pitch Turkey, Iran and Qatar against Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Arabia and Turkey differ on some of the Middle East’s most important divides. Turkey backs Qatar in its 15-month-old dispute with a Saudi-United Arab Emirates-led alliance that is boycotting the Gulf state economically and diplomatically and is competing with Saudi Arabia, and even more so with its closest ally, the UAE, for influence in the Horn of Africa. While Turkey and Saudi Arabia are closer in their approach towards Syria, Turkey hosts members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a group that has been banned in the kingdom and is at the centre of its conflict with Qatar. It also opposes US sanctioning of Iran that has been embraced by Saudi Arabia. Turkey further has exploited Saudi reluctance to aggressively oppose US President Donald Trump’s pro-Israel policy to position itself as the leader of the Islamic world in supporting the Palestinians. Turkish officials have suggested that the UAE had funded a failed 2016 military coup. The projects are but one indication of the seeming emergence of a degree of pragmatism on the part of parties on all sides of the Middle Eastern divide. Other indications include differences between Turkey, Russia and Iran over how to handle Idlib, the last rebel-held stronghold in Syria; Bahraini trial balloons suggesting a softening of the boycott of Qatar; and Turkish-German efforts to mend fences with one another. The signs of flexibility are as fragile as the alliances themselves. They are being put to a test with the disappearance in Istanbul of prominent Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a critic of the kingdom’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, who disappeared this week during a visit to the Saudi consulate. Khashoggi, known for his close ties to the ruling family, went a year ago into self-exile in Washington, after being banned from publishing, which he feared was a prelude to arrest. Neither Saudi Arabia nor Turkey has so far commented on Khashoggi’s disappearance. A Saudi Press Agency report said an unidentified Saudi national accused of having signed cheques that bounced had been deported to the kingdom on the basis of an arrest warrant issued by Interpol. The agency gave no further details. While it is unknown whether the agency was referring to Khashoggi, many fear that he may have been kidnapped. It would not be the first time that Saudi Arabia has forcibly repatriated its critics. A Saudi detention or nabbing of Khashoggi in Istanbul without at least tacit Turkish cooperation would embarrass Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and likely spark a further deterioration of Turkish-Saudi relations. If Turkey was complicit, it would bear testimony to increasing pragmatism. Meanwhile, Saudi-Turkish cooperation in Syria goes beyond relief and development aid. It helps Turkey create a sphere of influence in areas of Syria near Turkey’s border that are controlled by Turkish troops and administered by Turkey. In a bid to compliment Turkish hard power in Syria with soft power and counter Kurdish influence, Erdogan’s Religious Affairs Directorate or Diyanet has trained Syrian religious personnel, according to a 104-page report published by the directorate. The report said that the directorate had spent a total of $34.1 million dollars in Syria on thing like repairing mosques, distributing Kurdish-language Qurans, and educating 11,250 students. Journalist Amed Dicle said that Diyanet had recruited 5,686 teachers from the ranks of rebels opposed to the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad whose curriculum emphasized Turkey’s synthesis between Islam and nationalism and included anti-Kurdish teachings. “Kurds are portrayed as atheists, and the PKK, YPG and other Kurdish fighters are infidels,” Dicle said, referring to the outlawed Kurdish Workers Party and its Syrian offshoot, the People’s Protection Units. A Syrian imam told Al-Monitor, “We're getting paid by the Turkish government. We're grateful to them and we see that the local population here are happy to be under Turkish rule. For Turkey, religious and national allegiances are one and the same. But our interpretation of Islam may not always be the same. Turkey keeps Kurds under control and that's good for us. Plus, one day Syrians in Turkey may come and settle in these areas.” Saudi cooperation with Turkey and its anti-Kurdish agenda in Syria has not prevented the kingdom from establishing ties to Iraq’s autonomous Kurdish region that borders on Iran with the opening of a consulate in Erbil, initiation of Saudia flights from Jeddah to Erbil, and a visit by Saudi businessmen. Bahrain reportedly hinted last month that the Gulf states boycotting Qatar may re-open airspace to flights bound from and to Doha. The continued closure has forced Qatar Airways to fly longer routes to circumvent Saudi, UAE and Bahraini airspace at considerable cost to the airline. The report was widely seen as a trial balloon. Similarly, Erdogan travelled last week to Germany with which it has had strained relations in a bid to increase his options following a summit with Vladimir Putin and Hassan Rouhani, the presidents of Russia and Iran, in which he for now delayed a Syrian-Russian assault on Idlib that would have sent hundreds of thousands, if not millions fleeing towards the Turkish border. The limitations of the notion, apparently shared by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Erdogan, that deep differences can easily be put aside to pragmatically focus on issues of common interest, a key pillar of Middle Eastern alliances, were on display with the European Parliament this week voting to withhold 70 million euros in pre-accession funding because Turkey had failed to reverse its moves towards authoritarianism. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Prominent journalist’s disappearance challenges fragile Middle Eastern pragmatism

Three recent developments lay bare the fragility of Middle Eastern alliances and a rebalancing of their priorities: the Russian-Turkish compromise on an assault on the rebel-held Syrian region of Idlib, the fate of troubled Abu Dhabi airline Ettihad, and battles over reconstruction of Syria.

These developments highlight the fact that competition among Middle Eastern rivals and ultimate power within the region’s various alliances is increasingly as much economic and commercial as it is military and geopolitical. Battles are fought as much on geopolitical fronts as they are on economic and cultural battlefields such as soccer.

As a result, the fault lines of various alliances across the greater Middle East, a region that stretches from North Africa to north-western China, are coming to the fore.

The cracks may be most apparent in the Russian-Turkish-Iranian alliance but lurk in the background of Gulf cooperation with Israel in confronting Iran as well as the unified front put forward by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Russia, prevented, at least for now, a rupture with Turkey, by delaying an all-out attack on Idlib despite Iranian advocacy of an offensive. Turkey, already home to three million Syrians, feared that a Syrian-Russian assault, would push hundreds of thousands, if not millions more across its border.

If Iran was the weakest link in the debate about Idlib, it stands stronger in its coming competition with Russia for the spoils of reconstruction of war-ravaged Syria.

Similarly, Russia appears to be ambivalent towards a continued Iranian military presence in post-war Syria, a potential flashpoint given Israel’s opposition and Israeli attacks that led earlier this month to the downing of a Russian aircraft.

By the same token, Turkey, despite its backing of Qatar in its 15-month-old dispute with a Saudi-UAE-led alliance that is boycotting the Gulf state diplomatically and economically, poses perhaps the greatest challenge to Qatari efforts to project itself globally by operating one of the world’s best airlines and positioning itself as a sports hub.

Turkey, despite its failure this week to win the right to host Euro 2024 and its lack of the Gulf’s financial muscle, competes favourably on every other front with Qatar as well as the UAE that too is seeking to project itself through soft as well as hard power and opposes Mr. Erdogan because of his Islamist leanings, ties to Iran, and support of Qatar. Turkey wins hands down against the small Gulf states when it comes to size, population, location, industrial base, military might, and sports performance.

That, coupled with a determination to undermine Qatar, was likely one reason, why the UAE’s major carriers, Emirates and Etihad that is troubled by a failed business model, have, despite official denials, been quietly discussing a potential merger that would create the world’s largest airline.

Countering competition from Turkish Airlines that outflanks both UAE carriers with 309 passenger planes that service 302 destinations in 120 countries may well have been another reason. Emirates, the larger of the two Emirati carriers, has, a fleet of 256 aircraft flying to 150 destinations in 80 countries.

These recent developments suggest that alliances, particularly the one that groups Russia, Turkey and Iran, are brittle and transactional, geared towards capitalizing on immediate common interests rather than shared long-term goals, let alone values.

That is true even if Russia and Turkey increasingly find common ground in concepts of Eurasianism. It also applies to Turkey and Qatar who both support Islamist groups as well as to Saudi Arabia and the UAE who closely coordinate policies but see their different goals put on display in Yemen.

The fragility of the alliances is further underwritten by Turkish, Russian and Iranian aspirations of resurrecting empire in a 21st century mould and a Saudi quest for regional dominance.

Notions of empire have informed policies long before realignment across Eurasia as a result of the focus of the United States shifting from the Middle East to Asia, the rise of China. increasingly strained relations between the West and Russia, and the greater assertiveness of Middle Eastern states like Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Iran.

Then president Suleyman Demirel told this writer already in the 1990s in the wake of the demise of the Soviet Union and the emergence of independent, mostly ethnically Turkic Central Asian republics that “Turkey’s world stretches from the Adriatic to the Great Wall of China.”

In a world in which globalization is shaped by geopolitical zones rather than individual countries, Russia’s imperative is to be a region by defining itself as an Asian rather than a European power that would be on par with China, the European Union, and a US zone of influence.

“Putin does not think along national lines. He thinks in terms of larger blocks, and, ultimately in terms of the world order,” said former Portuguese minister for Europe, Bruno Macaes in a recently published book, The Dawn of Eurasia.

In doing so, Russia is effectively turning its back on Europe as it reinvents itself as an Asian power on the basis of a Eurasianism, a century-old ideology that defines Russia as a Eurasian rather than a European power.

The Eurasian Economic Union, that groups Russia, Kazakhstan. Kyrgyzstan, Belarus and Armenia, is a vehicle that allows Russia to establish itself as a block in the borderland between Europe and Asia.

Similarly, Eurasianism has gained currency in Turkey with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who enabled by the demise of the Soviet Union and the re-emergence of a Turkic world, projects his country as a crossroads between Europe, Africa and Asia rather than a European bridge to Asia.

In that vein, Turkish columnist Sinan Baykent projected this week’s fence-mending visit to Germany by Erdogan and his proposal for a summit on Syria of Turkish, Russian, German and French leaders as a Eurasian approach to problem solving.

The meeting between Erdogan and German chancellor Angela Merkel was meant “to pave the way for a Eurasian solution for the region… There is a new axis forming today between Berlin, Moscow, Ankara, Tehran and maybe Paris… All of these countries are fed up with American unilateralism and excessive policies displayed by the Trump administration.,”&nbsp;Baykent said.

If Turkey and Russia’s vision of their place in the world is defined to a large extent by geography, Iran’s topology dictates a more inward-looking view despite accusations that it is seeking to establish itself as the Middle East’s hegemon.

“Iran is a fortress. Surrounded on three sides by mountains and on the fourth by the ocean, with a wasteland at its centre,” noted Stratfor, a geopolitical intelligence platform. Gulf fears are rooted not only in deep-seated distrust of Iran’s Islamic regime, but also in the fact that the foundation of past Persian empire relied on control of plains in present-day Iraq.

As a result, the manoeuvring of Gulf states, in contrast to Turkey and Russia, is driven less by a conceptual framing of their place in the world and more by regional rivalry and regime survival. Countries like Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE walk a fine line focusing geopolitically on an increasingly unpredictable United States and economically on China and the rest of Asia, including Russia, Korea and Japan.

What the plight of Idlib, potential change in aviation and competition for reconstruction contracts highlight is the brittleness of Middle Eastern alliances that threatens to be reinforced by economics becoming an increasingly important factor alongside geopolitics.

“Stakes for all parties are starting to divert from each other in Syria and the prospects of cooperation with Russia and Iran are becoming more challenging,” said Turkish columnist Nuray Mert commenting on the situation in Idlib. Her analysis is as valid for Idlib as it for the prospects of many of the Middle East alliances.

 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Three recent developments lay bare the fragility of Middle Eastern alliances and a rebalancing of their priorities: the Russian-Turkish compromise on an assault on the rebel-held Syrian region of Idlib, the fate of troubled Abu Dhabi airline Ettihad, and battles over reconstruction of Syria.

Three recent developments lay bare the fragility of Middle Eastern alliances and a rebalancing of their priorities: the Russian-Turkish compromise on an assault on the rebel-held Syrian region of Idlib, the fate of troubled Abu Dhabi airline Ettihad, and battles over reconstruction of Syria. These developments highlight the fact that competition among Middle Eastern rivals and ultimate power within the region’s various alliances is increasingly as much economic and commercial as it is military and geopolitical. Battles are fought as much on geopolitical fronts as they are on economic and cultural battlefields such as soccer. As a result, the fault lines of various alliances across the greater Middle East, a region that stretches from North Africa to north-western China, are coming to the fore. The cracks may be most apparent in the Russian-Turkish-Iranian alliance but lurk in the background of Gulf cooperation with Israel in confronting Iran as well as the unified front put forward by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Russia, prevented, at least for now, a rupture with Turkey, by delaying an all-out attack on Idlib despite Iranian advocacy of an offensive. Turkey, already home to three million Syrians, feared that a Syrian-Russian assault, would push hundreds of thousands, if not millions more across its border. If Iran was the weakest link in the debate about Idlib, it stands stronger in its coming competition with Russia for the spoils of reconstruction of war-ravaged Syria. Similarly, Russia appears to be ambivalent towards a continued Iranian military presence in post-war Syria, a potential flashpoint given Israel’s opposition and Israeli attacks that led earlier this month to the downing of a Russian aircraft. By the same token, Turkey, despite its backing of Qatar in its 15-month-old dispute with a Saudi-UAE-led alliance that is boycotting the Gulf state diplomatically and economically, poses perhaps the greatest challenge to Qatari efforts to project itself globally by operating one of the world’s best airlines and positioning itself as a sports hub. Turkey, despite its failure this week to win the right to host Euro 2024 and its lack of the Gulf’s financial muscle, competes favourably on every other front with Qatar as well as the UAE that too is seeking to project itself through soft as well as hard power and opposes Mr. Erdogan because of his Islamist leanings, ties to Iran, and support of Qatar. Turkey wins hands down against the small Gulf states when it comes to size, population, location, industrial base, military might, and sports performance. That, coupled with a determination to undermine Qatar, was likely one reason, why the UAE’s major carriers, Emirates and Etihad that is troubled by a failed business model, have, despite official denials, been quietly discussing a potential merger that would create the world’s largest airline. Countering competition from Turkish Airlines that outflanks both UAE carriers with 309 passenger planes that service 302 destinations in 120 countries may well have been another reason. Emirates, the larger of the two Emirati carriers, has, a fleet of 256 aircraft flying to 150 destinations in 80 countries. These recent developments suggest that alliances, particularly the one that groups Russia, Turkey and Iran, are brittle and transactional, geared towards capitalizing on immediate common interests rather than shared long-term goals, let alone values. That is true even if Russia and Turkey increasingly find common ground in concepts of Eurasianism. It also applies to Turkey and Qatar who both support Islamist groups as well as to Saudi Arabia and the UAE who closely coordinate policies but see their different goals put on display in Yemen. The fragility of the alliances is further underwritten by Turkish, Russian and Iranian aspirations of resurrecting empire in a 21st century mould and a Saudi quest for regional dominance. Notions of empire have informed policies long before realignment across Eurasia as a result of the focus of the United States shifting from the Middle East to Asia, the rise of China. increasingly strained relations between the West and Russia, and the greater assertiveness of Middle Eastern states like Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Iran. Then president Suleyman Demirel told this writer already in the 1990s in the wake of the demise of the Soviet Union and the emergence of independent, mostly ethnically Turkic Central Asian republics that “Turkey’s world stretches from the Adriatic to the Great Wall of China.” In a world in which globalization is shaped by geopolitical zones rather than individual countries, Russia’s imperative is to be a region by defining itself as an Asian rather than a European power that would be on par with China, the European Union, and a US zone of influence. “Putin does not think along national lines. He thinks in terms of larger blocks, and, ultimately in terms of the world order,” said former Portuguese minister for Europe, Bruno Macaes in a recently published book, The Dawn of Eurasia. In doing so, Russia is effectively turning its back on Europe as it reinvents itself as an Asian power on the basis of a Eurasianism, a century-old ideology that defines Russia as a Eurasian rather than a European power. The Eurasian Economic Union, that groups Russia, Kazakhstan. Kyrgyzstan, Belarus and Armenia, is a vehicle that allows Russia to establish itself as a block in the borderland between Europe and Asia. Similarly, Eurasianism has gained currency in Turkey with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who enabled by the demise of the Soviet Union and the re-emergence of a Turkic world, projects his country as a crossroads between Europe, Africa and Asia rather than a European bridge to Asia. In that vein, Turkish columnist Sinan Baykent projected this week’s fence-mending visit to Germany by Erdogan and his proposal for a summit on Syria of Turkish, Russian, German and French leaders as a Eurasian approach to problem solving. The meeting between Erdogan and German chancellor Angela Merkel was meant “to pave the way for a Eurasian solution for the region… There is a new axis forming today between Berlin, Moscow, Ankara, Tehran and maybe Paris… All of these countries are fed up with American unilateralism and excessive policies displayed by the Trump administration.,” Baykent said. If Turkey and Russia’s vision of their place in the world is defined to a large extent by geography, Iran’s topology dictates a more inward-looking view despite accusations that it is seeking to establish itself as the Middle East’s hegemon. “Iran is a fortress. Surrounded on three sides by mountains and on the fourth by the ocean, with a wasteland at its centre,” noted Stratfor, a geopolitical intelligence platform. Gulf fears are rooted not only in deep-seated distrust of Iran’s Islamic regime, but also in the fact that the foundation of past Persian empire relied on control of plains in present-day Iraq. As a result, the manoeuvring of Gulf states, in contrast to Turkey and Russia, is driven less by a conceptual framing of their place in the world and more by regional rivalry and regime survival. Countries like Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE walk a fine line focusing geopolitically on an increasingly unpredictable United States and economically on China and the rest of Asia, including Russia, Korea and Japan. What the plight of Idlib, potential change in aviation and competition for reconstruction contracts highlight is the brittleness of Middle Eastern alliances that threatens to be reinforced by economics becoming an increasingly important factor alongside geopolitics. “Stakes for all parties are starting to divert from each other in Syria and the prospects of cooperation with Russia and Iran are becoming more challenging,” said Turkish columnist Nuray Mert commenting on the situation in Idlib. Her analysis is as valid for Idlib as it for the prospects of many of the Middle East alliances. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Fragility of Middle East alliances becomes more apparent

If any one part of the world has forced China to throw its long-standing foreign and defense policy principles out the window and increasingly adopt attitudes associated with a global power, it is the greater Middle East, a region that stretches from the Atlantic coast of Africa to north-western China, a swath of land populated by the Arab, Turkic and Persian worlds.&nbsp;

It was a series of incidents in 2011 during the popular Arab revolts that drove home the fact that China would not be able to protect with its existing foreign and defence policy kit its mushrooming Diaspora and exponentially expanding foreign investments that within a matter of a few years would be grouped as the infrastructure and connectivity-driven Belt and Road initiative linking the Eurasian landmass to the People’s Republic.&nbsp;

Policy principles of non-interference in the domestic affairs of others, an economically-driven win-win approach as a sort of magic wand for problem solution, and no foreign military interventions or bases needed reinterpretation if not being dumped on the dustbin of history.&nbsp;

The incidents included China’s approach to the revolt in Libya as it was happening when it deviated from its policy of non-interference by establishing parallel relations with the opposition National Council. The outreach to Libyan leader Col Moammar Qadhafi’s opponents did not save it from being identified with the ancien regime once the opposition gained power. On the contrary, the Council made clear that China would be low on the totem pole because of its past support for the Qadhafi regime.&nbsp;

The price for supporting autocratic rule in the greater Middle East meant that overseas Chinese nationals and assets became potential targets. To ensure the safety and security of its nationals in Libya, China was forced to evacuate 35,000 people, its most major foreign rescue operation. The evacuation was the first of similar operations in Syria, Iraq and Yemen.&nbsp;

The evacuations didn’t stop militants in Egypt’s Sinai from kidnapping 25 Chinese nationals and radicals in South Sudan from taking several Chinese hostages. The kidnappings sparked significant criticism on Chinese social media of the government’s seeming inability to protects its nationals and investments.&nbsp;

With Uyghurs from China’s strategic north-western province of Xinjiang joining militant jihadists in Syria and two Uyghur knife attacks in Xinjiang itself in the cities of Hotam and Kashgar, the limits of China’s traditional foreign and defense policy meshed with its increasingly repressive domestic approach towards the ethnic Turkic people.&nbsp;

Finally, the greater Middle East’s expectations were driven home in a brutal encounter between Arab businessmen and ethnic Chinese scholars and former officials in which the Arabs took the Chinese to task for wanting to benefit from Middle Eastern resources and trade relations without taking on political and geopolitical responsibilities they associated with a rising superpower.&nbsp;

Add to all of this that in subsequent years it was becoming increasingly difficult for China to remain on the sidelines of the Middle East’s multiple conflicts and rivalries. This was particularly true with President Donald Trump’s coming to office. The greater Middle East’s problems escalated with Mr Trump’s abandonment of any pretence of impartiality in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; his heating up of the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran by withdrawing from the 2015 international agreement curbing Iran’s nuclear program; and his toying with attempting to change the regime in Tehran that encouraged Saudi Arabia to step up Saudi support for Pakistani militants in the province of Baluchistan; the likely return of Uyghur jihadists in Syria to Central and South Asia that has prompted the establishment of Chinese military outposts in Tajikistan and Afghanistan and consideration of direct military intervention in a possible Syrian-Russian assault on Idlib, the last rebel-held stronghold in Syria; and finally the potential fallout of China’s brutal crackdown in Xinjiang.&nbsp;

Already, the events in 2011 and since coupled with the mushrooming of Belt and Road-related investments has led to the creation of the country’s first foreign military base in Djibouti and the likely establishment of similar facilities in its string of pearls, the network of ports in the Indian Ocean and beyond.

China’s potential policy dilemmas in the greater Middle East were enhanced by the fact that it doesn’t really have a Middle East policy that goes beyond its shaky, traditional foreign and defence policy principles and economics. That was evident when China in January 2016 on the eve of President Xi Jinping’s visit to the Middle East, the first by a Chinese head of state in seven years, issued its first Middle East-related policy white paper that fundamentally contained no new thinking and amounted to a reiteration of a win-win-based approach to the region.

Moreover, with China dependent on the US security umbrella in the Gulf, Beijing sees itself as competitively cooperating with the United States in the Middle East. That is true despite the US-Chinese trade war; differences over the Iranian nuclear agreement which the United States has abandoned and China wants to salvage; and Mr. Trump’s partisan Middle East policy.

China shares with the United States in general and even more so with the Trump administration a fundamental policy principle: stability rather than equitable political reform. China’s principle of non-interference is little more than another label for the US equivalent of long-standing support of autocracy in the Middle East in a bid to maintain stability.

In some ways China is learning the lesson, despite recent developments in Xinjiang, that US President George W. Bush and Susan Rice, his national security advisor and subsequent secretary of state, learnt on 9/11. Within a matter of weeks after the Al Qaeda attacks on New York and Washington, Bush and Rice suggested that the United States was co-responsible for the attacks because of its support for autocracy that had fuelled anti-American and anti-Western sentiment. It was why Bush launched his ill-conceived democracy initiative.

China, as a result of its political, economic and commercial approach towards the Belt and Road, is starting to have a similar experience. Chinese overseas outposts and assets have become targets, particularly in Pakistan but also in Central Asia.

The kidnappings in 2011 in the Sinai and South Sudan were the beginning. Uyghurs joined groups like the Islamic State and Al Qaeda not because they were pan-Islamist jihadists but because they wanted to get experience they could later apply in militant struggle against the Chinese.

Beyond profiling themselves in fighting in Syria, Uyghurs have trained with Malhama Tactical, a jihadist for profit Blackwater, the private military company created by Erik Prince.

Anti-Chinese sentiment in countries like Kazakhstan and Tajikistan is on the rise.

Iranians are grateful for Chinese support not only in the current battle over the nuclear accord but also in the previous round of international and US sanctions. They feel however that last time round they were taken for a ride in terms of high Chinese interest rates for project finance, the quality of goods delivered, and a perceived Chinese laxity in adhering to deadlines.

