US President Joe Biden has landed at Ben Gurion Airport, Israel kicking off a four-day visit to the Middle East, his first to the region as president. The welcome ceremony has commenced with the military band playing. Watch in

Biden's West Asia Trip: US president Joe Biden lands in Israel on first Middle East tour

US President Joe Biden defended his decision to travel to Saudi Arabia saying he aims to reset ties with the crown prince. Biden will hold bilateral talks with Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz and his leadership team on his visit to the Middle East next week.

US President Biden defends visit to Saudi, says crucial for global positioning

Pixar's latest film, 'Lightyear,' has been banned in some Middle Eastern nations for its LGBTQ content as the globe celebrates Pride Month this June.

These films faced bans in the Middle East for LGBTQ themes

Scientists say they have found the origins of the black death, the health catastrophe that killed tens of millions in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa in the 14th century. What did the researchers find and where did they find it?

Did scientists find origins of black death, bubonic plague after 675 years?

A thick cloud of dust storm has hit large part of the country. Several flights have been grounded due to poor visibility. Dust storms are common in the Middle East. Iraq was hit by a series of dust storms in April. Dozens were hospitalised due to respiratory problems.

Watch: Skies in Iraq turn orange after dust storm

Russia's invasion of Ukraine is endangering more than only the lives of Ukrainians.

The war is also on course to generate a worldwide increase in severe hunger and even starvation.

Many Middle Eastern countries are concerned about an impending grain shortfall, as Russia and Ukraine jointly account for 30% of world wheat exports.

Russia is the world's greatest wheat exporter, followed by Ukraine in fourth place, and the two countries together account for 19% of global corn exports.&nbsp;

If the battle in Ukraine continues for several weeks longer, Ukrainians will be unable to plant wheat, while Western sanctions will prevent Russia from selling its produce.

As a result, grain prices will continue to climb sharply, generating sharp price increases in bread, milk, meat, and other goods.&nbsp;

Lebanon gets 81 percent of its national wheat consumption from Ukraine and 15 percent from Russia, according to figures from the FAO's 2020 balance sheet.

Egypt imports 60 percent of its wheat from Russia and 25 percent from Ukraine.

Turkey has a similar ratio: Russia accounts for 66% of wheat imports, while Ukraine accounts for 10%.

Several Middle Eastern governments, particularly those of Egypt, Lebanon, Libya, and Turkey, may find it difficult to pay for the rising grain costs and may be compelled to curtail or even eliminate bread subsidies, triggering violent popular protests that could overthrow some of them.&nbsp;

Egypt is scrambling to locate alternative wheat supplies after Russia's invasion of Ukraine placed the country's supply in peril.

Because the country imported nearly 85% of the wheat it required last year from Russia and Ukraine, Abdel Fattah al-government Sisi's will need to find alternate sources of supply as soon as possible.

The Egyptian government had to cancel an international tender for the supply of wheat from France last week because only one tender was received, rather than the statutory minimum of two, and Cairo hastened to call a new tender 48 hours later.&nbsp;

But, in view of the fact that last week the price of wheat reached a 14-year high, there is no doubt that it would have to pay much more for the same quantities.

The price of bread has been a politically explosive issue in Egypt as on several occasions in the past 50 years it triggered angry protests, to which the Police usually responded by firing shots over the heads of demonstrators. Particularly strong protests were staged in March 2017 in Alexandria, Giza and many other areas after the government cut the supply of subsidized bread amid an economic crisis.

Also during the so-called "Bread Intifada" in January 1977 violent protests broke out and the Egyptian security forces killed 70 people and wounded more than 550 protesters, but in the end the government was forced to re-institute the subsidies.

Bread subsidies are considered a red line among Egyptians and people in other countries in the Middle East, as they are a staple for every family in the region. Bread is sold at very low prices, for example, a subsidized flat loaf costs 0.05 Egyptian pounds, less than one US cent, which covers only a small part of the real cost of producing it and the government coffers cover the rest.

Lebanon is facing a huge problem with grain supplies, as it imports more than 80 per cent of the grain it needs from the Black Sea and does not have a strategic stockpile of grains due to the enormous explosion in the port of Beirut in August 2020 which destroyed its only large grain silo.

Furthermore, as its economy has been facing a large-scale, multi-dimensional crisis, including a banking collapse, a liquidity crisis, and sovereign default, it may not be able to pay the skyrocketing prices for the grain it needs.

Turkey's economy has been faltering in the past three years, and the sharp devaluation of the Turkish lira has forced the majority of its estimated 81 million people to increase consumption of wheat-based products at the expense of the protein, increasing in this way the need for grain.

Moreover, the approximately 5 million refugees hosted in Turkey have bread as their main food. All this is coupled with the fact that Turkey is a major producer of pasta, flour, biscuits and semolina. Turkey is now a key player in the international wheat market, as its grain imports have increase to record levels.

In 2021, Turkey imported 64.6 percent of its wheat from Russia and 13.4 per cent from Ukraine.

Watch | Zelensky urges people to continue resistance as Russia builds military columns near Kyiv

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/zelensky-urges-people-to-continue-resistance-as-russia-builds-military-columns-near-kyiv-459691/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Ankara would desperately need to find enough wheat to cover its needs. This year's Ukrainian harvest may be considered lost due to the war and the closing of its Black Sea and Sea of Azov ports, while Russia will find it extremely difficult to export its grain, as major shipping giants including Switzerland-based MSC, Denmark's Maersk and France's CMA CGM have announced last Tuesday that they would halt cargo bookings to and from Russia until further notice.

Currently, the world grain markets are in a paralyzing state of uncertainty. Traders do not want to make deals that may be affected by the sanctions imposed on Russia and may find themselves in trouble either with the sanctions of the international community or their clients. 
 
IN PICS |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/battle-analysis-russian-tank-armada-vs-ukraine-who-will-win-459067">Battle analysis: Russian tank armada vs Ukraine - who will win?</a>

So, apart from the serious violation of international law and the big humanitarian crisis it created, Russia's invasion of Ukraine will have serious repercussions also on the international grain markets and will affect millions of people who due to steep price rises may be forced to reduce the consumption of bread and thus may be close to famine, as in the case of Yemen. 
 
IN PICS |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/what-are-czech-hedgehogs-homemade-obstacles-that-can-destroy-russian-tanks-459254">What are Czech hedgehogs?: Homemade obstacles that can destroy Russian tanks</a>

In the end, everything will depend on how long this war will last. Russia could be able to maintain its grain production to the previous levels but would face great difficulties in exporting it, while Ukraine's grain production will disappear from the international markets at least for several months.

(With inputs from agencies)

Russia's invasion of Ukraine is endangering more than only the lives of Ukrainians. The war is also on course to generate a worldwide increase in severe hunger and even starvation.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine is endangering more than only the lives of Ukrainians. The war is also on course to generate a worldwide increase in severe hunger and even starvation. Many Middle Eastern countries are concerned about an impending grain shortfall, as Russia and Ukraine jointly account for 30% of world wheat exports. Russia is the world's greatest wheat exporter, followed by Ukraine in fourth place, and the two countries together account for 19% of global corn exports. If the battle in Ukraine continues for several weeks longer, Ukrainians will be unable to plant wheat, while Western sanctions will prevent Russia from selling its produce. As a result, grain prices will continue to climb sharply, generating sharp price increases in bread, milk, meat, and other goods. Lebanon gets 81 percent of its national wheat consumption from Ukraine and 15 percent from Russia, according to figures from the FAO's 2020 balance sheet. Egypt imports 60 percent of its wheat from Russia and 25 percent from Ukraine. Turkey has a similar ratio: Russia accounts for 66% of wheat imports, while Ukraine accounts for 10%. Several Middle Eastern governments, particularly those of Egypt, Lebanon, Libya, and Turkey, may find it difficult to pay for the rising grain costs and may be compelled to curtail or even eliminate bread subsidies, triggering violent popular protests that could overthrow some of them. Egypt is scrambling to locate alternative wheat supplies after Russia's invasion of Ukraine placed the country's supply in peril. Because the country imported nearly 85% of the wheat it required last year from Russia and Ukraine, Abdel Fattah al-government Sisi's will need to find alternate sources of supply as soon as possible. The Egyptian government had to cancel an international tender for the supply of wheat from France last week because only one tender was received, rather than the statutory minimum of two, and Cairo hastened to call a new tender 48 hours later. But, in view of the fact that last week the price of wheat reached a 14-year high, there is no doubt that it would have to pay much more for the same quantities. The price of bread has been a politically explosive issue in Egypt as on several occasions in the past 50 years it triggered angry protests, to which the Police usually responded by firing shots over the heads of demonstrators. Particularly strong protests were staged in March 2017 in Alexandria, Giza and many other areas after the government cut the supply of subsidized bread amid an economic crisis. Also during the so-called "Bread Intifada" in January 1977 violent protests broke out and the Egyptian security forces killed 70 people and wounded more than 550 protesters, but in the end the government was forced to re-institute the subsidies. Bread subsidies are considered a red line among Egyptians and people in other countries in the Middle East, as they are a staple for every family in the region. Bread is sold at very low prices, for example, a subsidized flat loaf costs 0.05 Egyptian pounds, less than one US cent, which covers only a small part of the real cost of producing it and the government coffers cover the rest. Lebanon is facing a huge problem with grain supplies, as it imports more than 80 per cent of the grain it needs from the Black Sea and does not have a strategic stockpile of grains due to the enormous explosion in the port of Beirut in August 2020 which destroyed its only large grain silo. Furthermore, as its economy has been facing a large-scale, multi-dimensional crisis, including a banking collapse, a liquidity crisis, and sovereign default, it may not be able to pay the skyrocketing prices for the grain it needs. Turkey's economy has been faltering in the past three years, and the sharp devaluation of the Turkish lira has forced the majority of its estimated 81 million people to increase consumption of wheat-based products at the expense of the protein, increasing in this way the need for grain. Moreover, the approximately 5 million refugees hosted in Turkey have bread as their main food. All this is coupled with the fact that Turkey is a major producer of pasta, flour, biscuits and semolina. Turkey is now a key player in the international wheat market, as its grain imports have increase to record levels. In 2021, Turkey imported 64.6 percent of its wheat from Russia and 13.4 per cent from Ukraine. Watch | Zelensky urges people to continue resistance as Russia builds military columns near Kyiv Ankara would desperately need to find enough wheat to cover its needs. This year's Ukrainian harvest may be considered lost due to the war and the closing of its Black Sea and Sea of Azov ports, while Russia will find it extremely difficult to export its grain, as major shipping giants including Switzerland-based MSC, Denmark's Maersk and France's CMA CGM have announced last Tuesday that they would halt cargo bookings to and from Russia until further notice. Currently, the world grain markets are in a paralyzing state of uncertainty. Traders do not want to make deals that may be affected by the sanctions imposed on Russia and may find themselves in trouble either with the sanctions of the international community or their clients. IN PICS | Battle analysis: Russian tank armada vs Ukraine - who will win? So, apart from the serious violation of international law and the big humanitarian crisis it created, Russia's invasion of Ukraine will have serious repercussions also on the international grain markets and will affect millions of people who due to steep price rises may be forced to reduce the consumption of bread and thus may be close to famine, as in the case of Yemen. IN PICS | What are Czech hedgehogs?: Homemade obstacles that can destroy Russian tanks In the end, everything will depend on how long this war will last. Russia could be able to maintain its grain production to the previous levels but would face great difficulties in exporting it, while Ukraine's grain production will disappear from the international markets at least for several months. (With inputs from agencies)

Middle East to suffer from the grain shortage: Russian attack disrupts Ukraine's supply chain

The Russian invasion into Ukraine has displaced more than a million people with millions more at risk The European Union nations have been pretty swift in their response to the Ukrainians who are crossing over the border from Ukraine into the neighbouring nations.

Europe's bias of Ukrainian: Middle east refugees still seek shelter

The Western media's coverage of the Ukraine’s refugee crisis has exposed its double standards.

About 470,000 foreign nationals, including students and migrant workers, are stranded in Ukraine and neighbouring countries should grant them refugee if they try to flee, the UN&nbsp;migration agency said on Tuesday.

"We appeal to neighbouring countries to ensure that protection and shelter and access to territory is provided to all," Safa Msehli, a spokesperson for the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), told a briefing.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-western-medias-racist-reportage-on-ukrainian-refugees-457644/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The IOM has received requests from states in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa asking for help for their nationals trying to leave Ukraine and the agency is working on a coordinated response, Msehli said. So far, 6,000 foreign nationals have managed to flee to Slovakia and Moldova, she added.

Several have shared videos and testimonies on social media, denouncing discrimination at train stations and border posts.

More than 660,000 people have fled Ukraine to neighbouring countries since Russia launched its invasion last week, the UN refugee agency said on Tuesday. That includes hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians, mostly women and children, as well as third country nationals.

Netizens have pointed out the double standard, noting that while the toll of war may be similar in the respective conflicts, the media treatment is not.

Many also drew a comparison between Europe's welcoming of Ukrainian refugees and the influx of Syrians, Iraqis and Afghans, which was declared a "migrant crisis".