Resentment of the fallout of the Belt and Road investment taps into the broader threat involved in supporting stability by backing autocratic regimes That is nowhere truer than in the greater Middle East, a region that is in a period of volatile, often bloody and brutal transition. It’s a transition that started with the 2011 Arab revolts and has been pro-longed by a powerful Saudi-United Arab Emirates-led counterrevolution. Transitions take anywhere from a quarter to half a century. In other words, the Middle East is just at the beginning.

China, like the United States, did for decades, ignores the rumblings just below the surface even if the global trend is toward more authoritarian, more autocratic rule. 9/11 was the result of the United States and the West failing to put their ear to the ground and to take note of those rumblings.

Of course, current rumblings may never explode. But the lesson of the people’s power movement in the Philippines in 1986, the video in late 2010 of a fruit and vegetable vendor in Tunisia who set himself alight that sparked the Arab revolts, months of street and online protests in Morocco in the last year, the mass protests in Jordan earlier this year against a draft tax bill that have now restarted because of the legislation’s resurrection, and the current protests in the Iraqi city of Basra potentially are the writing on the wall. &nbsp;All it takes is a black swan.

Said Financial Times columnist Jamil Anderlini:” China is at risk of inadvertently embarking on its own colonial adventure in Pakistan— the biggest recipient of BRI investment and once the East India Company’s old stamping ground… Pakistan is now virtually a client state of China. Many within the country worry openly that its reliance on Beijing is already turning it into a colony of its huge neighbour. The risks that the relationship could turn problematic are greatly increased by Beijing’s ignorance of how China is perceived abroad and its reluctance to study history through a non-ideological lens... It is easy to envisage a scenario in which militant attacks on Chinese projects overwhelm the Pakistani military and China decides to openly deploy the People’s Liberation Army to protect its people and assets. That is how ‘win-win’ investment projects can quickly become the foundations of empire.”

The Chinese crackdown in Xinjiang could just be a black swan on multiple fronts given the fact that its fallout is felt far beyond China’s borders. For starters, the wall of Western and Muslim silence is cracking with potentially serious consequences for China as well as the Islamic world.

What is happening in Xinjiang is fundamentally different from past incidents including protests against a novel by Salman Rushdie and Ayatollah Khomeini’s fatwa ordering his killing; the 2006 Muslim boycott of Danish products because of controversial Danish cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed, and the more recent protests sparked by the burning of a Qur’an by a Florida evangelist. The Chinese campaign in Xinjiang challenges the fundamentals of the Islamic faith itself.

The earlier incidents were sparked by protests, primarily among South Asians in either Birmingham or Pakistan. This month has seen the first of Xinjiang-related anti-Chinese protests in Bangladesh and India. The first critical article on Xinjiang in the Pakistani press was published this week.

Malaysia is the first Muslim country to speak out with condemnations by a senior figure in Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad’s political party as well as the country’s likely next head of government, Anwar Ibrahim.

Consideration in Washington of Xinjiang-related sanctions by the Trump administration, coupled with United Nations reporting on the crackdown and a German and Swedish ban on deportations of Uyghurs, puts the issue on the map and increases pressure on Muslim nations, particularly those like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey and Pakistan that claim to speak on behalf of Islam.

This together with the fact that Chinese support for autocratic or authoritarian rule creates a potential opportunity to export its model of the surveillance state, the most extreme example of which is on display in Xinjiang, constitutes risks and involves potential black swans. To be sure, Pakistan can hardly be described as a liberal society, but it is also not exactly an authoritarian state, yet Pakistan is China’s first export target. And others closer to home could follow.

If all of this is more than enough to digest, factor in the geopolitics of Eurasia, certainly as they relate to the greater Middle East. The Chinese-backed Russian-Iranian-Turkish alliance is brittle at best, witness differences over the possible battle for Idlib and the post-war presence of Iran in Syria.

Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iran, and to a lesser degree Israel are players in what is a 21st-century Great Game. That is particularly true in the Caucasus and Central Asia as well as Pakistan and as it relates to port diplomacy in Pakistan’s Gwadar and the Indian-backed Iranian port of Chabahar.

Add to this the fact that if Saudi Arabia is the world’s swing oil producer, Iran is Eurasia’s swing gas producer with the potential to co-shape the supercontinent’s future energy architecture.

And finally, there are multiple ways that China risks being sucked into the Saudi-Iranian rivalry not least if the United States and Saudi Arabia decide to take plans off the drawing board and initiate a campaign to destabilize Iran by stirring unrest among its Baloch, Kurdish, Iranian Arab and Azeri minorities.

The long and short of this is that the Great Game in Eurasia remains largely undecided and that change in China’s foreign and defense policy is already a fact. The question is how all of this will affect China and how potential obstacles on the Belt and Road will play out.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

If any one part of the world has forced China to throw its long-standing foreign and defense policy principles out the window and increasingly adopt attitudes associated with a global power, it is the greater Middle East, a region that stretches from the Atlantic coast of Africa to north-western China, a swath of land populated by the Arab, Turkic and Persian worlds.

If any one part of the world has forced China to throw its long-standing foreign and defense policy principles out the window and increasingly adopt attitudes associated with a global power, it is the greater Middle East, a region that stretches from the Atlantic coast of Africa to north-western China, a swath of land populated by the Arab, Turkic and Persian worlds. It was a series of incidents in 2011 during the popular Arab revolts that drove home the fact that China would not be able to protect with its existing foreign and defence policy kit its mushrooming Diaspora and exponentially expanding foreign investments that within a matter of a few years would be grouped as the infrastructure and connectivity-driven Belt and Road initiative linking the Eurasian landmass to the People’s Republic. Policy principles of non-interference in the domestic affairs of others, an economically-driven win-win approach as a sort of magic wand for problem solution, and no foreign military interventions or bases needed reinterpretation if not being dumped on the dustbin of history. The incidents included China’s approach to the revolt in Libya as it was happening when it deviated from its policy of non-interference by establishing parallel relations with the opposition National Council. The outreach to Libyan leader Col Moammar Qadhafi’s opponents did not save it from being identified with the ancien regime once the opposition gained power. On the contrary, the Council made clear that China would be low on the totem pole because of its past support for the Qadhafi regime. The price for supporting autocratic rule in the greater Middle East meant that overseas Chinese nationals and assets became potential targets. To ensure the safety and security of its nationals in Libya, China was forced to evacuate 35,000 people, its most major foreign rescue operation. The evacuation was the first of similar operations in Syria, Iraq and Yemen. The evacuations didn’t stop militants in Egypt’s Sinai from kidnapping 25 Chinese nationals and radicals in South Sudan from taking several Chinese hostages. The kidnappings sparked significant criticism on Chinese social media of the government’s seeming inability to protects its nationals and investments. With Uyghurs from China’s strategic north-western province of Xinjiang joining militant jihadists in Syria and two Uyghur knife attacks in Xinjiang itself in the cities of Hotam and Kashgar, the limits of China’s traditional foreign and defense policy meshed with its increasingly repressive domestic approach towards the ethnic Turkic people. Finally, the greater Middle East’s expectations were driven home in a brutal encounter between Arab businessmen and ethnic Chinese scholars and former officials in which the Arabs took the Chinese to task for wanting to benefit from Middle Eastern resources and trade relations without taking on political and geopolitical responsibilities they associated with a rising superpower. Add to all of this that in subsequent years it was becoming increasingly difficult for China to remain on the sidelines of the Middle East’s multiple conflicts and rivalries. This was particularly true with President Donald Trump’s coming to office. The greater Middle East’s problems escalated with Mr Trump’s abandonment of any pretence of impartiality in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; his heating up of the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran by withdrawing from the 2015 international agreement curbing Iran’s nuclear program; and his toying with attempting to change the regime in Tehran that encouraged Saudi Arabia to step up Saudi support for Pakistani militants in the province of Baluchistan; the likely return of Uyghur jihadists in Syria to Central and South Asia that has prompted the establishment of Chinese military outposts in Tajikistan and Afghanistan and consideration of direct military intervention in a possible Syrian-Russian assault on Idlib, the last rebel-held stronghold in Syria; and finally the potential fallout of China’s brutal crackdown in Xinjiang. Already, the events in 2011 and since coupled with the mushrooming of Belt and Road-related investments has led to the creation of the country’s first foreign military base in Djibouti and the likely establishment of similar facilities in its string of pearls, the network of ports in the Indian Ocean and beyond. China’s potential policy dilemmas in the greater Middle East were enhanced by the fact that it doesn’t really have a Middle East policy that goes beyond its shaky, traditional foreign and defence policy principles and economics. That was evident when China in January 2016 on the eve of President Xi Jinping’s visit to the Middle East, the first by a Chinese head of state in seven years, issued its first Middle East-related policy white paper that fundamentally contained no new thinking and amounted to a reiteration of a win-win-based approach to the region. Moreover, with China dependent on the US security umbrella in the Gulf, Beijing sees itself as competitively cooperating with the United States in the Middle East. That is true despite the US-Chinese trade war; differences over the Iranian nuclear agreement which the United States has abandoned and China wants to salvage; and Mr. Trump’s partisan Middle East policy. China shares with the United States in general and even more so with the Trump administration a fundamental policy principle: stability rather than equitable political reform. China’s principle of non-interference is little more than another label for the US equivalent of long-standing support of autocracy in the Middle East in a bid to maintain stability. In some ways China is learning the lesson, despite recent developments in Xinjiang, that US President George W. Bush and Susan Rice, his national security advisor and subsequent secretary of state, learnt on 9/11. Within a matter of weeks after the Al Qaeda attacks on New York and Washington, Bush and Rice suggested that the United States was co-responsible for the attacks because of its support for autocracy that had fuelled anti-American and anti-Western sentiment. It was why Bush launched his ill-conceived democracy initiative. China, as a result of its political, economic and commercial approach towards the Belt and Road, is starting to have a similar experience. Chinese overseas outposts and assets have become targets, particularly in Pakistan but also in Central Asia. The kidnappings in 2011 in the Sinai and South Sudan were the beginning. Uyghurs joined groups like the Islamic State and Al Qaeda not because they were pan-Islamist jihadists but because they wanted to get experience they could later apply in militant struggle against the Chinese. Beyond profiling themselves in fighting in Syria, Uyghurs have trained with Malhama Tactical, a jihadist for profit Blackwater, the private military company created by Erik Prince. Anti-Chinese sentiment in countries like Kazakhstan and Tajikistan is on the rise. Iranians are grateful for Chinese support not only in the current battle over the nuclear accord but also in the previous round of international and US sanctions. They feel however that last time round they were taken for a ride in terms of high Chinese interest rates for project finance, the quality of goods delivered, and a perceived Chinese laxity in adhering to deadlines. Resentment of the fallout of the Belt and Road investment taps into the broader threat involved in supporting stability by backing autocratic regimes That is nowhere truer than in the greater Middle East, a region that is in a period of volatile, often bloody and brutal transition. It’s a transition that started with the 2011 Arab revolts and has been pro-longed by a powerful Saudi-United Arab Emirates-led counterrevolution. Transitions take anywhere from a quarter to half a century. In other words, the Middle East is just at the beginning. China, like the United States, did for decades, ignores the rumblings just below the surface even if the global trend is toward more authoritarian, more autocratic rule. 9/11 was the result of the United States and the West failing to put their ear to the ground and to take note of those rumblings. Of course, current rumblings may never explode. But the lesson of the people’s power movement in the Philippines in 1986, the video in late 2010 of a fruit and vegetable vendor in Tunisia who set himself alight that sparked the Arab revolts, months of street and online protests in Morocco in the last year, the mass protests in Jordan earlier this year against a draft tax bill that have now restarted because of the legislation’s resurrection, and the current protests in the Iraqi city of Basra potentially are the writing on the wall. All it takes is a black swan. Said Financial Times columnist Jamil Anderlini:” China is at risk of inadvertently embarking on its own colonial adventure in Pakistan— the biggest recipient of BRI investment and once the East India Company’s old stamping ground… Pakistan is now virtually a client state of China. Many within the country worry openly that its reliance on Beijing is already turning it into a colony of its huge neighbour. The risks that the relationship could turn problematic are greatly increased by Beijing’s ignorance of how China is perceived abroad and its reluctance to study history through a non-ideological lens... It is easy to envisage a scenario in which militant attacks on Chinese projects overwhelm the Pakistani military and China decides to openly deploy the People’s Liberation Army to protect its people and assets. That is how ‘win-win’ investment projects can quickly become the foundations of empire.” The Chinese crackdown in Xinjiang could just be a black swan on multiple fronts given the fact that its fallout is felt far beyond China’s borders. For starters, the wall of Western and Muslim silence is cracking with potentially serious consequences for China as well as the Islamic world. What is happening in Xinjiang is fundamentally different from past incidents including protests against a novel by Salman Rushdie and Ayatollah Khomeini’s fatwa ordering his killing; the 2006 Muslim boycott of Danish products because of controversial Danish cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed, and the more recent protests sparked by the burning of a Qur’an by a Florida evangelist. The Chinese campaign in Xinjiang challenges the fundamentals of the Islamic faith itself. The earlier incidents were sparked by protests, primarily among South Asians in either Birmingham or Pakistan. This month has seen the first of Xinjiang-related anti-Chinese protests in Bangladesh and India. The first critical article on Xinjiang in the Pakistani press was published this week. Malaysia is the first Muslim country to speak out with condemnations by a senior figure in Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad’s political party as well as the country’s likely next head of government, Anwar Ibrahim. Consideration in Washington of Xinjiang-related sanctions by the Trump administration, coupled with United Nations reporting on the crackdown and a German and Swedish ban on deportations of Uyghurs, puts the issue on the map and increases pressure on Muslim nations, particularly those like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey and Pakistan that claim to speak on behalf of Islam. This together with the fact that Chinese support for autocratic or authoritarian rule creates a potential opportunity to export its model of the surveillance state, the most extreme example of which is on display in Xinjiang, constitutes risks and involves potential black swans. To be sure, Pakistan can hardly be described as a liberal society, but it is also not exactly an authoritarian state, yet Pakistan is China’s first export target. And others closer to home could follow. If all of this is more than enough to digest, factor in the geopolitics of Eurasia, certainly as they relate to the greater Middle East. The Chinese-backed Russian-Iranian-Turkish alliance is brittle at best, witness differences over the possible battle for Idlib and the post-war presence of Iran in Syria. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iran, and to a lesser degree Israel are players in what is a 21st-century Great Game. That is particularly true in the Caucasus and Central Asia as well as Pakistan and as it relates to port diplomacy in Pakistan’s Gwadar and the Indian-backed Iranian port of Chabahar. Add to this the fact that if Saudi Arabia is the world’s swing oil producer, Iran is Eurasia’s swing gas producer with the potential to co-shape the supercontinent’s future energy architecture. And finally, there are multiple ways that China risks being sucked into the Saudi-Iranian rivalry not least if the United States and Saudi Arabia decide to take plans off the drawing board and initiate a campaign to destabilize Iran by stirring unrest among its Baloch, Kurdish, Iranian Arab and Azeri minorities. The long and short of this is that the Great Game in Eurasia remains largely undecided and that change in China’s foreign and defense policy is already a fact. The question is how all of this will affect China and how potential obstacles on the Belt and Road will play out. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: China's policy dilemmas in the Middle East

Nissan Motor Co. aims to expand the company's footprints in African, Middle Eastern, and Indian markets as part of its six-year midterm plan.

It plans to maintain and build on solid profit margins in the region by developing a partnership with local talent to meet growing demand for automobiles.

Nissan has projected an increase of forty per cent in its regional sales by bringing more than 12 million vehicles by 2022.

It will further accelerate its Datsun brand's presence in new and existing markets and will continue to increase its market share in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and India.

The product range provided under Nissan Intelligent Mobility will be expanded as new services in electrification, autonomous driving systems, and improved connectivity tools will be introduced.

Chairman of Nissan in Africa, Middle East, and India Peyman Kargar said, "Our ambitious plans reflect the exciting opportunities ahead. Nissan has already developed a strong presence within this fast-growing region, and we are well-positioned to maximize our growth and make an increasing and lasting contribution to Nissan's overall performance."

As per its mid-term plan, Nissan is targeting annual revenue of 16.5 trillion yen and an 8% core consolidated operating profit margin by the end of the fiscal year 2022.

The company has specific plans for each region.

Nissan plans to increase its market share in South Africa, now at 10%, substantially over the course of the plan. The company's sales in South Africa jumped by 26% as 53,400 vehicles are currently in the market in the fiscal year 2017. The introduction of new models, including the new Nissan Micra, is expected to boost demand further.

In India, the company will strengthen its dealership network and develop the power of the Datsun and Nissan brands through initiatives including sponsorship of the International Cricket Council. Nissan has built a strong foundation for growth in India with a 480,000-vehicle capacity plant, as well as a large research and development centre - both in Chennai and established with its Alliance partner, Renault.

In the Middle East, Nissan will add new models to its already strong presence in key segments, building on its fiscal year 2017 sales of 96,600 vehicles.

Nissan has projected an increase of forty per cent in its regional sales by bringing more than 12 million vehicles by 2022

Nissan Motor Co. aims to expand the company's footprints in African, Middle Eastern, and Indian markets as part of its six-year midterm plan. It plans to maintain and build on solid profit margins in the region by developing a partnership with local talent to meet growing demand for automobiles. Nissan has projected an increase of forty per cent in its regional sales by bringing more than 12 million vehicles by 2022. It will further accelerate its Datsun brand's presence in new and existing markets and will continue to increase its market share in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and India. The product range provided under Nissan Intelligent Mobility will be expanded as new services in electrification, autonomous driving systems, and improved connectivity tools will be introduced. Chairman of Nissan in Africa, Middle East, and India Peyman Kargar said, "Our ambitious plans reflect the exciting opportunities ahead. Nissan has already developed a strong presence within this fast-growing region, and we are well-positioned to maximize our growth and make an increasing and lasting contribution to Nissan's overall performance." As per its mid-term plan, Nissan is targeting annual revenue of 16.5 trillion yen and an 8% core consolidated operating profit margin by the end of the fiscal year 2022. The company has specific plans for each region. Nissan plans to increase its market share in South Africa, now at 10%, substantially over the course of the plan. The company's sales in South Africa jumped by 26% as 53,400 vehicles are currently in the market in the fiscal year 2017. The introduction of new models, including the new Nissan Micra, is expected to boost demand further. In India, the company will strengthen its dealership network and develop the power of the Datsun and Nissan brands through initiatives including sponsorship of the International Cricket Council. Nissan has built a strong foundation for growth in India with a 480,000-vehicle capacity plant, as well as a large research and development centre - both in Chennai and established with its Alliance partner, Renault. In the Middle East, Nissan will add new models to its already strong presence in key segments, building on its fiscal year 2017 sales of 96,600 vehicles.

Nissan announces expansion plans in India, Africa, Middle East

Italy's new hardline interior minister Matteo Salvini said&nbsp;Sunday&nbsp;that "common sense" was needed to stop the country from being "Europe's refugee camp" as he visited a migrant centre in the south.

The newly minted deputy prime minister in Italy's populist coalition government travelled to Sicily, one of the country's main refugee landing points, to push the anti-immigration platform that propelled him to power.

"Italy and Sicily cannot be Europe's refugee camp," he told a crowd of supporters under the blazing sun in the southern Sicilian town of Pozzallo, a migration hotspot.

"Nobody will take away my certainty that illegal immigration is a business... and seeing people make money on children who go on to die makes me furious," he added.

His comments came as more than 50 migrants drowned in the Mediterranean&nbsp;on Sunday, with 48 bodies found off Tunisia's southern coast and nine Syrians -- including seven children -- killed when their vessel sank off the coast of Turkey.&nbsp;

The port town of Pozzallo is also on the migration front line as one of the main landing points for refugees fleeing war, persecution and famine across North Africa and the Middle East.

A crowd of enthusiastic supporters and a smaller group of protesters had earlier gathered in front of the gates of the town's migrant centre, where Salvini would give his speech, trading insults and nearly coming to blows.

One protester brandished a sign saying "refugees welcome", while a supporter said "we don't want any more pests" and others simply chanted "Matteo, Matteo".

After delivering his speech,&nbsp; Salvini went inside the centre to meet some of the 158 people who had landed in Pozzallo when they were rescued by a humanitarian boat&nbsp;on Friday.

The rescue operation, which was coordinated by the Italian coast guard, happened just hours after Salvini took his oath of office, and said he would ask his ministry's experts "how to reduce the number of arriving migrants and increase the number of expulsions".

"The good times for illegals is over -- get ready to pack your bags," he said&nbsp;on Saturday.

However, while he retained the fighting tone that helped spur his rise to power, he did temper his words when it came to NGOs organising rescues at sea, which he has previously called "smugglers" and accused of complicity with people traffickers.

"I think it's better to spend money in the countries of origin, and now if there are NGOs that want to work for free, that's fine," Salvini said.

The leader of the far-right League party also said the new government would "not take a hard line on immigration but one of common sense".

His fellow deputy prime minister, head of the anti-establishment Five Star Movement Luigi Di Maio, has also called rescue NGOs "taxis on the sea", although his rhetoric on immigration is more measured than that of the League.

Salvini is on the road seeking to rally support for his party's candidates in municipal elections later this month, as part of a broader effort to boost the traditionally northern party's profile in the country's poorer south.

European Union interior ministers will meet&nbsp;on Tuesday&nbsp;to discuss possible reforms of the EU's controversial Dublin rule, whereby would-be refugees must file for asylum in the first bloc member-state they enter however Salvini said he would not be attending, as he will be in Italy's parliament for a confidence vote on the new coalition with Five Star.&nbsp;

Salvini has condemned the Dublin rule as unfairly burdening Mediterranean countries and leading to "an obvious imbalance in management, numbers and costs".

The accord does heavily penalise Italy, which has seen more than 700,000 migrants arrive since 2013.

Previously, the vast majority would continue their journeys to northern Europe, but the introduction of EU-backed processing centres to ensure migrants are identified at their first European entry point and tighter border controls installed by France, Switzerland and Austria are now creating roadblocks along this well-worn route.

A controversial agreement between Italy's former centre-left government and authorities and militias in Libya has triggered a decline in overall arrivals of some 75 per cent since the summer of 2017.&nbsp;

But so far this year Italian authorities have still registered more than 13,500 arrivals.