Also see |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/a-new-refugee-crisis-as-russia-attacks-ukraine-thousands-flee-the-chaos-456411">A new 'refugee crisis': As Russia attacks Ukraine, thousands flee the chaos</a>

"This isn't a place, with all due respect, you know, like Iraq or Afghanistan that has seen conflict raging for decades," said Charlie D'Agata of US network CBS News.

"This is a relatively civilised, relatively European, I have to choose those words carefully too -- city where you wouldn't expect that or hope it is going to happen."

A day later, after much online furore, D'Agata apologised for his "poor choice of words".

Meanwhile, journalist Philippe Corbe said,&nbsp;"We are not talking about Syrians fleeing the bombardment of the Syrian regime, supported by Vladimir Putin.&nbsp;We are talking about Europeans who are leaving in their cars, that look like our cars... and who are just trying to save their lives."

These are just&nbsp;of many remarks on reputable media outlets drawing a line between the conflict unfolding in Ukraine and those in other parts of the world.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/ukraine-lifts-visa-requirements-for-foreigners-who-want-to-fight-against-russia-457756">Ukraine lifts visa requirements for foreigners willing to fight against Russia</a>

'Racist coverage'

The Arab and Middle Eastern Journalists' Association condemned "examples of racist news coverage that ascribes more importance to some victims of war than others".

"This type of commentary reflects the pervasive mentality in Western journalism of normalising tragedy in parts of the world such as the Middle East, Africa, South Asia and Latin America."

Political scientist Ziad Majed said that, while there was "magnificent solidarity" from the world over the Ukraine conflict, it also revealed a "shocking distinction".

The discrepancies in media treatment revealed the "dehumanisation of refugees from the Middle East", said Majed, a professor at the American University of Paris.

"When we hear some commentators speaking about 'people like us', this suggests that those coming from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan or Africa are not (like them)".

For Syrians, the disparity in media treatment is particularly striking as Russia launched a bloody intervention to prop up Bashar al-Assad's regime more than six years ago.

Before the war in Ukraine, Majed said, Syrian territory served as a "laboratory" for the Russian army, on which it "tested its arsenal and tactics".

The African Union (AU) said on Monday that it was disturbed by reports that African citizens in Ukraine are being refused the right to cross borders to safety as they try to flee the conflict in Ukraine.

Cities under siege across Ukraine are home to tens of thousands of African students studying medicine, engineering and military affairs. Morocco, Nigeria and Egypt are among the top 10 countries with foreign students in Ukraine, together supplying over 16,000 students, according to the education ministry.&nbsp;

What was meant to be a cheaper alternative to studying in Western Europe or the United States has turned overnight into a war zone as Russian tanks, planes and ships launch the biggest European invasion of another nation since World War Two.

With flights grounded, African governments thousands of miles away are struggling to support their students.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

The Western media's coverage of the Ukraine’s refugee crisis has exposed its double standards. About 470,000 foreign nationals, including students and migrant workers, are stranded in Ukraine and neighbouring countries should grant them refugee if they try to flee, the UN migration agency said on Tuesday.

The Western media's coverage of the Ukraine’s refugee crisis has exposed its double standards. About 470,000 foreign nationals, including students and migrant workers, are stranded in Ukraine and neighbouring countries should grant them refugee if they try to flee, the UN migration agency said on Tuesday. "We appeal to neighbouring countries to ensure that protection and shelter and access to territory is provided to all," Safa Msehli, a spokesperson for the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), told a briefing. The IOM has received requests from states in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa asking for help for their nationals trying to leave Ukraine and the agency is working on a coordinated response, Msehli said. So far, 6,000 foreign nationals have managed to flee to Slovakia and Moldova, she added. Several have shared videos and testimonies on social media, denouncing discrimination at train stations and border posts. More than 660,000 people have fled Ukraine to neighbouring countries since Russia launched its invasion last week, the UN refugee agency said on Tuesday. That includes hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians, mostly women and children, as well as third country nationals. Netizens have pointed out the double standard, noting that while the toll of war may be similar in the respective conflicts, the media treatment is not. Many also drew a comparison between Europe's welcoming of Ukrainian refugees and the influx of Syrians, Iraqis and Afghans, which was declared a "migrant crisis". Also see | A new 'refugee crisis': As Russia attacks Ukraine, thousands flee the chaos "This isn't a place, with all due respect, you know, like Iraq or Afghanistan that has seen conflict raging for decades," said Charlie D'Agata of US network CBS News. "This is a relatively civilised, relatively European, I have to choose those words carefully too -- city where you wouldn't expect that or hope it is going to happen." A day later, after much online furore, D'Agata apologised for his "poor choice of words". Meanwhile, journalist Philippe Corbe said, "We are not talking about Syrians fleeing the bombardment of the Syrian regime, supported by Vladimir Putin. We are talking about Europeans who are leaving in their cars, that look like our cars... and who are just trying to save their lives." These are just of many remarks on reputable media outlets drawing a line between the conflict unfolding in Ukraine and those in other parts of the world. Also read | Ukraine lifts visa requirements for foreigners willing to fight against Russia 'Racist coverage' The Arab and Middle Eastern Journalists' Association condemned "examples of racist news coverage that ascribes more importance to some victims of war than others". "This type of commentary reflects the pervasive mentality in Western journalism of normalising tragedy in parts of the world such as the Middle East, Africa, South Asia and Latin America." Political scientist Ziad Majed said that, while there was "magnificent solidarity" from the world over the Ukraine conflict, it also revealed a "shocking distinction". The discrepancies in media treatment revealed the "dehumanisation of refugees from the Middle East", said Majed, a professor at the American University of Paris. "When we hear some commentators speaking about 'people like us', this suggests that those coming from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan or Africa are not (like them)". For Syrians, the disparity in media treatment is particularly striking as Russia launched a bloody intervention to prop up Bashar al-Assad's regime more than six years ago. Before the war in Ukraine, Majed said, Syrian territory served as a "laboratory" for the Russian army, on which it "tested its arsenal and tactics". The African Union (AU) said on Monday that it was disturbed by reports that African citizens in Ukraine are being refused the right to cross borders to safety as they try to flee the conflict in Ukraine. Cities under siege across Ukraine are home to tens of thousands of African students studying medicine, engineering and military affairs. Morocco, Nigeria and Egypt are among the top 10 countries with foreign students in Ukraine, together supplying over 16,000 students, according to the education ministry. What was meant to be a cheaper alternative to studying in Western Europe or the United States has turned overnight into a war zone as Russian tanks, planes and ships launch the biggest European invasion of another nation since World War Two. With flights grounded, African governments thousands of miles away are struggling to support their students. (With inputs from agencies)

Ukraine’s refugee crisis exposes Western media's hypocrisy

Israeli&nbsp;Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said on Sunday that a U.S.-Iranian&nbsp;deal&nbsp;taking shape to revive&nbsp;Iran's 2015&nbsp;nuclear&nbsp;agreement with world powers is weaker than the original arrangement and&nbsp;would&nbsp;lead to a more violent&nbsp;Middle&nbsp;East.

The 2015&nbsp;deal&nbsp;limited&nbsp;Iran’s enrichment of uranium to make it harder for Tehran to develop material for&nbsp;nuclear&nbsp;weapons, in return for a lifting of international sanctions against Tehran.

But it has eroded since 2018 when then-President Donald Trump withdrew the United States and reimposed far-reaching sanctions on&nbsp;Iran.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/israel-sees-iran-nuclear-deal-shortly-warns-it-may-be-weaker-naftali-bennett-454791">Israel sees Iran nuclear deal 'shortly,' warns it may be 'weaker': Naftali Bennett</a>

"The emerging&nbsp;deal, as it seems, is highly likely to create a more violent, more volatile&nbsp;Middle&nbsp;East," Bennett said in a speech in Jerusalem to Jewish American leaders.

The aim of the&nbsp;nuclear&nbsp;talks in Vienna is to return to the original bargain of lifting sanctions against&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;in exchange for restrictions on its&nbsp;nuclear&nbsp;activities that extend the time it&nbsp;would&nbsp;need to produce enough enriched uranium for an atomic bomb if it chose to.

Iran&nbsp;says&nbsp;its&nbsp;nuclear&nbsp;ambitions are peaceful.

Bennett said the biggest problem in current negotiations was the possibility of the shorter timeline - two and a half years - before&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;could freely operate advanced centrifuges, since the original timeline may not be extended.

"Israel will not accept&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;as a&nbsp;nuclear&nbsp;threshold state," he said, reiterating a long-standing position, at the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. "Israel will always maintain its freedom of action to defend itself."

Watch |&nbsp;Israel PM Naftali Bennett slams emerging Nuclear Deal

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/israel-pm-naftali-bennett-slams-emerging-nuclear-deal-454922/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

&nbsp;

Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said on Sunday that a U.S.-Iranian deal taking shape to revive Iran's 2015 nuclear agreement with world powers is weaker than the original arrangement and would lead to a more violent Middle East.

Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said on Sunday that a U.S.-Iranian deal taking shape to revive Iran's 2015 nuclear agreement with world powers is weaker than the original arrangement and would lead to a more violent Middle East. The 2015 deal limited Iran’s enrichment of uranium to make it harder for Tehran to develop material for nuclear weapons, in return for a lifting of international sanctions against Tehran. But it has eroded since 2018 when then-President Donald Trump withdrew the United States and reimposed far-reaching sanctions on Iran. Also read | Israel sees Iran nuclear deal 'shortly,' warns it may be 'weaker': Naftali Bennett "The emerging deal, as it seems, is highly likely to create a more violent, more volatile Middle East," Bennett said in a speech in Jerusalem to Jewish American leaders. The aim of the nuclear talks in Vienna is to return to the original bargain of lifting sanctions against Iran in exchange for restrictions on its nuclear activities that extend the time it would need to produce enough enriched uranium for an atomic bomb if it chose to. Iran says its nuclear ambitions are peaceful. Bennett said the biggest problem in current negotiations was the possibility of the shorter timeline - two and a half years - before Iran could freely operate advanced centrifuges, since the original timeline may not be extended. "Israel will not accept Iran as a nuclear threshold state," he said, reiterating a long-standing position, at the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. "Israel will always maintain its freedom of action to defend itself." Watch | Israel PM Naftali Bennett slams emerging Nuclear Deal

Israeli PM says revived Iran nuclear deal would mean a 'more violent' Middle East

China is finding itself a 'great opportunity' to strengthen its strategic tie-ups in the Middle East as the US is now slowly withdrawing. China seeks to expand itself in the fields of energy, technology, and infrastructure.

China has started building a relationship with several countries. In January, senior representatives from Arab countries including Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey, had visited China to discuss investments in security technology, infrastructure and energy resources including oil, reports a Canada-based think tank, International Forum for Rights and Security (IFFRAS).&nbsp;

Saudi Arabia's Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud became the first foreign minister to come to China, as per IFFRAS.

A meeting between Faisal Al Saud and Wang Yi, Foreign Minister and State Councillor was held in Wuxi, Jiangsu province. As a part of the meeting, these two nations expressed their interest in each other's schemes such as "Vision 2030" and "Green Middle East."&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/chinas-pla-chopper-spotted-near-taiwan-during-routine-drills-454202">Also read |&nbsp;China's PLA chopper spotted near Taiwan during 'routine drills'</a>

An interest was also expressed in the "Belt and Road Initiative" of China.

Several other ministers who have visited China include Kuwait's Sheikh Ahmad Nasser Al-Mohammad Al-Sabah, Oman's Sayyid BadrAlbusaidi, and Baharain's Dr Abdullatif bin Rashid Al-Zayani.&nbsp;

IFFRAS analysts believe that these meetings may lead to several free trade agreements.&nbsp;

Not just physical visits, there have been many virtual meetings as well between the Arab nations and China.

China has also massively contributed to the Covid pandemic times in a bid to boost its relationship with the Middle East. As per IFFRAS, Sinopharm has developed a local Covid vaccine manufacturing plant in the Kizad zone of UAE.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

China is finding itself a 'great opportunity' to strengthen its strategic tie-ups in the Middle East as the US is now slowly withdrawing. China seeks to expand itself in the fields of energy, technology, and infrastructure.