The newly minted deputy prime minister in Italy's populist coalition government travelled to Sicily, one of the country's main refugee landing points, to push the anti-immigration platform that propelled him to power

Italy's new hardline interior minister Matteo Salvini said Sunday that "common sense" was needed to stop the country from being "Europe's refugee camp" as he visited a migrant centre in the south. The newly minted deputy prime minister in Italy's populist coalition government travelled to Sicily, one of the country's main refugee landing points, to push the anti-immigration platform that propelled him to power. "Italy and Sicily cannot be Europe's refugee camp," he told a crowd of supporters under the blazing sun in the southern Sicilian town of Pozzallo, a migration hotspot. "Nobody will take away my certainty that illegal immigration is a business... and seeing people make money on children who go on to die makes me furious," he added. His comments came as more than 50 migrants drowned in the Mediterranean on Sunday, with 48 bodies found off Tunisia's southern coast and nine Syrians -- including seven children -- killed when their vessel sank off the coast of Turkey. The port town of Pozzallo is also on the migration front line as one of the main landing points for refugees fleeing war, persecution and famine across North Africa and the Middle East. A crowd of enthusiastic supporters and a smaller group of protesters had earlier gathered in front of the gates of the town's migrant centre, where Salvini would give his speech, trading insults and nearly coming to blows. One protester brandished a sign saying "refugees welcome", while a supporter said "we don't want any more pests" and others simply chanted "Matteo, Matteo". After delivering his speech, Salvini went inside the centre to meet some of the 158 people who had landed in Pozzallo when they were rescued by a humanitarian boat on Friday. The rescue operation, which was coordinated by the Italian coast guard, happened just hours after Salvini took his oath of office, and said he would ask his ministry's experts "how to reduce the number of arriving migrants and increase the number of expulsions". "The good times for illegals is over -- get ready to pack your bags," he said on Saturday. However, while he retained the fighting tone that helped spur his rise to power, he did temper his words when it came to NGOs organising rescues at sea, which he has previously called "smugglers" and accused of complicity with people traffickers. "I think it's better to spend money in the countries of origin, and now if there are NGOs that want to work for free, that's fine," Salvini said. The leader of the far-right League party also said the new government would "not take a hard line on immigration but one of common sense". His fellow deputy prime minister, head of the anti-establishment Five Star Movement Luigi Di Maio, has also called rescue NGOs "taxis on the sea", although his rhetoric on immigration is more measured than that of the League. Salvini is on the road seeking to rally support for his party's candidates in municipal elections later this month, as part of a broader effort to boost the traditionally northern party's profile in the country's poorer south. European Union interior ministers will meet on Tuesday to discuss possible reforms of the EU's controversial Dublin rule, whereby would-be refugees must file for asylum in the first bloc member-state they enter however Salvini said he would not be attending, as he will be in Italy's parliament for a confidence vote on the new coalition with Five Star. Salvini has condemned the Dublin rule as unfairly burdening Mediterranean countries and leading to "an obvious imbalance in management, numbers and costs". The accord does heavily penalise Italy, which has seen more than 700,000 migrants arrive since 2013. Previously, the vast majority would continue their journeys to northern Europe, but the introduction of EU-backed processing centres to ensure migrants are identified at their first European entry point and tighter border controls installed by France, Switzerland and Austria are now creating roadblocks along this well-worn route. A controversial agreement between Italy's former centre-left government and authorities and militias in Libya has triggered a decline in overall arrivals of some 75 per cent since the summer of 2017. But so far this year Italian authorities have still registered more than 13,500 arrivals.

Italy cannot be 'Europe's refugee camp': Deputy PM Matteo  Salvini

Qatar has ordered shops to remove goods originating from a group of Saudi Arabian-led countries which a year ago imposed a wide-ranging boycott on the emirate, Doha officials said Saturday.&nbsp

A directive from the economy ministry ordered shops to immediately strip shelves of products from Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt.

Inspectors will visit stores to ensure they comply with the order, the ministry said.

The government will also try and stop products such as Saudi dairy goods from entering Qatar via a third country.

Qatar's Government Communications Office (GCO) said it was trying to "protect the safety of consumers".

"Products originating from blockading states, which as a result of the blockade cannot pass the GCC customs territory, has to undergo proper import inspections and customs procedures," the GCO said in a statement.&nbsp

"Qatar conducts its trade policy in accordance with all of its multilateral and bilateral agreements."

The order comes just days before the anniversary of a bitter Gulf crisis.

Since June 5 last year, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt have cut all relations with Qatar, accusing it of financing terrorist groups and having close ties with Iran.

The countries subsequently imposed a trade and diplomatic boycott on Qatar, which rejects the charges and says the countries are seeking regime change in Doha.

The row has forced isolated Qatar, which previously relied on its Gulf neighbours, to look elsewhere for food imports, including Turkey, Morocco and Iran.&nbsp

Many such imports enter the country via ports such as Kuwait and Oman.

It is through these ports, and also via individuals, that goods from the boycotting countries manage to get in to Qatar, said a source with knowledge of the situation.

"Businessmen from the blockading countries are trying to go around the blockade... by using third parties," said the source. &nbspQatar has ordered shops to remove goods originating from a group of Saudi Arabian-led countries which a year ago imposed a wide-ranging boycott on the emirate, Doha officials said Saturday.&nbsp

A directive from the economy ministry ordered shops to immediately strip shelves of products from Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt.

Inspectors will visit stores to ensure they comply with the order, the ministry said.

The government will also try and stop products such as Saudi dairy goods from entering Qatar via a third country.

Qatar's Government Communications Office (GCO) said it was trying to "protect the safety of consumers".

"Products originating from blockading states, which as a result of the blockade cannot pass the GCC customs territory, has to undergo proper import inspections and customs procedures," the GCO said in a statement.&nbsp

"Qatar conducts its trade policy in accordance with all of its multilateral and bilateral agreements."

The order comes just days before the anniversary of a bitter Gulf crisis.

Since June 5 last year, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt have cut all relations with Qatar, accusing it of financing terrorist groups and having close ties with Iran.

The countries subsequently imposed a trade and diplomatic boycott on Qatar, which rejects the charges and says the countries are seeking regime change in Doha.

The row has forced isolated Qatar, which previously relied on its Gulf neighbours, to look elsewhere for food imports, including Turkey, Morocco and Iran.&nbsp

Many such imports enter the country via ports such as Kuwait and Oman.

It is through these ports, and also via individuals, that goods from the boycotting countries manage to get into Qatar, said a source with knowledge of the situation.

"Businessmen from the blockading countries are trying to go around the blockade... by using third parties," said the source. &nbsp

A directive from the economy ministry ordered shops to immediately strip shelves of products from Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt

Qatar has ordered shops to remove goods originating from a group of Saudi Arabian-led countries which a year ago imposed a wide-ranging boycott on the emirate, Doha officials said Saturday. A directive from the economy ministry ordered shops to immediately strip shelves of products from Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt. Inspectors will visit stores to ensure they comply with the order, the ministry said. The government will also try and stop products such as Saudi dairy goods from entering Qatar via a third country. Qatar's Government Communications Office (GCO) said it was trying to "protect the safety of consumers". "Products originating from blockading states, which as a result of the blockade cannot pass the GCC customs territory, has to undergo proper import inspections and customs procedures," the GCO said in a statement. "Qatar conducts its trade policy in accordance with all of its multilateral and bilateral agreements." The order comes just days before the anniversary of a bitter Gulf crisis. Since June 5 last year, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt have cut all relations with Qatar, accusing it of financing terrorist groups and having close ties with Iran. The countries subsequently imposed a trade and diplomatic boycott on Qatar, which rejects the charges and says the countries are seeking regime change in Doha. The row has forced isolated Qatar, which previously relied on its Gulf neighbours, to look elsewhere for food imports, including Turkey, Morocco and Iran. Many such imports enter the country via ports such as Kuwait and Oman. It is through these ports, and also via individuals, that goods from the boycotting countries manage to get in to Qatar, said a source with knowledge of the situation. "Businessmen from the blockading countries are trying to go around the blockade... by using third parties," said the source. &nbspQatar has ordered shops to remove goods originating from a group of Saudi Arabian-led countries which a year ago imposed a wide-ranging boycott on the emirate, Doha officials said Saturday. A directive from the economy ministry ordered shops to immediately strip shelves of products from Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt. Inspectors will visit stores to ensure they comply with the order, the ministry said. The government will also try and stop products such as Saudi dairy goods from entering Qatar via a third country. Qatar's Government Communications Office (GCO) said it was trying to "protect the safety of consumers". "Products originating from blockading states, which as a result of the blockade cannot pass the GCC customs territory, has to undergo proper import inspections and customs procedures," the GCO said in a statement. "Qatar conducts its trade policy in accordance with all of its multilateral and bilateral agreements." The order comes just days before the anniversary of a bitter Gulf crisis. Since June 5 last year, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt have cut all relations with Qatar, accusing it of financing terrorist groups and having close ties with Iran. The countries subsequently imposed a trade and diplomatic boycott on Qatar, which rejects the charges and says the countries are seeking regime change in Doha. The row has forced isolated Qatar, which previously relied on its Gulf neighbours, to look elsewhere for food imports, including Turkey, Morocco and Iran. Many such imports enter the country via ports such as Kuwait and Oman. It is through these ports, and also via individuals, that goods from the boycotting countries manage to get into Qatar, said a source with knowledge of the situation. "Businessmen from the blockading countries are trying to go around the blockade... by using third parties," said the source.

Qatar bans Saudi, UAE goods from stores

By:&nbspConn Hallinan*

The unusual triple alliance coming out of Syria could change the regional balance of power and unhinge NATO — if it holds together at all.

An unusual triple alliance is emerging from the Syrian War — one that could alter the balance of power in the Middle East, unhinge the NATO alliance, and complicate the Trump administration’s designs on Iran. It might also lead to yet another double cross of one of the region’s largest ethnic groups, the Kurds.

However, the "troika alliance" — Turkey, Russia and Iran — consists of three countries that don’t much like one another, have different goals, and whose policies are driven by a combination of geo-global goals and internal politics. In short, "fragile and complicated" doesn’t even begin to describe it.

How the triad might be affected by the joint American, French and British attack on Syria is unclear, but in the long run the alliance will likely survive the uptick of hostilities.

Consolidating Erdogan's grip

Common ground was what came out of the April 4 meeting between Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Meeting in Ankara, the parties pledged to support the "territorial integrity" of Syria, find a diplomatic end to the war, and to begin a reconstruction of a Syria devastated by seven years of war. While Russia and Turkey explicitly backed the UN-sponsored talks in Geneva, Iran was quiet on that issue, preferring a regional solution without "foreign plans."

"Common ground," however, doesn’t mean the members of the "troika" are on the same page.

Turkey’s interests are both internal and external. The Turkish army is currently conducting two military operations in northern Syria, Olive Branch and Euphrates Shield, aimed at driving the mainly Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) out of land that borders Turkey. But those operations are also deeply entwined with domestic Turkish politics.

Erdogan's internal support has been eroded by a number of factors: exhaustion with the ongoing state of emergency imposed following the 2016 attempted coup, a shaky economy, and a precipitous fall in the value of the Turkish lira.

Rather than waiting for 2019, Erdogan has called a snap election for June 24, and beating up on the Kurds is always popular with right-wing Turkish nationalists. Erdogan needs all the votes he can get to implement the newly minted executive presidency that will give him virtually one-man rule.

Driving a wedge in NATO

To be part of the alliance, however, Erdogan has had to modify his goal of getting rid of Syrian President Bashar Assad and to agree — at this point, anyhow — to eventually withdraw from areas in northern Syria seized by the Turkish army. Russia and Iran have called for turning over the regions conquered by the Turks to the Syrian army.

Moscow's goals are to keep a foothold in the Middle East with its only base, Tartus, and to aid its long-time ally, Syria. The Russians aren’t deeply committed to Assad personally, but they want a friendly government in Damascus. They also want to destroy al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, which have caused Moscow considerable trouble in the Caucasus.

Russia also wouldn't mind driving a wedge between Ankara and NATO. After the US, Turkey has NATO’s second-largest army. NATO broke a 1989 agreement not to recruit former members of the Russian-dominated Warsaw Pact into NATO as a quid pro quo for the Soviets withdrawing from Eastern Europe.

Since the Yugoslav War in 1999, the alliance has marched right up to the borders of Russia. (The 2008 war with Georgia and 2014 seizure of the Crimea were largely a reaction to what Moscow sees as an encirclement strategy by its adversaries.)

Turkey has been at odds with its NATO allies around a dispute between Greece and Cyprus over sea-based oil and gas resources, and it recently charged two Greek soldiers who violated the Turkish border with espionage.

Erdogan is also angry that European Union countries refuse to extradite Turkish soldiers and civilians whom he claims helped engineer the 2016 coup against him. While most NATO countries condemned Moscow for the recent attack on two Russians in Britain, the Turks pointedly did not.

Turkish relations with Russia have an economic side as well. Ankara wants a natural gas pipeline from Russia, has broken ground on a $20 billion Russian nuclear reactor, and just shelled out $2.5 billion for Russia’s S-400 anti-aircraft system.

The Kurdish question

The Russians don't support Erdogan’s war on the Kurds and have lobbied for the inclusion of Kurdish delegations in negotiations over the future of Syria. But Moscow clearly gave the Turks a green light to attack the Kurdish city of Afrin in March, driving out the YPG that had liberated it from the Islamic State and Turkish-backed al-Qaeda groups. A number of Kurds charge that Moscow has betrayed them.

Will the Russians stand aside if the Turkish forces move further into Syria and attack the city of Manbij, where the Kurds are allied with American and French forces? And will Erdogan's hostility to the Kurds lead to an armed clash among three NATO members?

Such a clash seems unlikely, although the Turks have been giving flamethrower speeches over the past several weeks. "Those who cooperate with terrorist organisations [the YPG] will be targeted by Turkey," Deputy Prime Minister Bekir Bozdag said in a pointed reference to France's support for the Kurds. Threatening the French is one thing, picking a fight with the US military quite another.

Of course, if President Donald Trump pulls US forces out of Syria, it will be tempting for Turkey to move in. While the “troika alliance” has agreed to Syrian "sovereignty," that won’t stop Ankara from meddling in Kurdish affairs. The Turks are already appointing governors and mayors for the areas in Syria they have occupied.

Keeping the US at bay

Iran's major concern in Syria is maintaining a buffer between itself and the very aggressive American, Israeli and Saudi alliance, which seems to be in the preliminary stages of planning a war against the second-largest country in the Middle East.

Iran is not at all the threat it’s been pumped up to be. Its military is minuscule and talk of a so-called "Shia crescent" — Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon — is pretty much a Western invention (although the term was dreamed up by the Sunni king of Jordan).

Tehran has been weakened by crippling sanctions and faces the possibility that Washington will withdraw from the nuclear accord and re-impose yet more sanctions. The appointment of US National Security Adviser John Bolton, who openly calls for regime change in Iran, has to have sent a chill down the spines of the Iranians.

What Tehran needs most of all is allies who will shield it from the enmity of the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia. In this regard, Turkey and Russia could be helpful.

Iran has modified its original goals in Syria of a Shia-dominated regime by agreeing to a "non-sectarian character" for a post-war Syria. (Erdogan has also given up on his desire for a Sunni-dominated government in Damascus.)

War and oil

The war between the US or its allies and Iran would be catastrophic — an unwinnable conflict that could destabilise the Middle East even more than it is now. It would, however, drive up the price of oil, currently running at around $66 a barrel.

Saudi Arabia needs to sell its oil for at least $100 a barrel or it will very quickly run of money. The ongoing quagmire of the Yemen War, the need to diversify the economy, and the growing clamor by young Saudis — 70 per cent of the population — for jobs require lots of money, and the current trends in oil pricing are not going to cover the bills.

War and oil make for odd bedfellows. While the Saudis are doing their best to overthrow the Assad regime and fuel the extremists fighting the Russians, Riyadh is wooing Moscow to sign on to a long-term OPEC agreement to control oil supplies.

That probably won’t happen — the Russians are fine with oil at $50 to $60 a barrel — and are wary of agreements that would restrict their right to develop new oil and gas resources.

The Saudis' jihad on the Iranians has a desperate edge to it. The greatest threat to the kingdom has always come from within.

The rocks and shoals that can wreck alliances in the Middle East are too numerous to count, and the "troika" is riven with contradictions and conflicting interests. But the war in Syria looks as if it’s coming to some kind of resolution — and at this point Iran, Russia and Turkey seem to be the only actors who have a script that goes beyond lobbing cruise missiles at people.

*Conn M. Hallinan is a columnist for Foreign Policy in Focus, "A Think Tank Without Walls," and an independent journalist.&nbsp

(This article was originally published on <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/ ">Fair Observer</a>. Read the original <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/region/middle_east_north_africa/syrian-war-turkey-iran-russia-world-news-headlines-43093/">article</a>.)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The unusual triple alliance coming out of Syria could change the regional balance of power and unhinge NATO — if it holds together at all

By: Conn Hallinan* The unusual triple alliance coming out of Syria could change the regional balance of power and unhinge NATO — if it holds together at all. An unusual triple alliance is emerging from the Syrian War — one that could alter the balance of power in the Middle East, unhinge the NATO alliance, and complicate the Trump administration’s designs on Iran. It might also lead to yet another double cross of one of the region’s largest ethnic groups, the Kurds. However, the "troika alliance" — Turkey, Russia and Iran — consists of three countries that don’t much like one another, have different goals, and whose policies are driven by a combination of geo-global goals and internal politics. In short, "fragile and complicated" doesn’t even begin to describe it. How the triad might be affected by the joint American, French and British attack on Syria is unclear, but in the long run the alliance will likely survive the uptick of hostilities. Consolidating Erdogan's grip Common ground was what came out of the April 4 meeting between Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Meeting in Ankara, the parties pledged to support the "territorial integrity" of Syria, find a diplomatic end to the war, and to begin a reconstruction of a Syria devastated by seven years of war. While Russia and Turkey explicitly backed the UN-sponsored talks in Geneva, Iran was quiet on that issue, preferring a regional solution without "foreign plans." "Common ground," however, doesn’t mean the members of the "troika" are on the same page. Turkey’s interests are both internal and external. The Turkish army is currently conducting two military operations in northern Syria, Olive Branch and Euphrates Shield, aimed at driving the mainly Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) out of land that borders Turkey. But those operations are also deeply entwined with domestic Turkish politics. Erdogan's internal support has been eroded by a number of factors: exhaustion with the ongoing state of emergency imposed following the 2016 attempted coup, a shaky economy, and a precipitous fall in the value of the Turkish lira. Rather than waiting for 2019, Erdogan has called a snap election for June 24, and beating up on the Kurds is always popular with right-wing Turkish nationalists. Erdogan needs all the votes he can get to implement the newly minted executive presidency that will give him virtually one-man rule. Driving a wedge in NATO To be part of the alliance, however, Erdogan has had to modify his goal of getting rid of Syrian President Bashar Assad and to agree — at this point, anyhow — to eventually withdraw from areas in northern Syria seized by the Turkish army. Russia and Iran have called for turning over the regions conquered by the Turks to the Syrian army. Moscow's goals are to keep a foothold in the Middle East with its only base, Tartus, and to aid its long-time ally, Syria. The Russians aren’t deeply committed to Assad personally, but they want a friendly government in Damascus. They also want to destroy al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, which have caused Moscow considerable trouble in the Caucasus. Russia also wouldn't mind driving a wedge between Ankara and NATO. After the US, Turkey has NATO’s second-largest army. NATO broke a 1989 agreement not to recruit former members of the Russian-dominated Warsaw Pact into NATO as a quid pro quo for the Soviets withdrawing from Eastern Europe. Since the Yugoslav War in 1999, the alliance has marched right up to the borders of Russia. (The 2008 war with Georgia and 2014 seizure of the Crimea were largely a reaction to what Moscow sees as an encirclement strategy by its adversaries.) Turkey has been at odds with its NATO allies around a dispute between Greece and Cyprus over sea-based oil and gas resources, and it recently charged two Greek soldiers who violated the Turkish border with espionage. Erdogan is also angry that European Union countries refuse to extradite Turkish soldiers and civilians whom he claims helped engineer the 2016 coup against him. While most NATO countries condemned Moscow for the recent attack on two Russians in Britain, the Turks pointedly did not. Turkish relations with Russia have an economic side as well. Ankara wants a natural gas pipeline from Russia, has broken ground on a $20 billion Russian nuclear reactor, and just shelled out $2.5 billion for Russia’s S-400 anti-aircraft system. The Kurdish question The Russians don't support Erdogan’s war on the Kurds and have lobbied for the inclusion of Kurdish delegations in negotiations over the future of Syria. But Moscow clearly gave the Turks a green light to attack the Kurdish city of Afrin in March, driving out the YPG that had liberated it from the Islamic State and Turkish-backed al-Qaeda groups. A number of Kurds charge that Moscow has betrayed them. Will the Russians stand aside if the Turkish forces move further into Syria and attack the city of Manbij, where the Kurds are allied with American and French forces? And will Erdogan's hostility to the Kurds lead to an armed clash among three NATO members? Such a clash seems unlikely, although the Turks have been giving flamethrower speeches over the past several weeks. "Those who cooperate with terrorist organisations [the YPG] will be targeted by Turkey," Deputy Prime Minister Bekir Bozdag said in a pointed reference to France's support for the Kurds. Threatening the French is one thing, picking a fight with the US military quite another. Of course, if President Donald Trump pulls US forces out of Syria, it will be tempting for Turkey to move in. While the “troika alliance” has agreed to Syrian "sovereignty," that won’t stop Ankara from meddling in Kurdish affairs. The Turks are already appointing governors and mayors for the areas in Syria they have occupied. Keeping the US at bay Iran's major concern in Syria is maintaining a buffer between itself and the very aggressive American, Israeli and Saudi alliance, which seems to be in the preliminary stages of planning a war against the second-largest country in the Middle East. Iran is not at all the threat it’s been pumped up to be. Its military is minuscule and talk of a so-called "Shia crescent" — Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon — is pretty much a Western invention (although the term was dreamed up by the Sunni king of Jordan). Tehran has been weakened by crippling sanctions and faces the possibility that Washington will withdraw from the nuclear accord and re-impose yet more sanctions. The appointment of US National Security Adviser John Bolton, who openly calls for regime change in Iran, has to have sent a chill down the spines of the Iranians. What Tehran needs most of all is allies who will shield it from the enmity of the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia. In this regard, Turkey and Russia could be helpful. Iran has modified its original goals in Syria of a Shia-dominated regime by agreeing to a "non-sectarian character" for a post-war Syria. (Erdogan has also given up on his desire for a Sunni-dominated government in Damascus.) War and oil The war between the US or its allies and Iran would be catastrophic — an unwinnable conflict that could destabilise the Middle East even more than it is now. It would, however, drive up the price of oil, currently running at around $66 a barrel. Saudi Arabia needs to sell its oil for at least $100 a barrel or it will very quickly run of money. The ongoing quagmire of the Yemen War, the need to diversify the economy, and the growing clamor by young Saudis — 70 per cent of the population — for jobs require lots of money, and the current trends in oil pricing are not going to cover the bills. War and oil make for odd bedfellows. While the Saudis are doing their best to overthrow the Assad regime and fuel the extremists fighting the Russians, Riyadh is wooing Moscow to sign on to a long-term OPEC agreement to control oil supplies. That probably won’t happen — the Russians are fine with oil at $50 to $60 a barrel — and are wary of agreements that would restrict their right to develop new oil and gas resources. The Saudis' jihad on the Iranians has a desperate edge to it. The greatest threat to the kingdom has always come from within. The rocks and shoals that can wreck alliances in the Middle East are too numerous to count, and the "troika" is riven with contradictions and conflicting interests. But the war in Syria looks as if it’s coming to some kind of resolution — and at this point Iran, Russia and Turkey seem to be the only actors who have a script that goes beyond lobbing cruise missiles at people. *Conn M. Hallinan is a columnist for Foreign Policy in Focus, "A Think Tank Without Walls," and an independent journalist. (This article was originally published on Fair Observer. Read the original article.) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: An emerging Russia-Turkey-Iran alliance could reshape the Middle East

US&nbspSecretary of State Mike Pompeo arrived in the Saudi capital on Saturday&nbspfor the first leg of his trip to the Middle East where Iran is likely to be on the agenda.

The former CIA director who was sworn in as Rex Tillerson's replacement on Thursday was greeted by Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir and other Saudi officials at King Salman Air Base in Riyadh.

The State Department says Pompeo will also visit Jordan and Israel during the weekend after attending a NATO meeting on Friday in Brussels.

Pompeo picked those three Middle East stops "because of all that is going on," State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert told reporters.

US&nbspPresident Donald Trump will decide by May 12 whether to restore US&nbspeconomic sanctions on Tehran, which would be a severe blow to the 2015 nuclear pact between Iran and six major powers.