China is finding itself a 'great opportunity' to strengthen its strategic tie-ups in the Middle East as the US is now slowly withdrawing. China seeks to expand itself in the fields of energy, technology, and infrastructure. China has started building a relationship with several countries. In January, senior representatives from Arab countries including Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey, had visited China to discuss investments in security technology, infrastructure and energy resources including oil, reports a Canada-based think tank, International Forum for Rights and Security (IFFRAS). Saudi Arabia's Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud became the first foreign minister to come to China, as per IFFRAS. A meeting between Faisal Al Saud and Wang Yi, Foreign Minister and State Councillor was held in Wuxi, Jiangsu province. As a part of the meeting, these two nations expressed their interest in each other's schemes such as "Vision 2030" and "Green Middle East." Also read | China's PLA chopper spotted near Taiwan during 'routine drills' An interest was also expressed in the "Belt and Road Initiative" of China. Several other ministers who have visited China include Kuwait's Sheikh Ahmad Nasser Al-Mohammad Al-Sabah, Oman's Sayyid BadrAlbusaidi, and Baharain's Dr Abdullatif bin Rashid Al-Zayani. IFFRAS analysts believe that these meetings may lead to several free trade agreements. Not just physical visits, there have been many virtual meetings as well between the Arab nations and China. China has also massively contributed to the Covid pandemic times in a bid to boost its relationship with the Middle East. As per IFFRAS, Sinopharm has developed a local Covid vaccine manufacturing plant in the Kizad zone of UAE. (With inputs from agencies)

To replace US, China aims to strengthen relations in Middle East: Report

Gulf envoys stressed Monday that women must be able to work and go to school, in talks with the Taliban foreign minister as Afghanistan's hardline Islamic rulers made a new bid to unblock foreign aid.

Amir Khan Muttaqi, a key member of the Taliban leadership that took over Kabul six months ago, met in Doha with ambassadors from the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) on the first full day of his latest mission, where he is also to hold talks with European envoys.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/taliban-al-qaida-let-jem-links-concerning-says-unscs-counter-terror-committee-chair-tirumurti-453293" hreflang="en">Taliban, Al Qaida and LeT, JeM links concerning: TS Tirumurti</a>

The Taliban have been struggling to unfreeze billions of dollars of assets abroad and get sanctions lifted as it faces pressure over its treatment of women and supporters of the Western-backed government toppled last year.

The Taliban tweeted pictures of the smiling foreign minister entering Monday's meeting with representatives from Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. But diplomats said no promises were made by Afghan officials inside.

Arab envoys emphasised the need to help Afghanistan's "urgent humanitarian needs" as the country confronts widespread hunger caused by drought as well as an economic crisis that has driven up chronic unemployment, said a GCC statement.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/taliban-detain-29-women-and-their-families-in-kabul-claims-us-diplomat-452857" hreflang="en">Taliban detain 29 women and their families in Kabul, claims US diplomat</a>

While highlighting that there should be "non-interference" in Afghanistan's affairs, they "stressed" the importance of a national reconciliation plan that "takes into consideration the interests of all components of society and respects basic freedoms and rights, including women's right to work and education".

The ambassadors also raised fears that "terrorist groups may be able to launch attacks from Afghanistan's territory against other countries".&nbsp;

They insisted that the country must not be exploited to fuel the illegal drugs trade.

Muttaqi, who is to hold a key meeting with European nations and other international representatives on Wednesday, made no comment after the meeting.&nbsp;

No country has yet recognised the Taliban government and the latest talks came only days after President Joe Biden said that $7 billion held in US banks would be split between a fund to aid Afghanistan and to compensate victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

European governments and international finance institutions are also holding back billions in aid.&nbsp;

Gulf envoys stressed Monday that women must be able to work and go to school, in talks with the Taliban foreign minister as Afghanistan's hardline Islamic rulers made a new bid to unblock foreign aid.

Gulf envoys stressed Monday that women must be able to work and go to school, in talks with the Taliban foreign minister as Afghanistan's hardline Islamic rulers made a new bid to unblock foreign aid. Amir Khan Muttaqi, a key member of the Taliban leadership that took over Kabul six months ago, met in Doha with ambassadors from the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) on the first full day of his latest mission, where he is also to hold talks with European envoys. Also read | Taliban, Al Qaida and LeT, JeM links concerning: TS Tirumurti The Taliban have been struggling to unfreeze billions of dollars of assets abroad and get sanctions lifted as it faces pressure over its treatment of women and supporters of the Western-backed government toppled last year. The Taliban tweeted pictures of the smiling foreign minister entering Monday's meeting with representatives from Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. But diplomats said no promises were made by Afghan officials inside. Arab envoys emphasised the need to help Afghanistan's "urgent humanitarian needs" as the country confronts widespread hunger caused by drought as well as an economic crisis that has driven up chronic unemployment, said a GCC statement. Also read | Taliban detain 29 women and their families in Kabul, claims US diplomat While highlighting that there should be "non-interference" in Afghanistan's affairs, they "stressed" the importance of a national reconciliation plan that "takes into consideration the interests of all components of society and respects basic freedoms and rights, including women's right to work and education". The ambassadors also raised fears that "terrorist groups may be able to launch attacks from Afghanistan's territory against other countries". They insisted that the country must not be exploited to fuel the illegal drugs trade. Muttaqi, who is to hold a key meeting with European nations and other international representatives on Wednesday, made no comment after the meeting. No country has yet recognised the Taliban government and the latest talks came only days after President Joe Biden said that $7 billion held in US banks would be split between a fund to aid Afghanistan and to compensate victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks. European governments and international finance institutions are also holding back billions in aid.

Arab states stress women's rights to Taliban in aid talks

The next leader of the Islamic&nbsp;State&nbsp;is likely to be from a close circle of battle-hardened Iraqi jihadists who emerged in the aftermath of the 2003 US&nbsp;invasion, two Iraqi security officials and three independent analysts said.

The group of potential successors to Abu Ibrahim al-Quraishi, who blew himself up during a US&nbsp;operation to capture him in Syria last week, includes one commander whom Washington and Baghdad declared killed last year, the Iraqi officials said.

The death of Quraishi, 45, was another crushing blow to IS two years after the violent Sunni Muslim group lost longtime leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in a similar raid in 2019.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/al-qaedas-zawahiri-surfaces-in-video-again-calls-on-muslims-to-champion-cause-of-oppressed-451610">Also read |&nbsp;Al Qaeda's Zawahiri surfaces in video again; calls on Muslims to champion cause of 'oppressed'</a>

Quraishi, an Iraqi, never publicly addressed his fighters or followers, avoided electronic communications and oversaw a move to fighting in small devolved units in response to intense pressure from Iraqi and US-led forces.

But those following&nbsp;Islamic&nbsp;State&nbsp;closely expect it to name a successor in coming weeks, as the group which imposed brutal rule over vast swathes of Iraq and Syria from 2014 to 2017 continues a stubborn and deadly insurgency INSIGHT-Islamic&nbsp;State&nbsp;hits back, aided by power vacuum in Iraq and Syria in the Middle East.

Fadhil Abu Rgheef, an Iraqi expert who advises its security services, said there were at least four possible successors.

"These include ... Abu Khadija, whose last known role was Iraq leader for&nbsp;Islamic&nbsp;State, Abu Muslim, its leader for Anbar province, and another called Abu Salih, of whom there's very little information but who was close to Baghdadi and Quraishi," he said.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/islamic-state-claims-responsibility-for-causing-kabul-power-outage-423341">Also read |&nbsp;Islamic State claims responsibility for causing Kabul power outage</a>

"There's also Abu Yassir al-Issawi, who is suspected to be still alive. He's valuable to the group as he has long military experience."

Issawi's death in an air strike in January 2021 was reported at the time by both Iraqi forces as well as the U.S.-led military coalition fighting&nbsp;Islamic&nbsp;State&nbsp;in Iraq and Syria.

But an Iraqi security official confirmed there were strong suspicions Issawi is still alive. "If he's not dead he'd be a candidate, he's tried and tested in planning military attacks and has thousands of supporters," the official said.

Security sweep

The official added that&nbsp;Islamic&nbsp;State&nbsp;was likely carrying out a security sweep for potential leaks that led to the death of Quraishi before convening to choose or announce a successor.

Hassan Hassan, editor of New Lines magazine which has published research on Quraishi, said the new leader would be a veteran Iraqi jihadist.

"If they choose one in the coming weeks they'll have to choose someone from among the same circle ... the group that was part of the Anbari group which operated under (the name) ISIS since the early days," he said.

Islamic&nbsp;State&nbsp;emerged from the militants that waged an increasingly Sunni Islamist, sectarian-driven insurgency against U.S. troops and Iraqi forces after 2003.

The&nbsp;Islamic&nbsp;State&nbsp;of Iraq, also known as al Qaeda in Iraq, was an offshoot of the global al Qaeda organisation of Osama Bin Laden and the precursor to ISIS, which took shape in the chaos of Syria's civil war across the border.

Baghdadi and Quraishi, both members of al Qaeda in Iraq from the start, did time in U.S. detention in the mid-2000s. In contrast, none of the four potential successors to Quraishi had been captured by US&nbsp;forces, one security official and one army colonel told Reuters.

Officials and analysts in various countries agree&nbsp;Islamic&nbsp;State&nbsp;is under more pressure than it's ever been and will never restore its self-styled caliphate. But they are divided on how significant a setback Quraishi's death is for the group.

Some say the fight against ISIS will suck in the United&nbsp;States and its allies for years to come as it develops into a permanent insurgency with new leaders ready to take the reins.

"In Syria,&nbsp;Islamic&nbsp;State&nbsp;units work as a devolved network of individual groups in order to avoid them being targeted. We don't therefore believe that Quraishi's death will have an enormous impact," one of the Iraqi security officials said.

"It's also become more difficult to follow them because they've long stopped using mobile phones for communication."

Since their territorial defeat in Iraq in 2017 and Syria in 2019,&nbsp;Islamic&nbsp;State&nbsp;leaders have found it increasingly easy to move between the two countries, helped by a gap in areas of control between different armed forces, some officials say.

Security and military officials said the 600 km (372 mile)long border with Syria made it a very hard for Iraqi forces to prevent militants infiltrating via underground tunnels.

New leadership style

Lahur Talabany, former counter-terrorism chief for Iraq's autonomous Kurdistan region, said some IS leaders can travel on a route across the full expanse of Iraq.

"When you see attacks increasing in a particular area I wouldn't be surprised if somebody important has been through that region," he told Reuters. "The caliphate was defeated but ISIS was never eradicated. I don't believe we managed to finish the job."

Islamic&nbsp;State’s possession of land in Iraq and Syria set it apart from other like-minded groups such as al Qaeda and became central to its mission when it declared a caliphate in 2014, claiming sovereignty over all Muslim lands and peoples.

Fiercely anti-Western, the group also draws on Sunni-Shi’ite tensions, saying Shi’ites were infidels who deserve to be killed.

Abu Rgheef said the new leader could have stronger military credentials than Quraishi, who Iraqi officials say was seen by followers as more of an&nbsp;Islamic&nbsp;legal mind than a military man.

"Attacks and operations will change in character depending on the style of the new leader. The new one might believe in big and intensive attacks, bombs or suicide bombers," he said.

Despite Quraishi's low profile and operational secrecy, his killing is likely to affect the group's fighters, analysts say.

Hassan said Quraishi's removal would reduce morale. "ISIS is also locked into personalities and who's most trusted," he said.

Aaron Zelin, senior fellow at the Washington Institute, said a figurehead is very important to ISIS.

"Whenever a leader of the group is killed, your oath is to the (next) leader, the individual themselves, and not to the group."

The next leader of the Islamic State is likely to be from a close circle of battle-hardened Iraqi jihadists who emerged in the aftermath of the 2003 US invasion, two Iraqi security officials and three independent analysts said.