The former CIA director who was sworn in as Rex Tillerson's replacement on Thursday was greeted by Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir and other Saudi officials at King Salman Air Base in Riyadh

US&nbspSecretary of State Mike Pompeo arrived in the Saudi capital on Saturday&nbspfor the first leg of his trip to the Middle East where Iran is likely to be on the agenda. The former CIA director who was sworn in as Rex Tillerson's replacement on Thursday was greeted by Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir and other Saudi officials at King Salman Air Base in Riyadh. The State Department says Pompeo will also visit Jordan and Israel during the weekend after attending a NATO meeting on Friday in Brussels. Pompeo picked those three Middle East stops "because of all that is going on," State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert told reporters. US&nbspPresident Donald Trump will decide by May 12 whether to restore US&nbspeconomic sanctions on Tehran, which would be a severe blow to the 2015 nuclear pact between Iran and six major powers.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo meets Saudi leaders on first leg of Mideast trip

Oil prices edged off highs last reached in late 2014, pressured by a stronger dollar, but crude futures still drew support from mounting political tension in the Middle East and shrinking global oil inventories.

Brent crude futures were at $71.67 a barrel at 11:48 a.m. EDT (1548 GMT), down 39 cents. US&nbspWTI crude futures were down 13 cents at $66.68.

"The dollar index is the biggest factor in prices today," said Phillip Streible, an analyst at RJO Futures in Chicago. The U.S. dollar was up 0.3 percent against a basket of major currencies, making purchases in other currencies more expensive.

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries said the global oil stocks surplus was close to evaporating due to healthy demand and its own supply cuts.

The group is producing oil below its targets, meaning the world needs to use stocks to meet rising demand. OPEC said in its monthly report oil stocks in the developed world fell by 17.4 million barrels in February to 2.854 billion barrels, around 43 million barrels above the latest five-year average.

OPEC Secretary-General Mohammad Barkindo told Reuters in New Delhi the global oil glut has effectively shrunk by nine-tenths since the start of 2017.

"We have seen an accelerated shrinkage of stocks in storage from unparalleled highs of about 400 million barrels to about 43 million above the five-year average," Barkindo said.

OPEC, Russia and several other non-OPEC producers began trimming supply in January 2017. Their pact runs until the end of the year and OPEC meets in June to decide on its next course of action.

"There is growing confidence that the declaration of cooperation will be extended beyond 2018," Barkindo told Reuters. "Russia will continue to play a leading role."

On Wednesday, both Brent and WTI hit their highest since late 2014, $73.09 for Brent and $67.45 a barrel for US&nbspcrude, after Saudi Arabia said it intercepted missiles over Riyadh and U.S. President Donald Trump warned of military action in Syria.

The geopolitical developments more than offset pressure from a U.S. government report showing crude oil inventories rose by 3.3 million barrels, while domestic production hit a record 10.53 million barrels per day (bpd).

Brent crude futures were at $71.67 a barrel at 11:48 a.m. EDT (1548 GMT), down 39 cents. U.S. WTI crude futures were down 13 cents at $66.68.

Oil prices edged off highs last reached in late 2014, pressured by a stronger dollar, but crude futures still drew support from mounting political tension in the Middle East and shrinking global oil inventories. Brent crude futures were at $71.67 a barrel at 11:48 a.m. EDT (1548 GMT), down 39 cents. US&nbspWTI crude futures were down 13 cents at $66.68. "The dollar index is the biggest factor in prices today," said Phillip Streible, an analyst at RJO Futures in Chicago. The U.S. dollar was up 0.3 percent against a basket of major currencies, making purchases in other currencies more expensive. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries said the global oil stocks surplus was close to evaporating due to healthy demand and its own supply cuts. The group is producing oil below its targets, meaning the world needs to use stocks to meet rising demand. OPEC said in its monthly report oil stocks in the developed world fell by 17.4 million barrels in February to 2.854 billion barrels, around 43 million barrels above the latest five-year average. OPEC Secretary-General Mohammad Barkindo told Reuters in New Delhi the global oil glut has effectively shrunk by nine-tenths since the start of 2017. "We have seen an accelerated shrinkage of stocks in storage from unparalleled highs of about 400 million barrels to about 43 million above the five-year average," Barkindo said. OPEC, Russia and several other non-OPEC producers began trimming supply in January 2017. Their pact runs until the end of the year and OPEC meets in June to decide on its next course of action. "There is growing confidence that the declaration of cooperation will be extended beyond 2018," Barkindo told Reuters. "Russia will continue to play a leading role." On Wednesday, both Brent and WTI hit their highest since late 2014, $73.09 for Brent and $67.45 a barrel for US&nbspcrude, after Saudi Arabia said it intercepted missiles over Riyadh and U.S. President Donald Trump warned of military action in Syria. The geopolitical developments more than offset pressure from a U.S. government report showing crude oil inventories rose by 3.3 million barrels, while domestic production hit a record 10.53 million barrels per day (bpd).

Oil dips from 3-year highs but OPEC supply draw supports

US President Donald Trump insisted Thursday that US forces would pull out of Syria "very soon" and lamented what he said was Washington`s waste of $7 trillion in Middle East wars.

In a populist address to industrial workers in Ohio, Trump said US forces were close to securing all of the territory that the Islamic State jihadist group once claimed.

"We`ll be coming out of Syria, like, very soon. Let the other people take care of it now," he promised, to applause.&nbsp;

Trump did not say who the others were who might take care of Syria, but Russia and Iran have sizable forces in the country to support Bashar al-Assad`s regime.&nbsp;

"Very soon -- very soon we`re coming out. We`re going to have 100 percent of the caliphate, as they call it -- sometimes referred to as `land` -- taking it all back quickly, quickly," he said.&nbsp;

"But we`re going to be coming out of there real soon. Going to get back to our country, where we belong, where we want to be."

The United States has more than 2,000 military personnel in eastern Syria, working with local militia groups to defeat the extremist Islamic State group while trying to keep out of Syria`s broader civil war.

Trump`s eagerness to quit the conflict flies in the face of a new US Syria strategy announced in January by then secretary of state Rex Tillerson -- who has since been sacked.

Tillerson argued that US forces must remain engaged in Syria to prevent IS and Al-Qaeda from returning and to deny Iran a chance "to further strengthen its position in Syria."

In a speech at Stanford University, he also warned that "a total withdrawal of American personnel at this time would restore Assad and continue his brutal treatment against his own people."

But Tillerson has gone after being dismissed in a tweet and Trump, who increasingly makes foreign policy announcements without seeking the advice of US generals or diplomats, wants out.

"We spent $7 trillion in the Middle East. And you know what we have for it? Nothing," Trump declared, promising to focus future US spending on building jobs and infrastructure at home.

'We spent $7 trillion in the Middle East. And you know what we have for it? Nothing,' Trump declared, promising to focus future US spending on building jobs and infrastructure at home

US President Donald Trump insisted Thursday that US forces would pull out of Syria "very soon" and lamented what he said was Washington`s waste of $7 trillion in Middle East wars. In a populist address to industrial workers in Ohio, Trump said US forces were close to securing all of the territory that the Islamic State jihadist group once claimed. "We`ll be coming out of Syria, like, very soon. Let the other people take care of it now," he promised, to applause. Trump did not say who the others were who might take care of Syria, but Russia and Iran have sizable forces in the country to support Bashar al-Assad`s regime. "Very soon -- very soon we`re coming out. We`re going to have 100 percent of the caliphate, as they call it -- sometimes referred to as `land` -- taking it all back quickly, quickly," he said. "But we`re going to be coming out of there real soon. Going to get back to our country, where we belong, where we want to be." The United States has more than 2,000 military personnel in eastern Syria, working with local militia groups to defeat the extremist Islamic State group while trying to keep out of Syria`s broader civil war. Trump`s eagerness to quit the conflict flies in the face of a new US Syria strategy announced in January by then secretary of state Rex Tillerson -- who has since been sacked. Tillerson argued that US forces must remain engaged in Syria to prevent IS and Al-Qaeda from returning and to deny Iran a chance "to further strengthen its position in Syria." In a speech at Stanford University, he also warned that "a total withdrawal of American personnel at this time would restore Assad and continue his brutal treatment against his own people." But Tillerson has gone after being dismissed in a tweet and Trump, who increasingly makes foreign policy announcements without seeking the advice of US generals or diplomats, wants out. "We spent $7 trillion in the Middle East. And you know what we have for it? Nothing," Trump declared, promising to focus future US spending on building jobs and infrastructure at home.

US withdrawing from Syria 'very soon': Donald Trump

Oil prices extended gains to hit their highest level in nearly two weeks on Monday, buoyed as Asian shares joined a global recovery in equity markets and as worries grew over tensions in the Middle East.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that Israel could act against Iran itself, not just its allies in the Middle East, after border incidents in Syria brought the Middle East foes closer to direct confrontation.

US&nbsp;West Texas Intermediate crude for March delivery was up 73 cents, or 1.2 per cent, at $62.41 a barrel by 0600 GMT, after earlier touching its highest since February 7.

London Brent crude was up 52 cents, or 0.8 percent, at $65.36, after rising more than 3 per cent last week.

&quot;The upside momentum since WTI hit last week&#39;s low of $58 has been continuing,&quot; said Tetsu Emori, CEO of Emori Capital Management in Tokyo.

&quot;Oil got mild support from gains in Asian equity markets, but has been getting pressure from the rise in US&nbsp;rig count and a slight recovery in the dollar.&quot;

Trading is expected to be slower than usual due market holidays in the United States as well as Greater China.

The US&nbsp;oil rig count, an indicator of future production, rose by seven to 798, its highest since April 2015, according to a weekly report from General Electric&#39;s Baker Hughes unit.

That marked the first time since June that drillers added rigs for four consecutive weeks, and the figure was well up on the 597 rigs that were active a year earlier as energy companies have boosted spending since mid-2016 when crude prices began recovering from a two-year crash.

Surging US&nbsp;production is offsetting efforts by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and some other producers including Russia to curb production by 1.8 million barrels per day (bpd) until the end of 2018.

Money managers slashed their bullish wagers on ICE Brent crude oil futures by the most in nearly eight months in the week to February 13, data showed, as prices plunged amid concerns of oversupply.

Speculators also cut net long US&nbsp;crude futures and options positions in the week to February 13 by the most since late August, the US&nbsp;Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) said.

London Brent crude was up 52 cents, or 0.8 percent, at $65.36, after rising more than 3 percent last week

Oil prices extended gains to hit their highest level in nearly two weeks on Monday, buoyed as Asian shares joined a global recovery in equity markets and as worries grew over tensions in the Middle East. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that Israel could act against Iran itself, not just its allies in the Middle East, after border incidents in Syria brought the Middle East foes closer to direct confrontation. US West Texas Intermediate crude for March delivery was up 73 cents, or 1.2 per cent, at $62.41 a barrel by 0600 GMT, after earlier touching its highest since February 7. London Brent crude was up 52 cents, or 0.8 percent, at $65.36, after rising more than 3 per cent last week. "The upside momentum since WTI hit last week's low of $58 has been continuing," said Tetsu Emori, CEO of Emori Capital Management in Tokyo. "Oil got mild support from gains in Asian equity markets, but has been getting pressure from the rise in US rig count and a slight recovery in the dollar." Trading is expected to be slower than usual due market holidays in the United States as well as Greater China. The US oil rig count, an indicator of future production, rose by seven to 798, its highest since April 2015, according to a weekly report from General Electric's Baker Hughes unit. That marked the first time since June that drillers added rigs for four consecutive weeks, and the figure was well up on the 597 rigs that were active a year earlier as energy companies have boosted spending since mid-2016 when crude prices began recovering from a two-year crash. Surging US production is offsetting efforts by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and some other producers including Russia to curb production by 1.8 million barrels per day (bpd) until the end of 2018. Money managers slashed their bullish wagers on ICE Brent crude oil futures by the most in nearly eight months in the week to February 13, data showed, as prices plunged amid concerns of oversupply. Speculators also cut net long US crude futures and options positions in the week to February 13 by the most since late August, the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) said.

Oil hits highest in nearly two weeks on Asian equity recovery

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that Israel would act against Iran, not just its allies in the Middle East, if needed, reiterating that Tehran was the world&#39;s greatest threat.

Holding a piece of what he said was an Iranian drone after its incursion into Israeli airspace earlier this month, Netanyahu told the Munich Security Conference: &quot;Israel will not allow the regime to put a noose of terror around our neck.

&quot;We will act if necessary not just against Iran&#39;s proxies but against Iran itself,&quot; he said.

Addressing the Munich event for the first time, Netanyahu urged gathered U.S. and European officials and diplomats to counter Iran immediately, displaying a map showing what he said was Iran&#39;s growing presence in the Middle East.

He said Iran was increasing its power as the U.S.-led coalition against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria regains territory from militants.

&quot;The unfortunate thing is that as ISIS compresses and Iran moves in, it is trying to establish this continuous empire surrounding the Middle East from the south in Yemen but also trying to create a land bridge from Iran to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Gaza,&quot; Netanyahu said.

&quot;This is a very dangerous development for our region.&quot;

Tensions surged on Feb. 10 when anti-aircraft fire downed an Israeli warplane returning from a bombing raid on Iran-backed positions in Syria.

That was the most serious confrontation yet between Israel and Iranian-backed forces based across the border.

Holding a piece of what he said was an Iranian drone after its incursion into Israeli airspace earlier this month, Netanyahu told the Munich Security Conference: "Israel will not allow the regime to put a noose of terror around our neck.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that Israel would act against Iran, not just its allies in the Middle East, if needed, reiterating that Tehran was the world's greatest threat. Holding a piece of what he said was an Iranian drone after its incursion into Israeli airspace earlier this month, Netanyahu told the Munich Security Conference: "Israel will not allow the regime to put a noose of terror around our neck. "We will act if necessary not just against Iran's proxies but against Iran itself," he said. Addressing the Munich event for the first time, Netanyahu urged gathered U.S. and European officials and diplomats to counter Iran immediately, displaying a map showing what he said was Iran's growing presence in the Middle East. He said Iran was increasing its power as the U.S.-led coalition against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria regains territory from militants. "The unfortunate thing is that as ISIS compresses and Iran moves in, it is trying to establish this continuous empire surrounding the Middle East from the south in Yemen but also trying to create a land bridge from Iran to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Gaza," Netanyahu said. "This is a very dangerous development for our region." Tensions surged on Feb. 10 when anti-aircraft fire downed an Israeli warplane returning from a bombing raid on Iran-backed positions in Syria. That was the most serious confrontation yet between Israel and Iranian-backed forces based across the border.

Benjamin Netanyahu could act against Iran's 'empire'

Roiling more than a dozen major cities, young Iranians are protesting against the country&rsquo;s government. They appear to be particularly angered by the country&rsquo;s funding of wars in Arab countries, such as Yemen and Syria, as Iranian citizens slide towards poverty. In the city of Kerman, demonstrators chanted that the &ldquo;People are living like beggars, the Leader is behaving like a God&rdquo;, and in Khuzestan, protesters reportedly called out &ldquo;death to Khamenei&rdquo;, Iran&rsquo;s supreme leader. Something profound is happening &ndash; and it could have major implications for the Middle East as a whole.

On the face of it, this is reminiscent of the huge protests that followed the 2009 election, known as the Green Movement or Green Revolution. But these latest protests are all round very unlike the Green Movement in their implications, their size, and their demographics. In 2009, protesters mainly came from a young and educated middle class; this time, the protests started in the north-western city of Mashad, traditionally a religiously conservative place, and those taking to the streets come from a far wider variety of backgrounds.

Alas, much as happened in 2009, the latest protests in Iran face a severe government crackdown. The first deaths at the hands of security forces were reported in Dorud, and more than 20 casualties have now been counted. And yet the protesters continue to stand up against the government&rsquo;s iron-fisted approach. So what&rsquo;s driving them?

Besides the protesters&rsquo; explicit antipathy toward Iranian foreign policy in the Arab world, the protests also have a distinctively Arab dimension. In Ahwazi, a majority Arab region in Iran&rsquo;s south-west, protests have been going on for weeks, with people taking to the streets to rail against the Iranian government&rsquo;s repression and its confiscation of Ahwazi land and water. Thousands of Arab Iranians took to the streets when an Iranian parliamentarian, Qassem al-Saeedi, slammed the Iranian government&rsquo;s discriminatory policies, even comparing the Iranian regime&rsquo;s anti-Arab policies to those of Israel.

Lending support

Then there&rsquo;s the matter of Syria. Since the beginning of the Syrian uprisings in 2011, Ahwazi Arab Iranians have stood in solidarity with their counterparts on the Syrian streets, while Syrian pro-democracy protesters have waved the Ahwaz flag in their protests against Bashar al-Assad&rsquo;s regime. Small wonder then that today&rsquo;s Syrian anti-regime revolutionaries and activists are standing in solidarity with the Iranian protests.

Abdelaziz al-Hamza, a Syrian pro-democracy activist from Raqqa and active member of the group Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently, advised the Iranian protesters not to reveal their identity, not to carry any ID documentation, and to use removable memory cards in the devices they use to document the protests. He also strongly advised them to use nicknames for their Facebook, Twitter and YouTube accounts, and to communicate via encrypted apps.

Many Syrian opposition activists hope that the Iranian protests will start a domino effect that eventually affects Iranian foreign policy towards Syria. In recent years, the Iranian government has spent billions of dollars annually supporting the repressive Syrian regime. Iran&rsquo;s powerful military chief, General Qasem Soleimani, has been leading the Iranian military operation inside Syria. If the current protests lead to some sort of revolutionary change, Iran&rsquo;s strong financial and military support to active actors in the Syrian war &ndash; among them Hezbollah and the Assad regime&rsquo;s army &ndash; could suddenly shrivel up. This will also have major implications for Arab countries where Iran is playing a military role, not least Yemen.

If anything is to be learned from the Syrian uprisings, it&rsquo;s that protests such as these can take on a life of their own in ways no one anticipated. There is a significant chance that the Iranian regime will be every bit as brutal in its crackdown as the Assad regime. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has blamed the protests on a foreign conspiracy; hundreds of protesters have been arrested, and the head of Iran&rsquo;s Revolutionary Court warned that some will receive death sentences.

The prospect of major bloodshed at the hands of the state looms large &ndash; and if that happens, the ensuing domino effect could create yet another volatile and explosive situation in an already stormy and dangerous region.

This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The </a>Conversation. Read the original article.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL).

Many Syrian opposition activists hope that the Iranian protests will start a domino effect that eventually affects Iranian foreign policy towards Syria.

Roiling more than a dozen major cities, young Iranians are protesting against the country’s government. They appear to be particularly angered by the country’s funding of wars in Arab countries, such as Yemen and Syria, as Iranian citizens slide towards poverty. In the city of Kerman, demonstrators chanted that the “People are living like beggars, the Leader is behaving like a God”, and in Khuzestan, protesters reportedly called out “death to Khamenei”, Iran’s supreme leader. Something profound is happening – and it could have major implications for the Middle East as a whole. On the face of it, this is reminiscent of the huge protests that followed the 2009 election, known as the Green Movement or Green Revolution. But these latest protests are all round very unlike the Green Movement in their implications, their size, and their demographics. In 2009, protesters mainly came from a young and educated middle class; this time, the protests started in the north-western city of Mashad, traditionally a religiously conservative place, and those taking to the streets come from a far wider variety of backgrounds. Alas, much as happened in 2009, the latest protests in Iran face a severe government crackdown. The first deaths at the hands of security forces were reported in Dorud, and more than 20 casualties have now been counted. And yet the protesters continue to stand up against the government’s iron-fisted approach. So what’s driving them? Besides the protesters’ explicit antipathy toward Iranian foreign policy in the Arab world, the protests also have a distinctively Arab dimension. In Ahwazi, a majority Arab region in Iran’s south-west, protests have been going on for weeks, with people taking to the streets to rail against the Iranian government’s repression and its confiscation of Ahwazi land and water. Thousands of Arab Iranians took to the streets when an Iranian parliamentarian, Qassem al-Saeedi, slammed the Iranian government’s discriminatory policies, even comparing the Iranian regime’s anti-Arab policies to those of Israel. Lending support Then there’s the matter of Syria. Since the beginning of the Syrian uprisings in 2011, Ahwazi Arab Iranians have stood in solidarity with their counterparts on the Syrian streets, while Syrian pro-democracy protesters have waved the Ahwaz flag in their protests against Bashar al-Assad’s regime. Small wonder then that today’s Syrian anti-regime revolutionaries and activists are standing in solidarity with the Iranian protests. Abdelaziz al-Hamza, a Syrian pro-democracy activist from Raqqa and active member of the group Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently, advised the Iranian protesters not to reveal their identity, not to carry any ID documentation, and to use removable memory cards in the devices they use to document the protests. He also strongly advised them to use nicknames for their Facebook, Twitter and YouTube accounts, and to communicate via encrypted apps. Many Syrian opposition activists hope that the Iranian protests will start a domino effect that eventually affects Iranian foreign policy towards Syria. In recent years, the Iranian government has spent billions of dollars annually supporting the repressive Syrian regime. Iran’s powerful military chief, General Qasem Soleimani, has been leading the Iranian military operation inside Syria. If the current protests lead to some sort of revolutionary change, Iran’s strong financial and military support to active actors in the Syrian war – among them Hezbollah and the Assad regime’s army – could suddenly shrivel up. This will also have major implications for Arab countries where Iran is playing a military role, not least Yemen. If anything is to be learned from the Syrian uprisings, it’s that protests such as these can take on a life of their own in ways no one anticipated. There is a significant chance that the Iranian regime will be every bit as brutal in its crackdown as the Assad regime. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has blamed the protests on a foreign conspiracy; hundreds of protesters have been arrested, and the head of Iran’s Revolutionary Court warned that some will receive death sentences. The prospect of major bloodshed at the hands of the state looms large – and if that happens, the ensuing domino effect could create yet another volatile and explosive situation in an already stormy and dangerous region. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL).

Opinion: Protests in Iran could spell trouble for the Middle East

Israeli <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/pope-renews-call-for-wisdom-and-prudence-over-jerusalem-26389">PM Benjamin Netanyahu during his visit </a>to France said that &#39;&#39;Jerusalem is the capital of Israel&#39;&#39; and it has been the &quot;capital for 3,000 years&quot;.

&quot;Where else is <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/israels-netanyahu-says-wont-take-lectures-from-turkeys-erdogan-26395">the capital of Israel but in Jerusalem? Where</a> is our Knesset, our parliament, where&#39;s our supreme court, the seat of our government, the prime minister&#39;s office, the president&#39;s office?, Netanyahu asked, adding,&quot;It&#39;s not in Beersheba, it&#39;s not in Ashdod, these are wonderful cities but it&#39;s in Jerusalem, it&#39;s always been our capital and Jerusalem has never been the capital of any other people.&quot;

&quot;I think the sooner the Palestinians come to grips with this reality, the sooner we&#39;ll move towards peace,&quot; he added.

&quot;I have offered continuously to (Palestinian President) Mr (Mahmoud) Abbas to sit down and negotiate peace. I do so again,&quot; the Isreali PM said.&nbsp;

This is the first time Netanyahu has declared his views in front of another head of state. Speaking to reporters in Paris, President Macron, however, sought to strike a balance saying: &quot;I would tell Netanyahu, give a chance to peace and make a gesture towards the Palestinians.&quot;&nbsp;

&quot;Peace doesn&#39;t depend on the United States on one side, on France on its own. It depends on the ability of the two leaders, Israeli and Palestinian, to make it happen,&quot; Macron added.

Meanwhile, violence continued in the Middle East over US President Trump&#39;s announcement to declare Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. A Palestinian stabbed an Israeli security guard at Jerusalem&#39;s main bus station. Elsewhere, &nbsp;violence flared near the US Embassy in Beirut as demonstrators openly set torched the &nbsp;US and Israeli flags.

Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahayan said the US move &quot;could throw a lifebuoy to terrorist and armed groups, which have begun to lose ground&quot; in the Middle East.

President Macron said that he had told PM Netanyahu that France &quot;disapproved&quot; of the recent declaration by the president of the United States on Jerusalem, adding that it ran &quot;contrary to international law&quot; and was &quot;dangerous for peace&quot;.&nbsp;

&quot;Dangerous for peace because it doesn&#39;t seem in the short term to benefit the cause of security, including for the Israelis themselves,&quot; Macron asserted.