The next leader of the Islamic State is likely to be from a close circle of battle-hardened Iraqi jihadists who emerged in the aftermath of the 2003 US invasion, two Iraqi security officials and three independent analysts said. The group of potential successors to Abu Ibrahim al-Quraishi, who blew himself up during a US operation to capture him in Syria last week, includes one commander whom Washington and Baghdad declared killed last year, the Iraqi officials said. The death of Quraishi, 45, was another crushing blow to IS two years after the violent Sunni Muslim group lost longtime leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in a similar raid in 2019. Also read | Al Qaeda's Zawahiri surfaces in video again; calls on Muslims to champion cause of 'oppressed' Quraishi, an Iraqi, never publicly addressed his fighters or followers, avoided electronic communications and oversaw a move to fighting in small devolved units in response to intense pressure from Iraqi and US-led forces. But those following Islamic State closely expect it to name a successor in coming weeks, as the group which imposed brutal rule over vast swathes of Iraq and Syria from 2014 to 2017 continues a stubborn and deadly insurgency INSIGHT-Islamic State hits back, aided by power vacuum in Iraq and Syria in the Middle East. Fadhil Abu Rgheef, an Iraqi expert who advises its security services, said there were at least four possible successors. "These include ... Abu Khadija, whose last known role was Iraq leader for Islamic State, Abu Muslim, its leader for Anbar province, and another called Abu Salih, of whom there's very little information but who was close to Baghdadi and Quraishi," he said. Also read | Islamic State claims responsibility for causing Kabul power outage "There's also Abu Yassir al-Issawi, who is suspected to be still alive. He's valuable to the group as he has long military experience." Issawi's death in an air strike in January 2021 was reported at the time by both Iraqi forces as well as the U.S.-led military coalition fighting Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. But an Iraqi security official confirmed there were strong suspicions Issawi is still alive. "If he's not dead he'd be a candidate, he's tried and tested in planning military attacks and has thousands of supporters," the official said. Security sweep The official added that Islamic State was likely carrying out a security sweep for potential leaks that led to the death of Quraishi before convening to choose or announce a successor. Hassan Hassan, editor of New Lines magazine which has published research on Quraishi, said the new leader would be a veteran Iraqi jihadist. "If they choose one in the coming weeks they'll have to choose someone from among the same circle ... the group that was part of the Anbari group which operated under (the name) ISIS since the early days," he said. Islamic State emerged from the militants that waged an increasingly Sunni Islamist, sectarian-driven insurgency against U.S. troops and Iraqi forces after 2003. The Islamic State of Iraq, also known as al Qaeda in Iraq, was an offshoot of the global al Qaeda organisation of Osama Bin Laden and the precursor to ISIS, which took shape in the chaos of Syria's civil war across the border. Baghdadi and Quraishi, both members of al Qaeda in Iraq from the start, did time in U.S. detention in the mid-2000s. In contrast, none of the four potential successors to Quraishi had been captured by US forces, one security official and one army colonel told Reuters. Officials and analysts in various countries agree Islamic State is under more pressure than it's ever been and will never restore its self-styled caliphate. But they are divided on how significant a setback Quraishi's death is for the group. Some say the fight against ISIS will suck in the United States and its allies for years to come as it develops into a permanent insurgency with new leaders ready to take the reins. "In Syria, Islamic State units work as a devolved network of individual groups in order to avoid them being targeted. We don't therefore believe that Quraishi's death will have an enormous impact," one of the Iraqi security officials said. "It's also become more difficult to follow them because they've long stopped using mobile phones for communication." Since their territorial defeat in Iraq in 2017 and Syria in 2019, Islamic State leaders have found it increasingly easy to move between the two countries, helped by a gap in areas of control between different armed forces, some officials say. Security and military officials said the 600 km (372 mile)long border with Syria made it a very hard for Iraqi forces to prevent militants infiltrating via underground tunnels. New leadership style Lahur Talabany, former counter-terrorism chief for Iraq's autonomous Kurdistan region, said some IS leaders can travel on a route across the full expanse of Iraq. "When you see attacks increasing in a particular area I wouldn't be surprised if somebody important has been through that region," he told Reuters. "The caliphate was defeated but ISIS was never eradicated. I don't believe we managed to finish the job." Islamic State’s possession of land in Iraq and Syria set it apart from other like-minded groups such as al Qaeda and became central to its mission when it declared a caliphate in 2014, claiming sovereignty over all Muslim lands and peoples. Fiercely anti-Western, the group also draws on Sunni-Shi’ite tensions, saying Shi’ites were infidels who deserve to be killed. Abu Rgheef said the new leader could have stronger military credentials than Quraishi, who Iraqi officials say was seen by followers as more of an Islamic legal mind than a military man. "Attacks and operations will change in character depending on the style of the new leader. The new one might believe in big and intensive attacks, bombs or suicide bombers," he said. Despite Quraishi's low profile and operational secrecy, his killing is likely to affect the group's fighters, analysts say. Hassan said Quraishi's removal would reduce morale. "ISIS is also locked into personalities and who's most trusted," he said. Aaron Zelin, senior fellow at the Washington Institute, said a figurehead is very important to ISIS. "Whenever a leader of the group is killed, your oath is to the (next) leader, the individual themselves, and not to the group."

Islamic State likely to pick battle-hardened Iraqi as next leader: Report

Pentagon documents show that the US air wars in the Middle East have been marked by "deeply flawed intelligence" and resulted in thousands of civilian deaths, including children.

'Deeply Flawed' US Air Wars In Middle East, reads Pentagon Documents

It may not have been planned or coordinated but efforts by Middle Eastern states to dial down tensions serve as an example of what happens when big power interests coincide.

It also provides evidence of the potentially positive fallout of a lower US profile in the region.

Afghanistan, the United States’ chaotic withdrawal notwithstanding, could emerge as another example of the positive impact when global interests coincide. That is if the Taliban prove willing and capable of policing militant groups to ensure that they don’t strike beyond the Central Asian nation’s borders or at embassies and other foreign targets in the country.

Analysts credit the coming to office of US President Joe Biden with a focus on Asia rather than the Middle East and growing uncertainty about his commitment to the security of the Gulf for efforts to reduce tensions by Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirate and Egypt on the one hand and on the other, Turkey, Iran, and Qatar. Those efforts resulted in the lifting, early this year, of the Saudi-UAE-Egyptian-led economic and diplomatic boycott of Qatar.

Doubts about the United States’ commitment also played an important role in efforts to shore up or formalise alliances like the establishment of diplomatic relations with Israel by the UAE and Bahrain.

For its part, Saudi Arabia has de facto acknowledged its ties with the Jewish state even if Riyadh is not about to formally establish relations. In a sign of the times, that did not stop then Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu from last year visiting the kingdom.

To be sure, changes in Washington’s priorities impact regional defence strategies and postures given that the United States has a significant military presence in the Middle East and serves as its sole security guarantor.

Yet, what rings alarm bells in Gulf capitals also sparks concerns in Beijing, which depends to a significant degree on the flow of its trade and energy from and through Middle Eastern waters, and Moscow with its own security concerns and geopolitical aspirations.

Little surprise that Russia and China, each in their own way and independent of the United States, over the last year echoed the United States’ message that the Middle East needs to get its act together.

Eager to change rather than reform the world order, Russia proposed an all-new regional security architecture modelled on the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) adding not only Russia but also China, India, and Europe to the mix.

China, determined to secure its proper place in the new world order rather than fundamentally altering it, sent smoke signals through its academics and analysts that conveyed a double-barrelled message. On the one hand, China suggested that the Middle East did not rank high on its agenda. In other words, the Middle East would have to act to climb Beijing’s totem pole.

“For China, the Middle East is always on the very distant back burner of China’s strategic global strategies,” Niu Xinchun, director of Middle East Studies at China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR), China’s most prestigious think tank, told a webinar last year.

Prominent Chinese scholars Sun Degang and Wu Sike provided months later a carrot to accompany Mr. Niu’s stick. Taking the opposite tack, they argued that the Middle East was a “key region in big power diplomacy with Chinese characteristics in a new era.”

Chinese characteristics, they said, would involve “seeking common ground while reserving differences,” a formula that implies conflict management rather than conflict resolution.

On that basis, the two scholars suggest, Chinese engagement in Middle Eastern security would seek to build an inclusive and shared regional collective security mechanism based on fairness, justice, multilateralism, comprehensive governance, and the containment of differences.

In the final analysis, Chinese and Russian signalling that there was an unspoken big power consensus likely reinforced American messaging and gave Middle Eastern states a further nudge to change course and demonstrate a willingness to control tensions and differences.