When asked about discontent across the region over Trump&#39;s decision, including harsh criticism from Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, Netanyahu said he would not be given &quot;morality lectures&quot; by Erdogan.

 
<iframe allow="encrypted-media" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" gesture="media" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MXDDOlLLitc" width="560"></iframe> 
&nbsp;

&nbsp;

President Macron said that he had told PM Netanyahu that France "disapproved" of the recent declaration by the president of the United States on Jerusalem

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu during his visit to France said that ''Jerusalem is the capital of Israel'' and it has been the "capital for 3,000 years". "Where else is the capital of Israel but in Jerusalem? Where is our Knesset, our parliament, where's our supreme court, the seat of our government, the prime minister's office, the president's office?, Netanyahu asked, adding,"It's not in Beersheba, it's not in Ashdod, these are wonderful cities but it's in Jerusalem, it's always been our capital and Jerusalem has never been the capital of any other people." "I think the sooner the Palestinians come to grips with this reality, the sooner we'll move towards peace," he added. "I have offered continuously to (Palestinian President) Mr (Mahmoud) Abbas to sit down and negotiate peace. I do so again," the Isreali PM said. This is the first time Netanyahu has declared his views in front of another head of state. Speaking to reporters in Paris, President Macron, however, sought to strike a balance saying: "I would tell Netanyahu, give a chance to peace and make a gesture towards the Palestinians." "Peace doesn't depend on the United States on one side, on France on its own. It depends on the ability of the two leaders, Israeli and Palestinian, to make it happen," Macron added. Meanwhile, violence continued in the Middle East over US President Trump's announcement to declare Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. A Palestinian stabbed an Israeli security guard at Jerusalem's main bus station. Elsewhere, violence flared near the US Embassy in Beirut as demonstrators openly set torched the US and Israeli flags. Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahayan said the US move "could throw a lifebuoy to terrorist and armed groups, which have begun to lose ground" in the Middle East. President Macron said that he had told PM Netanyahu that France "disapproved" of the recent declaration by the president of the United States on Jerusalem, adding that it ran "contrary to international law" and was "dangerous for peace". "Dangerous for peace because it doesn't seem in the short term to benefit the cause of security, including for the Israelis themselves," Macron asserted. When asked about discontent across the region over Trump's decision, including harsh criticism from Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, Netanyahu said he would not be given "morality lectures" by Erdogan.

Sooner Palestinians come to grips with reality, we can move towards peace: Israeli PM Netanyahu

Gold prices steadied on Friday but were on track for their biggest weekly fall since May ahead of US&nbsp;employment data later that could influence the pace of US&nbsp;interest rate rises.

Gold this week broke below a recent trading range and tumbled through technical levels to its lowest since July as progress on US&nbsp;tax reform fuelled optimism about the US&nbsp;economy and boosted the dollar.

&quot;You can put it down to the strength of the dollar and the ebullience of investors regarding equities and all things risk-on,&quot; said ETF Securities analyst Martin Arnold.

&quot;When in such a positive mindset investors don&#39;t look for defensive assets like gold.&quot;

The dollar was given an extra boost on Friday after a funding bill eased fears of a US&nbsp;government shutdown this month. A stronger dollar makes bullion more expensive for holders of other currencies and can dampen demand.

Spot gold was down 0.1 percent at $1,245.66 an ounce at 1109 GMT, close to Thursday&#39;s low of $1243.71, the weakest since July 26. It had fallen 2.7 percent this week, its third consecutive weekly fall and the biggest since early May.

US&nbsp;gold futures were 0.4 percent lower at $1,247.80.

Selling was triggered after gold broke below $1,260, the bottom of its trading range since September, and plunged below its 200-day moving average for the first time since July.

Technical support is now at $1,250 and a Fibonacci level at $1,240.90 but momentum indicators suggest that gold could fall to $1,204.90, the July low, said analysts at ScotiaMocatta.

However, ETF Securities&#39; Arnold said prices were supported by risks including US&nbsp;policy paralysis, tensions in North Korea and the Middle East, and a potential correction in equity valuations. He said gold&#39;s fair value was $1,260-$1,280.

Gold is traditionally seen as a safe investment in times of uncertainty.

Investors were looking ahead to US&nbsp;non-farm payrolls data at 1330 GMT. The US&nbsp;Federal Reserve is expected next week to announce a rise in interest rates and offer guidance on the pace of further increases. Strong payrolls would support the case for aggressive rate rises.

Gold is sensitive to rising interest rates because they push up bond yields, reducing the appeal of non-yielding gold, and tend to boost the dollar.

Among other precious metals, silver was up 0.4 percent at $15.78 but down 4 percent this week.

Platinum was 0.1 percent lower at $892.20 an ounce and on track to fall nearly 5 percent this week, its biggest weekly loss in nine months.

Palladium was up 0.1 percent at $1,013.75 an ounce.

Gold prices steadied on Friday but were on track for their biggest weekly fall since May ahead of US?employment data later that could influence the pace of US?interest rate rises.

Gold prices steadied on Friday but were on track for their biggest weekly fall since May ahead of US employment data later that could influence the pace of US interest rate rises. Gold this week broke below a recent trading range and tumbled through technical levels to its lowest since July as progress on US tax reform fuelled optimism about the US economy and boosted the dollar. "You can put it down to the strength of the dollar and the ebullience of investors regarding equities and all things risk-on," said ETF Securities analyst Martin Arnold. "When in such a positive mindset investors don't look for defensive assets like gold." The dollar was given an extra boost on Friday after a funding bill eased fears of a US government shutdown this month. A stronger dollar makes bullion more expensive for holders of other currencies and can dampen demand. Spot gold was down 0.1 percent at $1,245.66 an ounce at 1109 GMT, close to Thursday's low of $1243.71, the weakest since July 26. It had fallen 2.7 percent this week, its third consecutive weekly fall and the biggest since early May. US gold futures were 0.4 percent lower at $1,247.80. Selling was triggered after gold broke below $1,260, the bottom of its trading range since September, and plunged below its 200-day moving average for the first time since July. Technical support is now at $1,250 and a Fibonacci level at $1,240.90 but momentum indicators suggest that gold could fall to $1,204.90, the July low, said analysts at ScotiaMocatta. However, ETF Securities' Arnold said prices were supported by risks including US policy paralysis, tensions in North Korea and the Middle East, and a potential correction in equity valuations. He said gold's fair value was $1,260-$1,280. Gold is traditionally seen as a safe investment in times of uncertainty. Investors were looking ahead to US non-farm payrolls data at 1330 GMT. The US Federal Reserve is expected next week to announce a rise in interest rates and offer guidance on the pace of further increases. Strong payrolls would support the case for aggressive rate rises. Gold is sensitive to rising interest rates because they push up bond yields, reducing the appeal of non-yielding gold, and tend to boost the dollar. Among other precious metals, silver was up 0.4 percent at $15.78 but down 4 percent this week. Platinum was 0.1 percent lower at $892.20 an ounce and on track to fall nearly 5 percent this week, its biggest weekly loss in nine months. Palladium was up 0.1 percent at $1,013.75 an ounce.

Dollar rise pushes gold toward biggest weekly fall since May

&nbsp;

By&nbsp;Spyros Sofos&nbsp;&amp;&nbsp;Vittorio Felci*

Donald Trump&rsquo;s decision to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and start preparations for the US to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to the contested city, has the potential to further inflame tensions across the Middle East.

Although this is not an unexpected move &ndash; Trump expressed his intention to do so during his electoral campaign &ndash; the decision breaks with years of precedent.

Trump&rsquo;s decision to move the embassy means he will not follow his predecessors by renewing a waiver on the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, which required the embassy to eventually be moved from Tel Aviv.

Since then, there has been a cross-party consensus in the US that any act which recognises the annexation of East Jerusalem by Israel and its designation as the country&rsquo;s capital would affect the fragile balance of power in the Middle East &ndash; and the ability of the US to promote its interests in the region. US diplomats have sought to tread carefully on this issue in one of the world&rsquo;s most treacherous political landscapes.

The Palestinian leadership condemned the move before Trump spoke, as did leaders from the Arab world and beyond. The announcement of the embassy move is likely to cause a wave of resentment among Palestinians in the occupied territories and the city itself, especially after two decades of stalemate in the peace process and deteriorating conditions throughout the Palestinian territories. Ahead of the speech, US citizens and government employees were told to avoid Jerusalem&rsquo;s Old City and the West Bank until further notice.

Central to the peace process

Jerusalem is not just a city of historical importance to Judaism, Islam and Christianity, but also a site key to both Israeli and Palestinian identity. Add to this the centrality of the status of Jerusalem in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, often described as one of the world&rsquo;s most intractable disputes, and it&rsquo;s clear why the decision to move the US embassy there has been described as tantamount to political arson.

At the political level, most Israelis and Palestinians insist that Jerusalem must be the capital of their states, present and future, and that this is non-negotiable. This is why the final status of Jerusalem was deemed to be one of the thorniest issues in the Oslo peace process in the 1990s. It was envisaged to be circumnavigated, dealt with only at the stage of &ldquo;permanent status negotiations&rdquo;, once all other issues between the state of Israel and the Palestinians were resolved.

As there has not been any progress in less important, yet substantive issues since Oslo, the issue of Jerusalem has acquired a symbolic importance among Palestinians.

Jerusalem is a city dense in symbolism in the Palestinian national imagination. Particularly so as other, more material anchors of identity such as territory, governance and self-determination are continually being eroded by the harsh realities of Israeli occupation, the blockade of Gaza and deteriorating cooperation between Israeli and Palestinian authorities.

The response to Trump&rsquo;s announcement by Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and most of his government was muted. But its symbolic value among nationalist circles in Israel, and also among many ordinary Israelis, should not be underestimated.

The Israeli government has been active in strengthening Israeli claims to the entire city since its annexation in 1980. Settlement building around Jerusalem has aimed to ring-fence the city and integrate it more into Israel. Meanwhile, there were building restrictions in East Jerusalem, and a series of restrictions to Palestinian access to the Al-Aqsa mosque, built on the remnants of the last Jewish Temple. Both sets of restrictions were lifted.

Equally important in terms of symbolic politics has been Israel&rsquo;s archaeological intervention around Jerusalem, which Palestinians see as an attempt to strengthen Israel&rsquo;s historical connection with the city.

Wider significance

Trump&rsquo;s decision seems oblivious to the fragility of coexistence in the city between its Israeli and Palestinian inhabitants. It also ignores the significance of Jerusalem in Palestinian national identity and national aspirations, and the devastating impact on the future of a moribund peace process.

It has the potential of not only affecting the political ecology of a place where history is a matter of life and death, but could also cause a ripple effect much further afield. It can destabilise a Palestinian authority already deprived of legitimacy and an array of fragile Arab regimes. And it is likely to accentuate the enmity between Israel and Iran. Iran perceives such a move as a &ldquo;violation of Islamic sanctities&rdquo; and, together with Trump&rsquo;s revitalised alliance with Saudi Arabia, a clear sign of the US president&rsquo;s anti-Iranian stance.

Last but not least, it could further stoke the flames of anti-Western Islamic movements in the Muslim world and the West alike, which have always put Jerusalem and the Palestinian issue in a central position.

&nbsp;

*Vittorio Felci is Researcher, Centre for Middle Eastern Studies, Lund University

&nbsp;

This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com/" rel="nofollow" target="blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-trumps-recognition-of-jerusalem-as-the-capital-of-israel-means-for-the-middle-east-88722" rel="nofollow" target="blank">original article</a>.

&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

<section>&nbsp;</section>

<h1>&nbsp;</h1>

It has the potential of not only affecting the political ecology of a place where history is a matter of life and death, but could also cause a ripple effect much further afield.

By Spyros Sofos & Vittorio Felci* Donald Trump’s decision to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and start preparations for the US to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to the contested city, has the potential to further inflame tensions across the Middle East. Although this is not an unexpected move – Trump expressed his intention to do so during his electoral campaign – the decision breaks with years of precedent. Trump’s decision to move the embassy means he will not follow his predecessors by renewing a waiver on the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, which required the embassy to eventually be moved from Tel Aviv. Since then, there has been a cross-party consensus in the US that any act which recognises the annexation of East Jerusalem by Israel and its designation as the country’s capital would affect the fragile balance of power in the Middle East – and the ability of the US to promote its interests in the region. US diplomats have sought to tread carefully on this issue in one of the world’s most treacherous political landscapes. The Palestinian leadership condemned the move before Trump spoke, as did leaders from the Arab world and beyond. The announcement of the embassy move is likely to cause a wave of resentment among Palestinians in the occupied territories and the city itself, especially after two decades of stalemate in the peace process and deteriorating conditions throughout the Palestinian territories. Ahead of the speech, US citizens and government employees were told to avoid Jerusalem’s Old City and the West Bank until further notice. Central to the peace process Jerusalem is not just a city of historical importance to Judaism, Islam and Christianity, but also a site key to both Israeli and Palestinian identity. Add to this the centrality of the status of Jerusalem in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, often described as one of the world’s most intractable disputes, and it’s clear why the decision to move the US embassy there has been described as tantamount to political arson. At the political level, most Israelis and Palestinians insist that Jerusalem must be the capital of their states, present and future, and that this is non-negotiable. This is why the final status of Jerusalem was deemed to be one of the thorniest issues in the Oslo peace process in the 1990s. It was envisaged to be circumnavigated, dealt with only at the stage of “permanent status negotiations”, once all other issues between the state of Israel and the Palestinians were resolved. As there has not been any progress in less important, yet substantive issues since Oslo, the issue of Jerusalem has acquired a symbolic importance among Palestinians. Jerusalem is a city dense in symbolism in the Palestinian national imagination. Particularly so as other, more material anchors of identity such as territory, governance and self-determination are continually being eroded by the harsh realities of Israeli occupation, the blockade of Gaza and deteriorating cooperation between Israeli and Palestinian authorities. The response to Trump’s announcement by Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and most of his government was muted. But its symbolic value among nationalist circles in Israel, and also among many ordinary Israelis, should not be underestimated. The Israeli government has been active in strengthening Israeli claims to the entire city since its annexation in 1980. Settlement building around Jerusalem has aimed to ring-fence the city and integrate it more into Israel. Meanwhile, there were building restrictions in East Jerusalem, and a series of restrictions to Palestinian access to the Al-Aqsa mosque, built on the remnants of the last Jewish Temple. Both sets of restrictions were lifted. Equally important in terms of symbolic politics has been Israel’s archaeological intervention around Jerusalem, which Palestinians see as an attempt to strengthen Israel’s historical connection with the city. Wider significance Trump’s decision seems oblivious to the fragility of coexistence in the city between its Israeli and Palestinian inhabitants. It also ignores the significance of Jerusalem in Palestinian national identity and national aspirations, and the devastating impact on the future of a moribund peace process. It has the potential of not only affecting the political ecology of a place where history is a matter of life and death, but could also cause a ripple effect much further afield. It can destabilise a Palestinian authority already deprived of legitimacy and an array of fragile Arab regimes. And it is likely to accentuate the enmity between Israel and Iran. Iran perceives such a move as a “violation of Islamic sanctities” and, together with Trump’s revitalised alliance with Saudi Arabia, a clear sign of the US president’s anti-Iranian stance. Last but not least, it could further stoke the flames of anti-Western Islamic movements in the Muslim world and the West alike, which have always put Jerusalem and the Palestinian issue in a central position. *Vittorio Felci is Researcher, Centre for Middle Eastern Studies, Lund University This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article. (Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

Opinion: Trump recognised Jerusalem. How will it impact Middle East

Dubai International Film Festival (DIFF) 2018 opened Wednesday night with the coming together of artists from around the world.&nbsp;

British actor Patrick Stewart, famous for&nbsp;his role as Professor X in &quot;X-Men&quot; was seen along with Indian films&#39;&nbsp;actor Irrfan Khan and renowned Egypt&#39;s director Wahid Hamed.&nbsp;

The 14th edition of the festival will be featuring 140 movies from 51 countries with a focus on regions like the Middle East and North Africa,&nbsp;from Iran to Syria, Lebanon, Israel and the Palestinian territories.

On the opening night yesterday, two-time Academy Award-winning actress Cate Blanchett walked in a bright coloured dress with Egyptian film and TV star Yusra. Blanchett received&nbsp;an honorary&nbsp;award for her widely acclaimed performances.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
The stunning Cate Blanchett has arrived and will be awarded the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DIFF17?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DIFF17</a> Honorary Award tonight! <a href="https://t.co/2MKf6ljPjm">pic.twitter.com/2MKf6ljPjm</a>
&mdash; Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) <a href="https://twitter.com/dubaifilm/status/938432508907212800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Cate Blanchett receives her <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DIFF17?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DIFF17</a> honorary award. Delighted to have her with us this year. <a href="https://t.co/lP9xZyPvGM">pic.twitter.com/lP9xZyPvGM</a>
&mdash; Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) <a href="https://twitter.com/dubaifilm/status/938456272852209671?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Indian actor Irrfan Khan of the fame &quot;Life of Pi&quot; was also seen dressed for the occasion. He also received an honorary&nbsp;award for his contribution to the industry.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Bollywood?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Bollywood</a> icon Irrfan Khan receiving his <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DIFF17?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DIFF17</a> Honorary Award on his fascinating career. <a href="https://t.co/kHPXgvZXeZ">pic.twitter.com/kHPXgvZXeZ</a>
&mdash; Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) <a href="https://twitter.com/dubaifilm/status/938456883106648064?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Hollywood actor Patrick Stewart also walked the red carpet and appreciated screenings of regional films. He said, &quot;I&#39;m not very familiar with Arabic film&quot; but &quot;After this week, I will certainly know very, very much more.&quot;

Stewart was given a Lifetime Achievement award.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
A once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to meet legendary British actor Sir Patrick Stewart at <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DIFF17?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DIFF17</a>! Get your tickets now at diff.ae and don&#39;t miss our exclusive In Conversation session on Dec 8, 3.30 PM! <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Filmwillfindyou?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Filmwillfindyou</a> <a href="https://t.co/akc9H46Qmi">pic.twitter.com/akc9H46Qmi</a>
&mdash; Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) <a href="https://twitter.com/dubaifilm/status/938670142258581504?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 7, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Sir Patrick Stewart receives his <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DIFF17?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DIFF17</a> Lifetime Achievement Award - such an incredible career that has inspired millions of film lovers. <a href="https://t.co/2lpVKSf827">pic.twitter.com/2lpVKSf827</a>
&mdash; Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) <a href="https://twitter.com/dubaifilm/status/938455983461994496?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Indian fashionista Sonam Kapoor also made her way to the festival as an ambassador to a premium watch brand. She chose a white ensemble as the ambassador.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
I&rsquo;m so excited to be back in Dubai for the 14th International Film Festival with <a href="https://twitter.com/IWC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@IWC</a> Watches. 
In - <a href="https://twitter.com/ashistudio?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ashistudio</a> Styled by <a href="https://twitter.com/RheaKapoor?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@RheaKapoor</a> 
Styling Assistants: Chandini Whabi , Manisha Melwani &amp; <a href="https://twitter.com/spacemuffin27?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@spacemuffin27</a> Hair &amp; MU: <a href="https://twitter.com/soninamrata?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@soninamrata</a> &amp; Deepti Aggarwal. 
??: The house of Pixels <a href="https://t.co/bxjWPpP0KF">pic.twitter.com/bxjWPpP0KF</a>
&mdash; Sonam Kapoor (@sonamakapoor) <a href="https://twitter.com/sonamakapoor/status/938684545108291585?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 7, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

The Dubai International Film Festival opened with the premiere of Scott Cooper Western&#39;s &quot;Hostiles&quot; -- the story of a 19th-century soldier forced to escort a dying Cheyenne chief and his family home, starring Christian Bale and Rosamund Pike.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Cast of our Opening film HOSTILES is here in this very special night where we celebrate the power of cinema through this superb Scott Cooper-directed film. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DIFF17?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DIFF17</a> <a href="https://t.co/3dmGyBuOwU">pic.twitter.com/3dmGyBuOwU</a>
&mdash; Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) <a href="https://twitter.com/dubaifilm/status/938427555845234688?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

The festival will also have&nbsp;Syria&#39;s &quot;Last Men in Aleppo&quot; -- a documentary on the daily lives of the White Helmets, the volunteer rescue workers who have refused to leave their homeland despite a devastating war. The film also received the Sundance Grand Jury Prize this year.

Last night, DIFF honoured&nbsp;Egypt&#39;s Wahid Hamed, the screenwriter behind the 2006 film adaptation of &quot;The Yaacoubian Building&quot;, with a lifetime achievement award, along with both Khan and Stewart.

Hamed, known as a pioneer of Arab cinema, has a long history of battling censorship. For over a decade, he fought for his political drama &quot;Al-Baree&quot; (The Innocent) to make it to the silver screen which was finally released in 1997.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DIFF17?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DIFF17</a> Lifetime Achievement Award winner Wahid Hamed and his son, director Marwan Hamed have arrived! <a href="https://t.co/kmILudbOVq">pic.twitter.com/kmILudbOVq</a>
&mdash; Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) <a href="https://twitter.com/dubaifilm/status/938409466608922624?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Indian fashionista Sonam Kapoor was also spotted on the red carpet

Dubai International Film Festival (DIFF) 2018 opened Wednesday night with the coming together of artists from around the world. British actor Patrick Stewart, famous for his role as Professor X in "X-Men" was seen along with Indian films' actor Irrfan Khan and renowned Egypt's director Wahid Hamed. The 14th edition of the festival will be featuring 140 movies from 51 countries with a focus on regions like the Middle East and North Africa, from Iran to Syria, Lebanon, Israel and the Palestinian territories. On the opening night yesterday, two-time Academy Award-winning actress Cate Blanchett walked in a bright coloured dress with Egyptian film and TV star Yusra. Blanchett received an honorary award for her widely acclaimed performances. The stunning Cate Blanchett has arrived and will be awarded the #DIFF17 Honorary Award tonight! pic.twitter.com/2MKf6ljPjm — Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) December 6, 2017 × Cate Blanchett receives her #DIFF17 honorary award. Delighted to have her with us this year. pic.twitter.com/lP9xZyPvGM — Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) December 6, 2017 × Indian actor Irrfan Khan of the fame "Life of Pi" was also seen dressed for the occasion. He also received an honorary award for his contribution to the industry. #Bollywood icon Irrfan Khan receiving his #DIFF17 Honorary Award on his fascinating career. pic.twitter.com/kHPXgvZXeZ — Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) December 6, 2017 × Hollywood actor Patrick Stewart also walked the red carpet and appreciated screenings of regional films. He said, "I'm not very familiar with Arabic film" but "After this week, I will certainly know very, very much more." Stewart was given a Lifetime Achievement award. A once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to meet legendary British actor Sir Patrick Stewart at #DIFF17! Get your tickets now at diff.ae and don't miss our exclusive In Conversation session on Dec 8, 3.30 PM! #Filmwillfindyou pic.twitter.com/akc9H46Qmi — Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) December 7, 2017 × Sir Patrick Stewart receives his #DIFF17 Lifetime Achievement Award - such an incredible career that has inspired millions of film lovers. pic.twitter.com/2lpVKSf827 — Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) December 6, 2017 × Indian fashionista Sonam Kapoor also made her way to the festival as an ambassador to a premium watch brand. She chose a white ensemble as the ambassador. I’m so excited to be back in Dubai for the 14th International Film Festival with @IWC Watches. In - @ashistudio Styled by @RheaKapoor Styling Assistants: Chandini Whabi , Manisha Melwani & @spacemuffin27 Hair & MU: @soninamrata & Deepti Aggarwal. ??: The house of Pixels pic.twitter.com/bxjWPpP0KF — Sonam Kapoor (@sonamakapoor) December 7, 2017 × The Dubai International Film Festival opened with the premiere of Scott Cooper Western's "Hostiles" -- the story of a 19th-century soldier forced to escort a dying Cheyenne chief and his family home, starring Christian Bale and Rosamund Pike. Cast of our Opening film HOSTILES is here in this very special night where we celebrate the power of cinema through this superb Scott Cooper-directed film. #DIFF17 pic.twitter.com/3dmGyBuOwU — Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) December 6, 2017 × The festival will also have Syria's "Last Men in Aleppo" -- a documentary on the daily lives of the White Helmets, the volunteer rescue workers who have refused to leave their homeland despite a devastating war. The film also received the Sundance Grand Jury Prize this year. Last night, DIFF honoured Egypt's Wahid Hamed, the screenwriter behind the 2006 film adaptation of "The Yaacoubian Building", with a lifetime achievement award, along with both Khan and Stewart. Hamed, known as a pioneer of Arab cinema, has a long history of battling censorship. For over a decade, he fought for his political drama "Al-Baree" (The Innocent) to make it to the silver screen which was finally released in 1997. #DIFF17 Lifetime Achievement Award winner Wahid Hamed and his son, director Marwan Hamed have arrived! pic.twitter.com/kmILudbOVq — Dubai International Film Festival (@dubaifilm) December 6, 2017 ×

Dubai International Film Festival: Cate Blanchett, Irrfan Khan, Patrick Stewart honoured

President Donald Trump will recognize Jerusalem as Israel&#39;s capital Wednesday, upending decades of careful US policy and ignoring dire warnings of a historic misstep that could trigger a surge of violence in the Middle East.

A senior administration official said Trump would make the landmark announcement -- which flies in the face of warnings from America&#39;s allies across the region and the world -- at 1 pm (1800 GMT) from the White House.

&quot;He will say that that the United States government recognizes that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel,&quot; a senior administration official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>He views this as a recognition of reality, both historic reality and modern reality&#39;</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=He views this as a recognition of reality, both historic reality and modern reality'" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

&quot;He views this as a recognition of reality, both historic reality,&quot; the source added, &quot;and modern reality.&quot;

Plunging further into a bitter centuries-old argument between Jews, Muslims and Christians, Trump will also order planning to begin on moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

&quot;It will take some time to find a site, to address security concerns, design a new facility, fund a new facility and build it,&quot; the official said, indicating that the move will not be immediate.

&quot;It will be a matter of some years, it won&#39;t be months, it&#39;s going to take time.&quot;

The status of Jerusalem is a central issue in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with both sides claiming the city as their capital, and expectations of Trump&#39;s announcement have roiled the combustible region.

In a frantic series of calls on its eve, the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, the EU, France, Germany and Turkey all warned Trump against the move.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-tells-mideast-leaders-he-will-move-embassy-to-jerusalem-breaking-with-us-policy-25980" target="_blank">Also read: Trump tells Arab, Israeli leaders he plans to move embassy to Jerusalem</a>

Anticipating widespread demonstrations, US government officials have been ordered to avoid Jerusalem&#39;s Old City and the West Bank.

But Trump&#39;s move comes close to fulfilling a campaign promise and will delight his political donors and the conservative and evangelical base that is so vital for the embattled president.

&#39;Red line&#39; 
Most of the international community does not formally recognize Jerusalem as Israel&#39;s capital, insisting the issue can only be resolved in final status negotiations.

US officials talk of &quot;threading the needle&quot; -- fulfilling Trump&#39;s campaign pledge, while keeping the peace process on the rails.

The White House argues that such a move would not prejudge final talks and would represent the reality that west Jerusalem is and will continue to be part of Israel under any settlement.

&quot;President Trump remains committed to achieving a lasting peace agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians and is optimistic that peace can be achieved,&quot; a second official said.

&quot;President Trump is prepared to support a two State solution... If agreed to by the two parties.&quot;

But critics say Trump&#39;s approach is more like &quot;splitting the baby&quot; and could also extinguish his own much-vaunted efforts to broker Middle East peace while igniting the flames of conflict in a region already reeling from crises in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Qatar.

The armed Islamist Hamas movement has threatened to launch a new &quot;intifada&quot; or uprising.

Saudi Arabia&#39;s King Salman warned his close ally that moving the US embassy was a &quot;dangerous step&quot; that could rile Muslims around the world.

&quot;Mr Trump! Jerusalem is a red line for Muslims,&quot; Turkey&#39;s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said in a raucous televised speech, echoing alarm expressed by Palestinian and Arab leaders.

&#39;Embassy Act&#39; 
Israel seized the largely-Arab eastern sector of Jerusalem during the 1967 Six-Day War and later annexed it, claiming both sides of the city as its &quot;eternal and undivided capital.&quot;

But the Palestinians want the eastern sector as the capital of their future state and fiercely oppose any Israeli attempt to extend sovereignty there.

Trump was pushed to act on the embassy as a result of the 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act, which stated that the city &quot;should be recognized as the capital of the State of Israel&quot; and that the US embassy should be moved there.

An inbuilt waiver has been repeatedly invoked by successive US presidents, postponing the move on grounds of &quot;national security&quot; once every six months, meaning the law has never taken effect.

Several peace plans have unravelled over the issue of how to divide sovereignty or oversee sites in the city that are holy for Christians, Jews and Muslims.

The decision upends decades of US policy and risks fuelling violence in the Middle East

President Donald Trump will recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital Wednesday, upending decades of careful US policy and ignoring dire warnings of a historic misstep that could trigger a surge of violence in the Middle East. A senior administration official said Trump would make the landmark announcement -- which flies in the face of warnings from America's allies across the region and the world -- at 1 pm (1800 GMT) from the White House. "He will say that that the United States government recognizes that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel," a senior administration official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. He views this as a recognition of reality, both historic reality and modern reality' × "He views this as a recognition of reality, both historic reality," the source added, "and modern reality." Plunging further into a bitter centuries-old argument between Jews, Muslims and Christians, Trump will also order planning to begin on moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. "It will take some time to find a site, to address security concerns, design a new facility, fund a new facility and build it," the official said, indicating that the move will not be immediate. "It will be a matter of some years, it won't be months, it's going to take time." The status of Jerusalem is a central issue in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with both sides claiming the city as their capital, and expectations of Trump's announcement have roiled the combustible region. In a frantic series of calls on its eve, the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, the EU, France, Germany and Turkey all warned Trump against the move. Also read: Trump tells Arab, Israeli leaders he plans to move embassy to Jerusalem Anticipating widespread demonstrations, US government officials have been ordered to avoid Jerusalem's Old City and the West Bank. But Trump's move comes close to fulfilling a campaign promise and will delight his political donors and the conservative and evangelical base that is so vital for the embattled president. 'Red line' Most of the international community does not formally recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital, insisting the issue can only be resolved in final status negotiations. US officials talk of "threading the needle" -- fulfilling Trump's campaign pledge, while keeping the peace process on the rails. The White House argues that such a move would not prejudge final talks and would represent the reality that west Jerusalem is and will continue to be part of Israel under any settlement. "President Trump remains committed to achieving a lasting peace agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians and is optimistic that peace can be achieved," a second official said. "President Trump is prepared to support a two State solution... If agreed to by the two parties." But critics say Trump's approach is more like "splitting the baby" and could also extinguish his own much-vaunted efforts to broker Middle East peace while igniting the flames of conflict in a region already reeling from crises in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Qatar. The armed Islamist Hamas movement has threatened to launch a new "intifada" or uprising. Saudi Arabia's King Salman warned his close ally that moving the US embassy was a "dangerous step" that could rile Muslims around the world. "Mr Trump! Jerusalem is a red line for Muslims," Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said in a raucous televised speech, echoing alarm expressed by Palestinian and Arab leaders. 'Embassy Act' Israel seized the largely-Arab eastern sector of Jerusalem during the 1967 Six-Day War and later annexed it, claiming both sides of the city as its "eternal and undivided capital." But the Palestinians want the eastern sector as the capital of their future state and fiercely oppose any Israeli attempt to extend sovereignty there. Trump was pushed to act on the embassy as a result of the 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act, which stated that the city "should be recognized as the capital of the State of Israel" and that the US embassy should be moved there. An inbuilt waiver has been repeatedly invoked by successive US presidents, postponing the move on grounds of "national security" once every six months, meaning the law has never taken effect. Several peace plans have unravelled over the issue of how to divide sovereignty or oversee sites in the city that are holy for Christians, Jews and Muslims.

Trump to recognise Jerusalem as Israel capital

Saudi&nbsp;Arabia&#39;s powerful&nbsp;Crown&nbsp;Prince&nbsp;called the Supreme&nbsp;Leader&nbsp;of&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;&quot;the new Hitler of the Middle East&quot; in an interview with the New York Times published on Thursday, sharply escalating the war of words between the arch-rivals.

The Sunni Muslim kingdom of&nbsp;Saudi&nbsp;Arabia and Shi&#39;ite&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;back rival sides in wars and political crises throughout the region.

Mohammed bin Salman, who is also&nbsp;Saudi&nbsp;defence minister in the US-allied oil giant kingdom, suggested the Islamic Republic&#39;s alleged expansion under Ayatollah Ali Khamenei needed to be confronted.

&quot;But we learned from Europe that appeasement doesn&#39;t work. We don&#39;t want the new Hitler in&nbsp;Iran to repeat what happened in Europe in the Middle East,&quot; the paper quoted him as saying.

Tensions soared this month when Lebanon&#39;s&nbsp;Saudi-allied Prime Minister Saad Hariri resigned in a television broadcast from Riyadh, citing the influence of&nbsp;Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon and risks to his life.

Hezbollah called the move an act of war engineered by&nbsp;Saudi&nbsp;authorities, an accusation they denied.

Hariri has since suspended his resignation.

Saudi&nbsp;Arabia has launched thousands of air strikes in a 2-1/2-year-old war in neighbouring Yemen to defeat the&nbsp;Iranian-aligned Houthi movement that seized broad swaths of the country.

Salman told the Times that the war was going in its favour and that its allies controlled 85 percent of Yemen&#39;s territory.

The Houthis, however, still retain the main population centres despite the war effort by a&nbsp;Saudi-led military coalition which receives intelligence and refuelling for its warplanes by the United States. Some 10,000 people have died in the conflict.

The group launched a ballistic missile toward Riyadh&#39;s main airport on Nov. 4, which&nbsp;Saudi&nbsp;Arabis decried as an act of war by Tehran.

Bin Salman said in May that the kingdom would make sure any future struggle between the two countries &quot;is waged in&nbsp;Iran&quot;.

For his part, Khamenei has referred to the House of Saud as an &quot;accursed tree&quot;, and&nbsp;Iranian officials have accused the kingdom of spreading terrorism.

Saudi?Arabia's powerful?Crown?Prince?called the Supreme?Leader?of?Iran?"the new Hitler of the Middle East" in an interview with the New York Times published on Thursday, sharply escalating the war of words between the arch-rivals

Saudi Arabia's powerful Crown Prince called the Supreme Leader of Iran "the new Hitler of the Middle East" in an interview with the New York Times published on Thursday, sharply escalating the war of words between the arch-rivals. The Sunni Muslim kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Shi'ite Iran back rival sides in wars and political crises throughout the region. Mohammed bin Salman, who is also Saudi defence minister in the US-allied oil giant kingdom, suggested the Islamic Republic's alleged expansion under Ayatollah Ali Khamenei needed to be confronted. "But we learned from Europe that appeasement doesn't work. We don't want the new Hitler in Iran to repeat what happened in Europe in the Middle East," the paper quoted him as saying. Tensions soared this month when Lebanon's Saudi-allied Prime Minister Saad Hariri resigned in a television broadcast from Riyadh, citing the influence of Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon and risks to his life. Hezbollah called the move an act of war engineered by Saudi authorities, an accusation they denied. Hariri has since suspended his resignation. Saudi Arabia has launched thousands of air strikes in a 2-1/2-year-old war in neighbouring Yemen to defeat the Iranian-aligned Houthi movement that seized broad swaths of the country. Salman told the Times that the war was going in its favour and that its allies controlled 85 percent of Yemen's territory. The Houthis, however, still retain the main population centres despite the war effort by a Saudi-led military coalition which receives intelligence and refuelling for its warplanes by the United States. Some 10,000 people have died in the conflict. The group launched a ballistic missile toward Riyadh's main airport on Nov. 4, which Saudi Arabis decried as an act of war by Tehran. Bin Salman said in May that the kingdom would make sure any future struggle between the two countries "is waged in Iran". For his part, Khamenei has referred to the House of Saud as an "accursed tree", and Iranian officials have accused the kingdom of spreading terrorism.

'New Hitler' in Iran should not repeat what happened in Europe: Saudi?Crown?Prince Salman

From the moment Saad al-Hariri&#39;s plane touched down in Saudi Arabia on Friday November 3, he was in for a surprise.

There was no line-up of Saudi princes or ministry officials, as would typically greet a prime minister on an official visit to King Salman, senior sources close to Hariri and top Lebanese political and security officials said. His phone was confiscated, and the next day he was <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/lebanon-pm-resigns-says-fears-for-his-life-23514">forced to resign</a> as prime minister in a statement broadcast by a Saudi-owned TV channel.

The move thrust Lebanon back to the forefront of a struggle that is reshaping the Middle East, between the conservative Sunni monarchy of Saudi Arabia and Shi&#39;ite revolutionary Iran.

Their rivalry has fuelled conflicts in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, where they back opposing sides, and now risks destabilising Lebanon, where Saudi has long tried to weaken the Iran-backed <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/lebanons-hezbollah-accuses-saudi-of-detaining-hariri-23953">Hezbollah group</a>, Lebanon&#39;s main political power and part of the ruling coalition.

Sources close to Hariri say Saudi Arabia has concluded that the prime minister - a long-time Saudi ally and son of late prime minister Rafik al-Hariri, who was assassinated in 2005 - had to go because he was unwilling to confront Hezbollah.

Multiple Lebanese sources say Riyadh hopes to replace Saad Hariri with his older brother Bahaa as Lebanon&#39;s top Sunni politician. Bahaa is believed to be in Saudi Arabia and members of the Hariri family have been asked to travel there to pledge allegiance to him, but have refused, the sources say.

&quot;When Hariri&#39;s plane landed in Riyadh, he got the message immediately that something was wrong,&quot; a Hariri source told Reuters. &quot;There was no one was waiting for him.&quot;

Saudi Arabia has dismissed suggestions it forced Hariri to resign and says he is a free man. Saudi officials could not immediately be reached for comment on the circumstances of his arrival, whether his phone had been taken, or whether the Kingdom was planning to replace him with his brother.

Hariri has given no public remarks since he resigned and no indication of when he might return to Lebanon.

&quot;NO RESPECT&quot;

Hariri was summoned to the Kingdom to meet Saudi King Salman in a phone call on Thursday night, November 2.

Before departing, he told his officials they would resume their discussions on Monday. He told his media team he would see them at the weekend in the Red Sea resort of Sharm&nbsp;al-Sheikh, where he was due to meet Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi&nbsp;on the sidelines of the World Youth Forum.

Hariri went to his Riyadh home. His family made their fortune in Saudi Arabia and have long had properties there. The source close to Hariri said the Lebanese leader received a call from a Saudi protocol official on Saturday morning, who asked him to attend a meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

He waited for about four hours before being presented with his resignation&nbsp;speech to read on television, the source said.

&quot;From the moment he arrived they (Saudis) showed no respect for the man,&quot; another senior Lebanese political source said.

Hariri frequently visits Saudi Arabia. On a trip a few days earlier, Prince Mohammed bin Salman had arranged for him to see senior intelligence officials and Gulf Affairs Minister Thamer al-Sabhan, the Saudi point man on Lebanon.

Hariri came back from that trip to Beirut &quot;pleased and relaxed&quot;, sources in his entourage said. He posted a selfie with Sabhan, both of them smiling. He told aides he had heard &quot;encouraging statements&quot; from the crown prince, including a promise to revive a Saudi aid package for the Lebanese army.

The Hariri sources say Hariri believed he had convinced Saudi officials of the need to maintain an entente with Hezbollah for the sake of Lebanon&#39;s stability.

Hezbollah has a heavily armed fighting force, in addition to seats in parliament and government. Saudi-backed efforts to weaken the group in Lebanon a decade ago led to Sunni-Shi&#39;ite clashes and a Hezbollah takeover of Beirut.&nbsp;

&quot;What happened&nbsp;in those&nbsp;meetings, I believe,&nbsp;is that (Hariri) revealed his position on how to deal with Hezbollah in Lebanon: that confrontation would destabilize the country. I think they didn&#39;t like what they heard,&quot; said one of the sources, who was briefed on the meetings.

The source said Hariri told Sabhan not to &quot;hold us responsible for something that is beyond my control or that of Lebanon.&quot; But Hariri underestimated the Saudi position on Hezbollah, the source said.

&quot;For the Saudis it is an existential battle. It&#39;s black and white. We in Lebanon are used to grey,&quot; the source said.

Sabhan could not immediately be reached for comment.

RESIGNATION

Hariri&rsquo;s resignation speech shocked his team.

Lebanese President Michel Aoun, a Hezbollah ally, told ambassadors to Lebanon that Saudi Arabia had kidnapped Hariri, a senior Lebanese official said. On Friday, France said it wanted Hariri to have &quot;all his freedom of movement&quot;.

In his speech, Hariri said he feared assassination and accused Iran and Hezbollah of sowing strife in the region. He said the Arab world would &quot;cut off the hands that wickedly extend to it,&quot; language which one source close to him said was not typical of the Lebanese leader.

Hariri&#39;s resignation came as more than 200 people, including 11 Saudi princes, current and former ministers and tycoons, were arrested in an anti-corruption purge in Saudi Arabia.

Initially there was speculation Hariri was a target of that campaign because of his family&#39;s business interests. But sources close to the Lebanese leader said his forced resignation was motivated by Saudi efforts to counter Iran.

Hariri was taken to meet the Saudi king after his resignation. Footage was aired on Saudi TV. He was then flown to Abu Dhabi to meet Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, the Saudi crown prince&#39;s main regional ally. He returned to Riyadh and has since received Western ambassadors.

Sources close to Hariri said the Saudis, while keeping Hariri under house arrest, were trying to orchestrate a change of leadership in Hariri&#39;s Future Movement by installing his elder brother Bahaa, who was overlooked for the top job when their father was killed. The two have been at odds for years.

In a statement, the Future Movement said it stood fully behind Hariri as its leader. Hariri aide and Interior Minister Nohad Machnouk dismissed the idea Bahaa was being positioned to replace his brother:

&quot;We are not herds of sheep or a plot of land whose ownership can be moved from one person to another. In Lebanon things happen though elections not pledges of allegiances.&quot;

Family members, aides and politicians who have contacted&nbsp;Hariri in Riyadh say he is apprehensive and reluctant to say anything beyond &quot;I am fine&quot;. Asked if he is coming&nbsp;back, they say his normal answer is: &quot;Inshallah&quot; (God willing).

From the moment Saad al-Hariri's plane touched down in Saudi Arabia on Friday November 3, he was in for a surprise.

From the moment Saad al-Hariri's plane touched down in Saudi Arabia on Friday November 3, he was in for a surprise. There was no line-up of Saudi princes or ministry officials, as would typically greet a prime minister on an official visit to King Salman, senior sources close to Hariri and top Lebanese political and security officials said. His phone was confiscated, and the next day he was forced to resign as prime minister in a statement broadcast by a Saudi-owned TV channel. The move thrust Lebanon back to the forefront of a struggle that is reshaping the Middle East, between the conservative Sunni monarchy of Saudi Arabia and Shi'ite revolutionary Iran. Their rivalry has fuelled conflicts in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, where they back opposing sides, and now risks destabilising Lebanon, where Saudi has long tried to weaken the Iran-backed Hezbollah group, Lebanon's main political power and part of the ruling coalition. Sources close to Hariri say Saudi Arabia has concluded that the prime minister - a long-time Saudi ally and son of late prime minister Rafik al-Hariri, who was assassinated in 2005 - had to go because he was unwilling to confront Hezbollah. Multiple Lebanese sources say Riyadh hopes to replace Saad Hariri with his older brother Bahaa as Lebanon's top Sunni politician. Bahaa is believed to be in Saudi Arabia and members of the Hariri family have been asked to travel there to pledge allegiance to him, but have refused, the sources say. "When Hariri's plane landed in Riyadh, he got the message immediately that something was wrong," a Hariri source told Reuters. "There was no one was waiting for him." Saudi Arabia has dismissed suggestions it forced Hariri to resign and says he is a free man. Saudi officials could not immediately be reached for comment on the circumstances of his arrival, whether his phone had been taken, or whether the Kingdom was planning to replace him with his brother. Hariri has given no public remarks since he resigned and no indication of when he might return to Lebanon. "NO RESPECT" Hariri was summoned to the Kingdom to meet Saudi King Salman in a phone call on Thursday night, November 2. Before departing, he told his officials they would resume their discussions on Monday. He told his media team he would see them at the weekend in the Red Sea resort of Sharm al-Sheikh, where he was due to meet Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi on the sidelines of the World Youth Forum. Hariri went to his Riyadh home. His family made their fortune in Saudi Arabia and have long had properties there. The source close to Hariri said the Lebanese leader received a call from a Saudi protocol official on Saturday morning, who asked him to attend a meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. He waited for about four hours before being presented with his resignation speech to read on television, the source said. "From the moment he arrived they (Saudis) showed no respect for the man," another senior Lebanese political source said. Hariri frequently visits Saudi Arabia. On a trip a few days earlier, Prince Mohammed bin Salman had arranged for him to see senior intelligence officials and Gulf Affairs Minister Thamer al-Sabhan, the Saudi point man on Lebanon. Hariri came back from that trip to Beirut "pleased and relaxed", sources in his entourage said. He posted a selfie with Sabhan, both of them smiling. He told aides he had heard "encouraging statements" from the crown prince, including a promise to revive a Saudi aid package for the Lebanese army. The Hariri sources say Hariri believed he had convinced Saudi officials of the need to maintain an entente with Hezbollah for the sake of Lebanon's stability. Hezbollah has a heavily armed fighting force, in addition to seats in parliament and government. Saudi-backed efforts to weaken the group in Lebanon a decade ago led to Sunni-Shi'ite clashes and a Hezbollah takeover of Beirut. "What happened in those meetings, I believe, is that (Hariri) revealed his position on how to deal with Hezbollah in Lebanon: that confrontation would destabilize the country. I think they didn't like what they heard," said one of the sources, who was briefed on the meetings. The source said Hariri told Sabhan not to "hold us responsible for something that is beyond my control or that of Lebanon." But Hariri underestimated the Saudi position on Hezbollah, the source said. "For the Saudis it is an existential battle. It's black and white. We in Lebanon are used to grey," the source said. Sabhan could not immediately be reached for comment. RESIGNATION Hariri’s resignation speech shocked his team. Lebanese President Michel Aoun, a Hezbollah ally, told ambassadors to Lebanon that Saudi Arabia had kidnapped Hariri, a senior Lebanese official said. On Friday, France said it wanted Hariri to have "all his freedom of movement". In his speech, Hariri said he feared assassination and accused Iran and Hezbollah of sowing strife in the region. He said the Arab world would "cut off the hands that wickedly extend to it," language which one source close to him said was not typical of the Lebanese leader. Hariri's resignation came as more than 200 people, including 11 Saudi princes, current and former ministers and tycoons, were arrested in an anti-corruption purge in Saudi Arabia. Initially there was speculation Hariri was a target of that campaign because of his family's business interests. But sources close to the Lebanese leader said his forced resignation was motivated by Saudi efforts to counter Iran. Hariri was taken to meet the Saudi king after his resignation. Footage was aired on Saudi TV. He was then flown to Abu Dhabi to meet Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, the Saudi crown prince's main regional ally. He returned to Riyadh and has since received Western ambassadors. Sources close to Hariri said the Saudis, while keeping Hariri under house arrest, were trying to orchestrate a change of leadership in Hariri's Future Movement by installing his elder brother Bahaa, who was overlooked for the top job when their father was killed. The two have been at odds for years. In a statement, the Future Movement said it stood fully behind Hariri as its leader. Hariri aide and Interior Minister Nohad Machnouk dismissed the idea Bahaa was being positioned to replace his brother: "We are not herds of sheep or a plot of land whose ownership can be moved from one person to another. In Lebanon things happen though elections not pledges of allegiances." Family members, aides and politicians who have contacted Hariri in Riyadh say he is apprehensive and reluctant to say anything beyond "I am fine". Asked if he is coming back, they say his normal answer is: "Inshallah" (God willing).

How Saudi Arabia turned on Lebanon's Hariri

By:&nbsp;Tridivesh Singh Maini &amp; Sandeep Sachdeva*

New Delhi,&nbsp;while consistently expanding strategic and economic ties with the Gulf Cooperation Countries (GCC) and Israel, has also sought to strengthen ties with Tehran, which has tense relations with both. The Nuclear Deal of 2015, signed between Iran and (P5+1) countries opened new vistas for India in Iran, which is strategically located and is India&rsquo;s potential gateway to Afghanistan and Central Asia.&nbsp;

During his visit to Iran in 2016, PM Modi signed an agreement, not just committing financial assistance&nbsp;to the tune of 500 Million USD for phase 1 of the development of the Chabahar Project, but also a three nation agreement with Iran and Afghanistan&nbsp;for establishing a land, transit and trade corridor. India will build a <a href="http://russiancouncil.ru/en/blogs/tridivesh-en/33618/">500-km rail line</a> from Chabahar port from the southern coast of Iran to Zahedan, close to the Afghan border, at a cost of $1.6 billion as part of the transit corridor to Afghanistan. &quot;It will open new routes for India, Iran, and Afghanistan to connect among themselves,&quot; said PM Modi with regard to the corridor.

India&rsquo;s main aim was to get access to Afghanistan and Central Asia. Pakistan has continuously opposed India&rsquo;s entry into the <a href="http://russiancouncil.ru/en/blogs/tridivesh-en/33618/">APTTA</a>&nbsp;(Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement), even though Afghanistan has been in favour of India joining the agreement. APTTA is a transit trade agreement as it is quite evident from its name. Currently, Afghan goods can come into India, but trucks stop at Wagah (Pakistani side of the border). India, however, has been deprived of land access to Afghanistan and Central Asia.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Given India&rsquo;s increasingly close ties with the US, and importance of Iran in the context of connectivity with Afghanistan and Central Asia, striking a balance may be a challenge given Trump&rsquo;s unpredictability.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Given India?s increasingly close ties with the US, and importance of Iran in the context of connectivity with Afghanistan and Central Asia, striking a balance may be a challenge given Trump?s unpredictability." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

There have been some hitches with regard to the Chabahar project kicking off by 2018. The <a href="https://www.google.co.in/amp/www.firstpost.com/india/chabahar-port-why-future-of-india-iran-project-hinges-on-outcome-of-narendra-modi-donald-trump-meet-3722647.html/amp">companies which are to develop customised equipment jetties and container terminals</a> were not willing to take part in the bidding process. The banks were not ready to facilitate the financial transactions involving Iran due to the uncertain policies of Trump administration towards&nbsp;Iran. Apart from this, there was a delay in <a href="http://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/iran-india-trade-charges-on-delay-of-chabahar-port/articleshow/56990454.cms">loan disbursement of $ 150 million</a>&nbsp;with India and Iran blaming each other for the delay. Transport minister, Nitin Gadkari who attended Iranian President Rouhani&rsquo;s swearing in on August 5, 2017, categorically stated:

&quot;India and Iran have been historically sharing special ties. We are keen on developing Chabahar Port and are hopeful of starting operations in 12 to 18 months.&quot;

US-Iran ties

India, however, needs to carefully observe Trump&rsquo;s warnings to Iran on the nuclear deal. Iran has categorically stated, that it will quit the Nuclear Deal if more sanctions are imposed. Rouhani&#39;s exact words were:&nbsp;&quot;Iran could quit the nuclear deal within hours if the US imposes more sanctions.&quot;

Even though Iran has followed the conditions of the deal, Trump has threatened about imposing sanctions. The Secretary of State Rex Tillerson,&nbsp;however, has made it clear on umpteen occasions, that the US will not scrap the deal. Interestingly, Tillerson has also stated, that he and the US President have differences over the deal. Whereas President Trump is in favour of calling off the deal and imposing new sanctions, secretary of state <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-tillerson-iran-idUSKBN1AH5E7">Tillerson </a>subscribes to the view, that America should not strike the deal rather engage with Iran to bring stability in the neighbourhood, especially in Iraq and Syria by holding it accountable.&nbsp;

Given India&rsquo;s increasingly close ties with the US, and importance of Iran in the context of connectivity with Afghanistan and Central Asia, striking a balance may be a challenge given Trump&rsquo;s unpredictability. 
&nbsp; 
Iran-Pakistan ties&nbsp;

New Delhi should also observe carefully Iran&rsquo;s support for Pakistan, particularly after Trump&rsquo;s speech on August 21 where he warned Pakistan to take more concrete action against terror groups operating on Pakistan-Afghanistan border. Iran came to the defence of Pakistan, with foreign ministry spokesman, Bahram Ghasemi saying:

&quot;What presently the US is highlighting to condemn other countries with is the result of years of wrong and inappropriate policies of Americans in the countries of the region, especially Afghanistan.&rdquo;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Iran already has strong economic ties with China, moving closer to Pakistan would not be good news for India.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Iran already has strong economic ties with China, moving closer to Pakistan would not be good news for India." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

Iran already has strong economic ties with China, and it moving closer to Pakistan would not be good news for India. New Delhi has been trying to jointly work with both Afghanistan and Iran much to the chagrin of the Pakistan army.&nbsp;

Significantly, in May 2017, Iran had taken a tough stance against certain terror groups operating from Pakistan, warning that it would hit the bases of Sunni militant groups operating in Pakistan. In April 2017, Ten Iranian border guards had been killed by militants and Iran blamed Sunni groups operating from Pakistan. <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-pakistan-security-idUSKBN1840SY">Major General Mohammad Baqeri</a>, head of the Iranian armed forces had said, &ldquo;If the terrorist attacks continue, we will hit their safe havens and cells, wherever they are.&rdquo;&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
Middle East

New Delhi should also be watching the gradual softening of Iran towards Saudi Arabia and Turkey. On the sidelines of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) meeting in Istanbul earlier this month, the <a href="#vgi=11831571547160704589&amp;amp=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.al-monitor.com%252Fpulse%252Fen%252Foriginals%252F2017%252F08%252Firan-zarif-jubeir-saudi-fm-handshake-istanbul-shamkhani-deal.amp.html&amp;ampidx=0&amp;ampct=1504066232985">foreign ministers of Iran and Saudi Arabia</a> met and exchanged greetings. Earlier this month Iranian chief of staff of the armed forces, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-iran-military-idUSKCN1AW1PT">Major-General Mohammad Baqeri</a> paid a visit to Turkey to explore possible synergies in counter-terrorism and the Syrian conflict. This is a clear indication of a significant improvement in bilateral ties. It has also been reported, that their high-level officials are likely to meet again.&nbsp;

While New Delhi has strong ties with both, and this has been a challenge in the past, the tensions were also to the benefit of India. Due to tensions between Iran and GCC countries, especially Saudi Arabia, New Delhi could also pressurise both sides to urge Pakistan to take action against terror groups. Apart from strengthening of India-US ties, Saudi Arabia has been apprehensive about India getting too close to Iran. This has resulted in Riyadh not just adopting a more nuanced stand on terrorism emanating from Pakistan and extraditing terrorists, but also strengthening security cooperation with India.&nbsp;

While currently, India is bogged down with numerous domestic challenges, and other foreign policy priorities, especially with China,&nbsp;a close watch should be kept on Iran&rsquo;s next moves not just in the context of its deal with the US, but also on&nbsp;its ties with Pakistan and GCC countries.&nbsp;

*Sandeep Sachdeva is an Independent Policy Analyst associated with The Jindal School of International Affairs, Sonipat.

Iran already has strong economic ties with China, and it moving closer to Pakistan would not be good news for India.

By: Tridivesh Singh Maini & Sandeep Sachdeva* New Delhi, while consistently expanding strategic and economic ties with the Gulf Cooperation Countries (GCC) and Israel, has also sought to strengthen ties with Tehran, which has tense relations with both. The Nuclear Deal of 2015, signed between Iran and (P5+1) countries opened new vistas for India in Iran, which is strategically located and is India’s potential gateway to Afghanistan and Central Asia. During his visit to Iran in 2016, PM Modi signed an agreement, not just committing financial assistance to the tune of 500 Million USD for phase 1 of the development of the Chabahar Project, but also a three nation agreement with Iran and Afghanistan for establishing a land, transit and trade corridor. India will build a 500-km rail line from Chabahar port from the southern coast of Iran to Zahedan, close to the Afghan border, at a cost of $1.6 billion as part of the transit corridor to Afghanistan. "It will open new routes for India, Iran, and Afghanistan to connect among themselves," said PM Modi with regard to the corridor. India’s main aim was to get access to Afghanistan and Central Asia. Pakistan has continuously opposed India’s entry into the APTTA (Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement), even though Afghanistan has been in favour of India joining the agreement. APTTA is a transit trade agreement as it is quite evident from its name. Currently, Afghan goods can come into India, but trucks stop at Wagah (Pakistani side of the border). India, however, has been deprived of land access to Afghanistan and Central Asia. Given India’s increasingly close ties with the US, and importance of Iran in the context of connectivity with Afghanistan and Central Asia, striking a balance may be a challenge given Trump’s unpredictability. × There have been some hitches with regard to the Chabahar project kicking off by 2018. The companies which are to develop customised equipment jetties and container terminals were not willing to take part in the bidding process. The banks were not ready to facilitate the financial transactions involving Iran due to the uncertain policies of Trump administration towards Iran. Apart from this, there was a delay in loan disbursement of $ 150 million with India and Iran blaming each other for the delay. Transport minister, Nitin Gadkari who attended Iranian President Rouhani’s swearing in on August 5, 2017, categorically stated: "India and Iran have been historically sharing special ties. We are keen on developing Chabahar Port and are hopeful of starting operations in 12 to 18 months." US-Iran ties India, however, needs to carefully observe Trump’s warnings to Iran on the nuclear deal. Iran has categorically stated, that it will quit the Nuclear Deal if more sanctions are imposed. Rouhani's exact words were: "Iran could quit the nuclear deal within hours if the US imposes more sanctions." Even though Iran has followed the conditions of the deal, Trump has threatened about imposing sanctions. The Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, however, has made it clear on umpteen occasions, that the US will not scrap the deal. Interestingly, Tillerson has also stated, that he and the US President have differences over the deal. Whereas President Trump is in favour of calling off the deal and imposing new sanctions, secretary of state Tillerson subscribes to the view, that America should not strike the deal rather engage with Iran to bring stability in the neighbourhood, especially in Iraq and Syria by holding it accountable. Given India’s increasingly close ties with the US, and importance of Iran in the context of connectivity with Afghanistan and Central Asia, striking a balance may be a challenge given Trump’s unpredictability. Iran-Pakistan ties New Delhi should also observe carefully Iran’s support for Pakistan, particularly after Trump’s speech on August 21 where he warned Pakistan to take more concrete action against terror groups operating on Pakistan-Afghanistan border. Iran came to the defence of Pakistan, with foreign ministry spokesman, Bahram Ghasemi saying: "What presently the US is highlighting to condemn other countries with is the result of years of wrong and inappropriate policies of Americans in the countries of the region, especially Afghanistan.” Iran already has strong economic ties with China, moving closer to Pakistan would not be good news for India. × Iran already has strong economic ties with China, and it moving closer to Pakistan would not be good news for India. New Delhi has been trying to jointly work with both Afghanistan and Iran much to the chagrin of the Pakistan army. Significantly, in May 2017, Iran had taken a tough stance against certain terror groups operating from Pakistan, warning that it would hit the bases of Sunni militant groups operating in Pakistan. In April 2017, Ten Iranian border guards had been killed by militants and Iran blamed Sunni groups operating from Pakistan. Major General Mohammad Baqeri, head of the Iranian armed forces had said, “If the terrorist attacks continue, we will hit their safe havens and cells, wherever they are.” Middle East New Delhi should also be watching the gradual softening of Iran towards Saudi Arabia and Turkey. On the sidelines of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) meeting in Istanbul earlier this month, the foreign ministers of Iran and Saudi Arabia met and exchanged greetings. Earlier this month Iranian chief of staff of the armed forces, Major-General Mohammad Baqeri paid a visit to Turkey to explore possible synergies in counter-terrorism and the Syrian conflict. This is a clear indication of a significant improvement in bilateral ties. It has also been reported, that their high-level officials are likely to meet again. While New Delhi has strong ties with both, and this has been a challenge in the past, the tensions were also to the benefit of India. Due to tensions between Iran and GCC countries, especially Saudi Arabia, New Delhi could also pressurise both sides to urge Pakistan to take action against terror groups. Apart from strengthening of India-US ties, Saudi Arabia has been apprehensive about India getting too close to Iran. This has resulted in Riyadh not just adopting a more nuanced stand on terrorism emanating from Pakistan and extraditing terrorists, but also strengthening security cooperation with India. While currently, India is bogged down with numerous domestic challenges, and other foreign policy priorities, especially with China, a close watch should be kept on Iran’s next moves not just in the context of its deal with the US, but also on its ties with Pakistan and GCC countries. *Sandeep Sachdeva is an Independent Policy Analyst associated with The Jindal School of International Affairs, Sonipat.

India should be careful about Iran's softening of stance towards Pakistan and China

It is a&nbsp;country&nbsp;often depicted for being&nbsp;regressive and offering limited sources of entertainment, but for the first time ever&nbsp;Saudi Arabia hosted the&nbsp;Comic Con expo. The Red Sea city of Jeddah in the kingdom&nbsp;saw a display of robots, video games and giant anime figures over the weekend.

The event, which started&nbsp;on Friday, brought&nbsp;some 20,000 young enthusiasts&nbsp;dressed in their favourite comic book character, commonly&nbsp;with painted faces. Comic Con started in the year 1970 and has now turned into a global phenomena with sci-fi lovers using the expo as a celebration of&nbsp;comic culture.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/saudi2-20170220072257.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
Spectators attend Comic Con expo in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (Reuters)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/saudi4-20170220072442.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
People take part in Comic Con expo in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (Reuters)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Participants were also seen enjoying&nbsp;the pop art booths, while gamers took part in various video game competitions.&nbsp;

As reported to Al Jazeera, Obada Awad, Riyadh-based Time Entertainment, who organised the event, said, &quot;It was better than expected. We prepared so many scenarios for every possible thing that could happen, but this was the best possible turnout.&quot;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/saudi3-20170220072347.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
Boys play games during Comic Con expo in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia February (Reuters)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/saudi6-20170220072610.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
A fan with painted face takes part in Comic Con expo in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (Reuters)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

The first-ever global comics expo was held under the Saudi General Entertainment Authority in Saudi Arabia, which, has been hosting a series of festivals, comedy shows and concerts throughout the year.&nbsp;As part of an economic and social reform drive, Saudi Arabia aims at creating jobs and weaning the country off its dependence on oil and related products.&nbsp;

In recent times, the kingdom has seen a spurt in comic book lovers. While the US comic book industry has started integrating prominent Muslim and Arab heroes in their plots,&nbsp;West Asia&nbsp;is&nbsp;constructing their own comic superheroes. Deena Mohamed&rsquo;s Qahera, Joumana Medlej&rsquo;s Malaak are some superheroes bred out of this need.&nbsp;

(WION with inputs from Reuters)

Unsurprisingly given the rise in comic book culture in West Asia, the sci-fi event attracted thousands

It is a country often depicted for being regressive and offering limited sources of entertainment, but for the first time ever Saudi Arabia hosted the Comic Con expo. The Red Sea city of Jeddah in the kingdom saw a display of robots, video games and giant anime figures over the weekend. The event, which started on Friday, brought some 20,000 young enthusiasts dressed in their favourite comic book character, commonly with painted faces. Comic Con started in the year 1970 and has now turned into a global phenomena with sci-fi lovers using the expo as a celebration of comic culture. Spectators attend Comic Con expo in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (Reuters) × People take part in Comic Con expo in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (Reuters) × Participants were also seen enjoying the pop art booths, while gamers took part in various video game competitions. As reported to Al Jazeera, Obada Awad, Riyadh-based Time Entertainment, who organised the event, said, "It was better than expected. We prepared so many scenarios for every possible thing that could happen, but this was the best possible turnout." Boys play games during Comic Con expo in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia February (Reuters) × A fan with painted face takes part in Comic Con expo in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (Reuters) × The first-ever global comics expo was held under the Saudi General Entertainment Authority in Saudi Arabia, which, has been hosting a series of festivals, comedy shows and concerts throughout the year. As part of an economic and social reform drive, Saudi Arabia aims at creating jobs and weaning the country off its dependence on oil and related products. In recent times, the kingdom has seen a spurt in comic book lovers. While the US comic book industry has started integrating prominent Muslim and Arab heroes in their plots, West Asia is constructing their own comic superheroes. Deena Mohamed’s Qahera, Joumana Medlej’s Malaak are some superheroes bred out of this need. (WION with inputs from Reuters)

Saudi Arabia gets its first-ever Comic-Con expo

The White House signalled a sharp break with decades of support for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict Tuesday, on the eve of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu&#39;s visit to the White House.

A senior White House official said the United States would no longer seek to dictate the terms of any eventual peace settlement&nbsp;but would support what the two sides agree to together.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Trump hosts Netanyahu at the White House on Wednesday and is expected to express his desire to help broker a solution to the conflict</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Trump hosts Netanyahu at the White House on Wednesday and is expected to express his desire to help broker a solution to the conflict" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

&quot;A two-state solution that doesn&#39;t bring peace is not a goal that anybody wants to achieve,&quot; the official said on condition of anonymity.

&quot;Peace is the goal, whether that comes in the form of a two-state solution if that&#39;s what the parties want, or something else if that&#39;s what the parties want.&quot;

&quot;That&#39;s going to be up to them, we are not going to dictate what the terms of peace are going to be,&quot; said the official.

President Trump hosts Netanyahu at the White House on Wednesday and is expected to express his desire to help broker a solution to the conflict.

He has already tapped son-in-law Jared Kushner and lawyer Jason Greenblatt to lead his peace drive.

But major questions remain about how Trump will achieve that goal.

For the better part of half a century, successive US governments -- both Republican and Democrat -- have backed a two-state solution. It was the basis of peace talks at Oslo and Camp David.

But since coming to office in late January, Trump has sought to show that the United States is an unwavering ally of Israel and tried to draw a contrast with the policies of President Barack Obama.

Netanyahu won re-election in 2015 by insisting he would not accept the creation of a Palestinian state, a vow that considerably soured relations with the Obama White House. &nbsp;

Obama often warned that Israeli settlement construction could make a two-state solution impossible&nbsp;and that a one state solution would put the future of the Jewish state in question.

Trump has shied away from criticising Netanyahu&#39;s settlement policies as an impediment to peace, instead offering Israel some scope to build on land already under development.

&quot;The construction of new settlements or the expansion of existing settlements beyond their current borders may not be helpful in achieving that goal,&quot; the White House said in a statement earlier this month.

Saeb Erakat, a senior Palestinian official, said it was not enough for Trump to say settlements were &quot;unhelpful&quot; but he must order an end to new building.

Friendly visit

Netanyahu arrived in Washington on Monday, dined with US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Tuesday and after his White House talks with Trump on Wednesday will meet lawmakers.

Aside from winning support for policies that will help him at home, the Israeli leader will also want to get the measure of Trump&#39;s appetite for better relations with Russia.

Trump has signalled his willingness to work with Russia to defeat the Islamic State group in Syria.

That could de facto mean furthering the goals of Russian allies Bashar al-Assad and Iran.

Israel sees Iran and its Lebanese ally the Hezbollah militia as its greatest existential threat, a view shared by the leaders of the main Sunni Arab states of the region.

Dennis Ross, a US diplomat who worked on Middle East policy under both Republican and Democratic administrations, said Netanyahu&#39;s diplomatic goals would at first be modest.

Israel wouldn&#39;t oppose a rapprochement with Moscow in itself&nbsp;but would urge Washington to use this as leverage to push Russia away from Iran.

&quot;What he&#39;d like to see is a distancing of Russia from Iran within Syria, maybe more of a move towards Turkey and less towards Iran in Syria,&quot; Ross told reporters on Monday.

Trump appears to have back-pedaled on a campaign threat to tear up Obama&#39;s Iran nuclear deal, which Israel bitterly opposed, but his administration has &quot;put Iran on notice.&quot;

This appears to mean a more robust stance against military provocations and a determination to impose tough sanctions on Iran&#39;s missile program and covert support for militants.&nbsp;

Observers expect Trump and Netanyahu to get on well in public. Both have much to gain politically from marking a clean break from the Obama years.

But, personal chemistry aside, the pair will only make the relationship a success if it overcomes the disagreement that poisoned ties under Obama.

(AFP)

A senior White House official said the United States would no longer seek to dictate the terms of any eventual peace settlement

The White House signalled a sharp break with decades of support for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict Tuesday, on the eve of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to the White House. A senior White House official said the United States would no longer seek to dictate the terms of any eventual peace settlement but would support what the two sides agree to together. Trump hosts Netanyahu at the White House on Wednesday and is expected to express his desire to help broker a solution to the conflict × "A two-state solution that doesn't bring peace is not a goal that anybody wants to achieve," the official said on condition of anonymity. "Peace is the goal, whether that comes in the form of a two-state solution if that's what the parties want, or something else if that's what the parties want." "That's going to be up to them, we are not going to dictate what the terms of peace are going to be," said the official. President Trump hosts Netanyahu at the White House on Wednesday and is expected to express his desire to help broker a solution to the conflict. He has already tapped son-in-law Jared Kushner and lawyer Jason Greenblatt to lead his peace drive. But major questions remain about how Trump will achieve that goal. For the better part of half a century, successive US governments -- both Republican and Democrat -- have backed a two-state solution. It was the basis of peace talks at Oslo and Camp David. But since coming to office in late January, Trump has sought to show that the United States is an unwavering ally of Israel and tried to draw a contrast with the policies of President Barack Obama. Netanyahu won re-election in 2015 by insisting he would not accept the creation of a Palestinian state, a vow that considerably soured relations with the Obama White House. Obama often warned that Israeli settlement construction could make a two-state solution impossible and that a one state solution would put the future of the Jewish state in question. Trump has shied away from criticising Netanyahu's settlement policies as an impediment to peace, instead offering Israel some scope to build on land already under development. "The construction of new settlements or the expansion of existing settlements beyond their current borders may not be helpful in achieving that goal," the White House said in a statement earlier this month. Saeb Erakat, a senior Palestinian official, said it was not enough for Trump to say settlements were "unhelpful" but he must order an end to new building. Friendly visit Netanyahu arrived in Washington on Monday, dined with US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Tuesday and after his White House talks with Trump on Wednesday will meet lawmakers. Aside from winning support for policies that will help him at home, the Israeli leader will also want to get the measure of Trump's appetite for better relations with Russia. Trump has signalled his willingness to work with Russia to defeat the Islamic State group in Syria. That could de facto mean furthering the goals of Russian allies Bashar al-Assad and Iran. Israel sees Iran and its Lebanese ally the Hezbollah militia as its greatest existential threat, a view shared by the leaders of the main Sunni Arab states of the region. Dennis Ross, a US diplomat who worked on Middle East policy under both Republican and Democratic administrations, said Netanyahu's diplomatic goals would at first be modest. Israel wouldn't oppose a rapprochement with Moscow in itself but would urge Washington to use this as leverage to push Russia away from Iran. "What he'd like to see is a distancing of Russia from Iran within Syria, maybe more of a move towards Turkey and less towards Iran in Syria," Ross told reporters on Monday. Trump appears to have back-pedaled on a campaign threat to tear up Obama's Iran nuclear deal, which Israel bitterly opposed, but his administration has "put Iran on notice." This appears to mean a more robust stance against military provocations and a determination to impose tough sanctions on Iran's missile program and covert support for militants. Observers expect Trump and Netanyahu to get on well in public. Both have much to gain politically from marking a clean break from the Obama years. But, personal chemistry aside, the pair will only make the relationship a success if it overcomes the disagreement that poisoned ties under Obama. (AFP)

US will no longer insist on two-state solution in Middle East

After a strategic break meant to&nbsp;relieve troops after&nbsp;two months of intense&nbsp;urban guerrilla warfare, Iraqi forces launched a new wave of attacks to retake Mosul, the last stronghold&nbsp;and the de facto capital city of&nbsp;the Islamic State in Iraq.&nbsp;

The Iraqi army is now conducting a multi-axis advance, and according to the US Department of Defense two new fronts have been opened to increase pressure on the terrorists still fighting in the city.&nbsp;

Pentagon sources told CNN they have no reason to think that&nbsp;IS leader Abu Bakhr al-Baghdadi is dead.&nbsp;The reward for information leading to his capture is now at $25 million.

&nbsp;

Humanitarian challenges

The major challenge in the Mosul offensive is the presence of many civilians within the city. There are no official figures on the current situation, but before the offensive begun the population was believed to be close to one million.&nbsp;

When wars are fought in highly and densely populated cities, citizens are forcibly and heavily involved in the conflict: A&nbsp;mortar can fall on their house any moment, a flying bullet can hit them, a car bomb or a rudimentary explosive device can explode in front of them without notice. The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) estimates that 3,125 civilians have been injured in Mosul since the army entered the city in early&nbsp;November. That&#39;s a rate of about&nbsp;approximately 50 persons per day.&nbsp;

As the Iraqi army advances, more and more citizens decide to&nbsp;leave their home. The new round of attacks caused an increase in the number of people fleeing with as many as 13,000&nbsp;running away in the first days. &nbsp;

Since&nbsp;the offensive started on October 17, the <a href="http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Situation%20Report_14_Mosul%20final.pdf">United Nation says</a>&nbsp;that as many as 125,569 civilians have abandoned their home. The majority of them&nbsp;now live&nbsp;in the many refugee camps in northern Iraq, where a severe winter hits hard. The region sees temperatures which easily drop below zero during the night.&nbsp;

Some Iraqis who fled war&nbsp;are slowly deciding to go back as soon as their neighbourhoods&nbsp;are declared safe. The OCHA says that as many 14,000 people have currently returned.

&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>When wars are fought in highly and densely populated cities, citizens are forcibly and heavily involved in the conflict: A&nbsp;mortar can fall on their house any moment, a flying bullet can hit them, a car bomb or a rudimentary explosive device can explode in front of them without notice.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=When wars are fought in highly and densely populated cities, citizens are forcibly and heavily involved in the conflict: A?mortar can fall on their house any moment, a flying bullet can hit them, a car bomb or a rudimentary explosive device can explode in front of them without notice." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

A fundamental part of the Mosul offensive is dictated&nbsp;by the five bridges that cross&nbsp;the Tigris river,&nbsp;connecting the eastern and the western parts of the city. The bridges are&nbsp;the only way terrorists have to move between the two sides and partially escape isolation. All major roads from and to the city are in fact cut off by troops, so&nbsp;the only possibility for them to fight is to move within Mosul and organise as many ambushes as possible. Between December 26&nbsp;and 27, at the request of the Iraqi army, US-led coalition forces disabled three bridges.&nbsp;

While this is militarily significant, it is also&nbsp;concerning for all those&nbsp;living&nbsp;in&nbsp;western Mosul, now suffering complete isolation. No humanitarian agency has access to the area.&nbsp;

OCHA reports that due to scarcity of food, prices are skyrocketing and many &quot;water boreholes in the eastern part of the city are drying up or turning brackish from overuse&quot;.&nbsp;

The Mosul humanitarian emergency adds a problem to a country already devastated by more than ten years of conflict, from the US-led invasion to topple Saddam Hussein to the current fight against the Islamic State.

In 2016 alone,&nbsp;war has left 6,878 Iraqis dead, according to the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq.

That&#39;s nearly one life per hour.

While the Iraqi army is achieving moderate gains against IS, no matter how well they fight, destruction and death is inevitable.&nbsp;&nbsp;

(WION) 
&nbsp;

Some Iraqis who fled?are slowly deciding to go back to their neighbourhoods, but in 2016 war has left 6,878 Iraqis dead

After a strategic break meant to relieve troops after two months of intense urban guerrilla warfare, Iraqi forces launched a new wave of attacks to retake Mosul, the last stronghold and the de facto capital city of the Islamic State in Iraq. The Iraqi army is now conducting a multi-axis advance, and according to the US Department of Defense two new fronts have been opened to increase pressure on the terrorists still fighting in the city. Pentagon sources told CNN they have no reason to think that IS leader Abu Bakhr al-Baghdadi is dead. The reward for information leading to his capture is now at $25 million. Humanitarian challenges The major challenge in the Mosul offensive is the presence of many civilians within the city. There are no official figures on the current situation, but before the offensive begun the population was believed to be close to one million. When wars are fought in highly and densely populated cities, citizens are forcibly and heavily involved in the conflict: A mortar can fall on their house any moment, a flying bullet can hit them, a car bomb or a rudimentary explosive device can explode in front of them without notice. The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) estimates that 3,125 civilians have been injured in Mosul since the army entered the city in early November. That's a rate of about approximately 50 persons per day. As the Iraqi army advances, more and more citizens decide to leave their home. The new round of attacks caused an increase in the number of people fleeing with as many as 13,000 running away in the first days. Since the offensive started on October 17, the United Nation says that as many as 125,569 civilians have abandoned their home. The majority of them now live in the many refugee camps in northern Iraq, where a severe winter hits hard. The region sees temperatures which easily drop below zero during the night. Some Iraqis who fled war are slowly deciding to go back as soon as their neighbourhoods are declared safe. The OCHA says that as many 14,000 people have currently returned. When wars are fought in highly and densely populated cities, citizens are forcibly and heavily involved in the conflict: A mortar can fall on their house any moment, a flying bullet can hit them, a car bomb or a rudimentary explosive device can explode in front of them without notice. × A fundamental part of the Mosul offensive is dictated by the five bridges that cross the Tigris river, connecting the eastern and the western parts of the city. The bridges are the only way terrorists have to move between the two sides and partially escape isolation. All major roads from and to the city are in fact cut off by troops, so the only possibility for them to fight is to move within Mosul and organise as many ambushes as possible. Between December 26 and 27, at the request of the Iraqi army, US-led coalition forces disabled three bridges. While this is militarily significant, it is also concerning for all those living in western Mosul, now suffering complete isolation. No humanitarian agency has access to the area. OCHA reports that due to scarcity of food, prices are skyrocketing and many "water boreholes in the eastern part of the city are drying up or turning brackish from overuse". The Mosul humanitarian emergency adds a problem to a country already devastated by more than ten years of conflict, from the US-led invasion to topple Saddam Hussein to the current fight against the Islamic State. In 2016 alone, war has left 6,878 Iraqis dead, according to the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq. That's nearly one life per hour. While the Iraqi army is achieving moderate gains against IS, no matter how well they fight, destruction and death is inevitable. (WION)

Mosul's humanitarian crisis continues as Iraqi forces fight IS

Israel could advance plans this week for thousands more settlement homes in annexed east Jerusalem in defiance of a landmark UN resolution demanding an end to such activity.

It would mark the first such approvals since Friday&#39;s UN Security Council vote demanding a halt to Israeli settlement building in Palestinian territory.

The resolution, which was passed after the United States took the rare move of abstaining, infuriated Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who lashed out at President Barack Obama and vowed not to abide by it.

On Wednesday, a Jerusalem planning committee is to discuss issuing building permits for 618 housing units in the mainly Palestinian eastern sector of the city, according to the Ir Amim NGO, which monitors settlement building.

Jerusalem deputy mayor Meir Turjeman, who also heads the committee, has reportedly also spoken of seeking to advance plans for some 5,600 other units at earlier stages in the process.

On Tuesday he told AFP there were no plans to call off discussions in response to the UN vote. The hundreds of building permits were on the agenda before the resolution was passed.

&quot;We&#39;ll discuss everything that&#39;s on the table in a serious manner,&quot; he said.

And on his Facebook page Turjeman wrote: &quot;I&#39;m not concerned by the UN or anything else trying to dictate our actions in Jerusalem.

&quot;I hope the government and new US administration will give us the momentum to continue and make up for the shortage created over the eight years of the Obama administration,&quot; he said of settlement construction.

&nbsp;

Diplomatic reprisals&nbsp;

Israel has already taken diplomatic steps in response to what it calls the &quot;shameful&quot; resolution, which passed with support from all the remaining members of the 15-strong Security Council.

On Tuesday, the foreign ministry said it was &quot;temporarily reducing&quot; visits and work with embassies of nations that voted for it.

On Christmas Day it summoned ambassadors of countries that voted for the resolution while Netanyahu met US ambassador Daniel Shapiro on Sunday.

Security Council members such as Russia, China and Britain are the key to Israeli diplomacy or trade and some analysts suggested the measures being taken were more symbolic than substantive.

Washington is Israel&#39;s most important ally and provides it with more than $3 billion per year in defence aid.&nbsp;

By declining to use its veto, the US enabled the adoption of the first UN resolution since 1979 to condemn Israel over its settlement policy.

Obama&#39;s administration has been frustrated with settlement building in east Jerusalem and the West Bank, which Israel occupied in 1967.

Israel later annexed east Jerusalem in a move never recognised by the international community.

Settlements are built on land the Palestinians view as part of their future state and seen as illegal under international law.

Some 430,000 Israeli settlers live in the West Bank and 200,000 Israelis live in east Jerusalem, which Palestinians see as the capital of their future state.

&nbsp;

New &#39;Dreyfus trial&#39;?&nbsp;

The UN resolution demands &quot;Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including east Jerusalem&quot;.

It says settlements have &quot;no legal validity&quot; and are &quot;dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-state solution&quot; to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the basis of years of negotiations.

The resolution contains no sanctions but Israeli officials are concerned it could widen the possibility of prosecution at the International Criminal Court.

They are also worried it could encourage some countries to impose sanctions against Israeli settlers and goods produced in the settlements.

Plans by France to hold an international Middle East peace conference on January 15 -- opposed by Israel which has called for direct talks with the Palestinians -- is another point of concern.

Officials fear the conference could be lead to further action against Israel that would then be taken to the Security Council for approval before Donald Trump takes over as US president on January 20.

Palestinian leaders support the conference, saying years of negotiations with the Israelis have not ended the occupation.

Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas on Monday said the UN resolution &quot;paves the way for the success&quot; of the conference. He said he hopes it &quot;comes out with an international mechanism and a timeline to end Israeli occupation of our country&quot;.

Israeli hardline Defence Minister Avigdor Lieberman dubbed the conference a new &quot;Dreyfus trial&quot; and urged French Jews to move to Israel.

(AFP)

The UN resolution demands Israel cease all settlement activities 'in the occupied Palestinian territory, including east Jerusalem'

Israel could advance plans this week for thousands more settlement homes in annexed east Jerusalem in defiance of a landmark UN resolution demanding an end to such activity. It would mark the first such approvals since Friday's UN Security Council vote demanding a halt to Israeli settlement building in Palestinian territory. The resolution, which was passed after the United States took the rare move of abstaining, infuriated Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who lashed out at President Barack Obama and vowed not to abide by it. On Wednesday, a Jerusalem planning committee is to discuss issuing building permits for 618 housing units in the mainly Palestinian eastern sector of the city, according to the Ir Amim NGO, which monitors settlement building. Jerusalem deputy mayor Meir Turjeman, who also heads the committee, has reportedly also spoken of seeking to advance plans for some 5,600 other units at earlier stages in the process. On Tuesday he told AFP there were no plans to call off discussions in response to the UN vote. The hundreds of building permits were on the agenda before the resolution was passed. "We'll discuss everything that's on the table in a serious manner," he said. And on his Facebook page Turjeman wrote: "I'm not concerned by the UN or anything else trying to dictate our actions in Jerusalem. "I hope the government and new US administration will give us the momentum to continue and make up for the shortage created over the eight years of the Obama administration," he said of settlement construction. Diplomatic reprisals Israel has already taken diplomatic steps in response to what it calls the "shameful" resolution, which passed with support from all the remaining members of the 15-strong Security Council. On Tuesday, the foreign ministry said it was "temporarily reducing" visits and work with embassies of nations that voted for it. On Christmas Day it summoned ambassadors of countries that voted for the resolution while Netanyahu met US ambassador Daniel Shapiro on Sunday. Security Council members such as Russia, China and Britain are the key to Israeli diplomacy or trade and some analysts suggested the measures being taken were more symbolic than substantive. Washington is Israel's most important ally and provides it with more than $3 billion per year in defence aid. By declining to use its veto, the US enabled the adoption of the first UN resolution since 1979 to condemn Israel over its settlement policy. Obama's administration has been frustrated with settlement building in east Jerusalem and the West Bank, which Israel occupied in 1967. Israel later annexed east Jerusalem in a move never recognised by the international community. Settlements are built on land the Palestinians view as part of their future state and seen as illegal under international law. Some 430,000 Israeli settlers live in the West Bank and 200,000 Israelis live in east Jerusalem, which Palestinians see as the capital of their future state. New 'Dreyfus trial'? The UN resolution demands "Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including east Jerusalem". It says settlements have "no legal validity" and are "dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-state solution" to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the basis of years of negotiations. The resolution contains no sanctions but Israeli officials are concerned it could widen the possibility of prosecution at the International Criminal Court. They are also worried it could encourage some countries to impose sanctions against Israeli settlers and goods produced in the settlements. Plans by France to hold an international Middle East peace conference on January 15 -- opposed by Israel which has called for direct talks with the Palestinians -- is another point of concern. Officials fear the conference could be lead to further action against Israel that would then be taken to the Security Council for approval before Donald Trump takes over as US president on January 20. Palestinian leaders support the conference, saying years of negotiations with the Israelis have not ended the occupation. Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas on Monday said the UN resolution "paves the way for the success" of the conference. He said he hopes it "comes out with an international mechanism and a timeline to end Israeli occupation of our country". Israeli hardline Defence Minister Avigdor Lieberman dubbed the conference a new "Dreyfus trial" and urged French Jews to move to Israel. (AFP)

Israel may push for more East Jerusalem settlement homes despite UN resolution

While travelling to Qayyarah, a two-hour-drive from Mosul, WION had the chance to interview Iraqi Army Major General Najim al-Jabouri soon after he met Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi in Baghdad. He is the commander of the Nineveh Operations, an offensive that aims to liberate south of Mosul. He is in-charge of the Mosul offensive and currently leads approximately 25,000 men.

WION: How are you preparing for the Mosul operation? 

General al-Jabouri: Our troops are ready to attack Islamic State in Mosul and retake the city. The coalition forces gave us good training, equipped us with modern equipment. We are just waiting for the prime minister&nbsp;to give us the order to attack. We are confident about the battle since we have liberated many cities, important cities in Nineveh (governorate), including Qayyara a few weeks ago. Right now, we are now coordinating with the Peshmerga (Kurdish military forces). Some brigades have already moved to the station areas near Mosul.

WION: How long will the battle last? And do you expect a large presence of IS&nbsp;fighters?

al-Jabouri:&nbsp;I think&nbsp;IS&nbsp;is not as strong as it was two months ago or six months ago. They have lost many good fighters. Many of them were killed, many of them got injured and many of them escaped.

IS is different from Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda believed in a cause but the majority of IS jihadists are like the mafia &mdash;&nbsp;they look for money, they look for women, they look for power.

A few months ago when we began the battle in Qayyarah, we faced strong fighters. The foreigners were especially strong. But the group has weakened. Now, we hardly lose our men even during intense gunfights. The last battle in Qayyarah, four or five days ago, we killed 66 people of theirs and lost not even a single one of ours. Also, we hardly face any foreign fighters anymore.

The local fighters are not that good because they are only interested in earning money. Such attitude is destroying the moral of IS.

The loss in Qayyarah was also financially damaging for IS. They are losing $1 million every day since they lost out in Qayyarah. When they were here, they stole oil and sold about a hundred trucks of it every day.

WION: How important will local support be&nbsp;in your battle for Mosul? 

al-Jabouri:&nbsp;Their (residents of Mosul) support&nbsp;is very vital. Even the strongest security force&nbsp;will be unable to defeat IS if they don&#39;t get support from the locals.

If the locals did not give IS a safe haven, it would have been impossible for them to grow in strength.

In my view, people were unhappy with the security forces in Iraq. This was one of the main reasons for IS to thrive in the area. We worked very hard to change this relationship, we built many bridges between us and the people. You are free to go&nbsp;to Qayyarah and to other villages and ask the people about us. Now, locals support us whenever we fight the IS. This will build the future of this area and Iraq.

WION: Will Shia militia organisation Hal Al-Hashd Al-Sha&#39;abi have any role during the Mosul Operation?

al-Jabouri:&nbsp;Maybe we will need their support. Only the commander-in-chief (the Iraqi prime minister) can decide on such matters. But they will not enter the city if we need them. They will have to go to the desert to cut off IS&#39; supplies. But the battle will be mainly fought by the Iraqi army, the Iraqi counter-terrorism forces and the police. The Peshmerga will help us as well.

WION: What do you make of Turkey&#39;s role? 

al-Jabouri:&nbsp;About the Turkish &hellip; I am a military commander, these are issues concerning the central (Iraqi) government and Turkey, but as an Iraqi &hellip; we don&rsquo;t need boots on the ground here. We don&#39;t even need the coalition forces. We depend on them for training, for advice&nbsp;and for launch air strikes on IS&nbsp;positions. If Turkey is part of the coalition forces, it works for me. If they do what the coalition forces&nbsp;say, I don&#39;t think there would be a problem. But we do not need anybody to act independently.

WION: Are you afraid that after Mosul, IS&nbsp;will launch suicide attacks across Iraq?

al-Jabouri:&nbsp;They do not have the capability to do such things.

WION: Do you plan to liberate Hawija before Mosul?

al-Jabouri:&nbsp;Hawija is not under my command, but I think the government is thinking about it. Mosul is the head of a snake, the last castle for the IS. But I think if we had retaken Mosul earlier, even before Ramani and before every other area, we would have wiped out Daesh (Islamic State) much earlier.&nbsp;

WION: So you think the strategy was wrong?

al-Jabouri:&nbsp;No, this is my view. I think the head of the snake is Mosul because it is a big city, it has good foundation, many factories and&nbsp;many resources. IS in Iraq and even in Syria rely on resources coming from Mosul.

WION: If IS&nbsp;fighters manage to escape Iraq and enter Syria, will the Iraqi army follow them and help Syrian forces fight them?&nbsp;

al-Jabouri:&nbsp;If my commander-in-chief gives me an order, I will follow them in Syria, in Nigeria, everywhere.&nbsp;

(WION)

Possibly the most important military person in West Asia, who is leading 25,000 men, spoke to WION about the fight against Islamic State

While travelling to Qayyarah, a two-hour-drive from Mosul, WION had the chance to interview Iraqi Army Major General Najim al-Jabouri soon after he met Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi in Baghdad. He is the commander of the Nineveh Operations, an offensive that aims to liberate south of Mosul. He is in-charge of the Mosul offensive and currently leads approximately 25,000 men. WION: How are you preparing for the Mosul operation? General al-Jabouri: Our troops are ready to attack Islamic State in Mosul and retake the city. The coalition forces gave us good training, equipped us with modern equipment. We are just waiting for the prime minister to give us the order to attack. We are confident about the battle since we have liberated many cities, important cities in Nineveh (governorate), including Qayyara a few weeks ago. Right now, we are now coordinating with the Peshmerga (Kurdish military forces). Some brigades have already moved to the station areas near Mosul. WION: How long will the battle last? And do you expect a large presence of IS fighters? al-Jabouri: I think IS is not as strong as it was two months ago or six months ago. They have lost many good fighters. Many of them were killed, many of them got injured and many of them escaped. IS is different from Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda believed in a cause but the majority of IS jihadists are like the mafia — they look for money, they look for women, they look for power. A few months ago when we began the battle in Qayyarah, we faced strong fighters. The foreigners were especially strong. But the group has weakened. Now, we hardly lose our men even during intense gunfights. The last battle in Qayyarah, four or five days ago, we killed 66 people of theirs and lost not even a single one of ours. Also, we hardly face any foreign fighters anymore. The local fighters are not that good because they are only interested in earning money. Such attitude is destroying the moral of IS. The loss in Qayyarah was also financially damaging for IS. They are losing $1 million every day since they lost out in Qayyarah. When they were here, they stole oil and sold about a hundred trucks of it every day. WION: How important will local support be in your battle for Mosul? al-Jabouri: Their (residents of Mosul) support is very vital. Even the strongest security force will be unable to defeat IS if they don't get support from the locals. If the locals did not give IS a safe haven, it would have been impossible for them to grow in strength. In my view, people were unhappy with the security forces in Iraq. This was one of the main reasons for IS to thrive in the area. We worked very hard to change this relationship, we built many bridges between us and the people. You are free to go to Qayyarah and to other villages and ask the people about us. Now, locals support us whenever we fight the IS. This will build the future of this area and Iraq. WION: Will Shia militia organisation Hal Al-Hashd Al-Sha'abi have any role during the Mosul Operation? al-Jabouri: Maybe we will need their support. Only the commander-in-chief (the Iraqi prime minister) can decide on such matters. But they will not enter the city if we need them. They will have to go to the desert to cut off IS' supplies. But the battle will be mainly fought by the Iraqi army, the Iraqi counter-terrorism forces and the police. The Peshmerga will help us as well. WION: What do you make of Turkey's role? al-Jabouri: About the Turkish … I am a military commander, these are issues concerning the central (Iraqi) government and Turkey, but as an Iraqi … we don’t need boots on the ground here. We don't even need the coalition forces. We depend on them for training, for advice and for launch air strikes on IS positions. If Turkey is part of the coalition forces, it works for me. If they do what the coalition forces say, I don't think there would be a problem. But we do not need anybody to act independently. WION: Are you afraid that after Mosul, IS will launch suicide attacks across Iraq? al-Jabouri: They do not have the capability to do such things. WION: Do you plan to liberate Hawija before Mosul? al-Jabouri: Hawija is not under my command, but I think the government is thinking about it. Mosul is the head of a snake, the last castle for the IS. But I think if we had retaken Mosul earlier, even before Ramani and before every other area, we would have wiped out Daesh (Islamic State) much earlier. WION: So you think the strategy was wrong? al-Jabouri: No, this is my view. I think the head of the snake is Mosul because it is a big city, it has good foundation, many factories and many resources. IS in Iraq and even in Syria rely on resources coming from Mosul. WION: If IS fighters manage to escape Iraq and enter Syria, will the Iraqi army follow them and help Syrian forces fight them? al-Jabouri: If my commander-in-chief gives me an order, I will follow them in Syria, in Nigeria, everywhere. (WION)

Iraqi army poised to retake 'Islamic State's last castle of Mosul', Major General Najim al-Jabouri tells WION

middle-east-0

Middle East, News on Middle East, stories on Middle East, articles on Middle East, Middle East stories at Wion, Middle East news, Middle East latest news

middle east-0