Implicit in the unspoken big power consensus was not only the need to dial down tensions but also the projection of a reduced, not an eliminated, US presence in the Middle East.

While there has been little real on-the-ground reduction of US forces, just talking about it seemingly opened pathways. It altered the US’ weighting in the equation.

“The US has a habit of seeing itself as indispensable to regional stability around the world, when in fact its intervention can be very destabilising because it becomes part of the local equation rather than sitting above it,” noted Raad Alkadiri, an international risk consultant.

While important, the United States’ willingness to get out of the way is no guarantee that talks will do anything more than at best avert conflicts spinning out of control.

Saudi and Iranian leaders and officials have sought to put a positive spin on several rounds of direct and indirect talks between the two rivals.

Yet, more important than the talk of progress, expressions of willingness to bury hatchets, and toning down of rhetoric is Saudi King Salman’s insistence in remarks last month to the United Nations General Assembly on the need to build trust.

The monarch suggested that could be achieved by Iran ceasing "all types of support" for armed groups in the region, including the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and pro-Iranian militias in Iraq.

The potential monkey wrench is not just the improbability of Iran making meaningful concessions to improve relations but also the fact that the chances are fading for a revival of the 2015 international agreement that curbed Iran’s nuclear program.

“We have to prepare for a world where Iran doesn’t have constraints on its nuclear program and we have to consider options for dealing with that. This is what we are doing while we hope they do go back to the deal,” said US negotiator Rob Malley.

Already, Israeli politicians, unhappy with the original nuclear deal and the Biden administration's effort to revive it, are taking a more alarmist view than may be prevalent in their intelligence services.

In Washington this week, Foreign Minister Yair Lapid told US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan that Iran was “becoming a nuclear threshold state.” Back home Yossi Cohen, a close confidante of Mr Netanyahu, who stepped down in June as head of the Mossad, asserted at the same time that Iran was “no closer than before” to obtaining a nuclear weapon.

There is no doubt, however that both men agree that Israel retains the option of a military strike against Iran. "Israel reserves the right to act at any moment in any way," Mr. Lapid told his American interlocutors as they sought to resolve differences of how to deal with Iran if a revival of the agreement proves elusive.

Meanwhile, a foreplay of the fallout of a potential failure to put a nuclear deal in place is playing out on multiple fronts. Tension have been rising along the border between Iran and Azerbaijan.

Iran sees closer Azerbaijani-Israeli relations as part of an effort to encircle it and fears that the Caucasian state would be a staging ground for Israeli operations against the Islamic republic. Iran and Azerbaijan agreed this week to hold talks to reduce the friction.

At the same time, Iran, Turkey and Israel have been engaged in a shadow boxing match in predominantly Kurdish northern Iraq while a poll showed half of Israeli Jews believe that attacking Iran early on rather than negotiating a deal would have been a better approach.

Taken together, these factors cast a shadow over optimism that the Middle East is pulling back from the brink. They suggest that coordinated big power leadership is what could make the difference as the Middle East balances between forging a path towards stability and waging a continuous covert war and potentially an overt one.

A Johns Hopkins University Iran research program suggested that a US return to the nuclear deal may be the catalyst for cooperation with Europe, China, and Russia.

“Should the United States refuse to re-join the agreement following sufficient attempts by Iran to demonstrate flexibility in their negotiating posture, Russia and China will ramp up their economic and security cooperation with Iran in a manner fundamentally opposed to US interests,” the program warned.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh announced this week that Russia and Iran were finalizing a ‘Global Agreement for Cooperation between Iran and Russia’ along the lines of a &nbsp;similar 25-year agreement between China and the Islamic republic last year that has yet to get legs.

Even so, Iran scored an important victory when the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in which China and Russia loom large last month agreed to process Iran’s application for membership.

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.) 
&nbsp;

It may not have been planned or coordinated but efforts by Middle Eastern states to dial down tensions serve as an example of what happens when big power interests coincide.

It may not have been planned or coordinated but efforts by Middle Eastern states to dial down tensions serve as an example of what happens when big power interests coincide. It also provides evidence of the potentially positive fallout of a lower US profile in the region. Afghanistan, the United States’ chaotic withdrawal notwithstanding, could emerge as another example of the positive impact when global interests coincide. That is if the Taliban prove willing and capable of policing militant groups to ensure that they don’t strike beyond the Central Asian nation’s borders or at embassies and other foreign targets in the country. Analysts credit the coming to office of US President Joe Biden with a focus on Asia rather than the Middle East and growing uncertainty about his commitment to the security of the Gulf for efforts to reduce tensions by Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirate and Egypt on the one hand and on the other, Turkey, Iran, and Qatar. Those efforts resulted in the lifting, early this year, of the Saudi-UAE-Egyptian-led economic and diplomatic boycott of Qatar. Doubts about the United States’ commitment also played an important role in efforts to shore up or formalise alliances like the establishment of diplomatic relations with Israel by the UAE and Bahrain. For its part, Saudi Arabia has de facto acknowledged its ties with the Jewish state even if Riyadh is not about to formally establish relations. In a sign of the times, that did not stop then Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu from last year visiting the kingdom. To be sure, changes in Washington’s priorities impact regional defence strategies and postures given that the United States has a significant military presence in the Middle East and serves as its sole security guarantor. Yet, what rings alarm bells in Gulf capitals also sparks concerns in Beijing, which depends to a significant degree on the flow of its trade and energy from and through Middle Eastern waters, and Moscow with its own security concerns and geopolitical aspirations. Little surprise that Russia and China, each in their own way and independent of the United States, over the last year echoed the United States’ message that the Middle East needs to get its act together. Eager to change rather than reform the world order, Russia proposed an all-new regional security architecture modelled on the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) adding not only Russia but also China, India, and Europe to the mix. China, determined to secure its proper place in the new world order rather than fundamentally altering it, sent smoke signals through its academics and analysts that conveyed a double-barrelled message. On the one hand, China suggested that the Middle East did not rank high on its agenda. In other words, the Middle East would have to act to climb Beijing’s totem pole. “For China, the Middle East is always on the very distant back burner of China’s strategic global strategies,” Niu Xinchun, director of Middle East Studies at China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR), China’s most prestigious think tank, told a webinar last year. Prominent Chinese scholars Sun Degang and Wu Sike provided months later a carrot to accompany Mr. Niu’s stick. Taking the opposite tack, they argued that the Middle East was a “key region in big power diplomacy with Chinese characteristics in a new era.” Chinese characteristics, they said, would involve “seeking common ground while reserving differences,” a formula that implies conflict management rather than conflict resolution. On that basis, the two scholars suggest, Chinese engagement in Middle Eastern security would seek to build an inclusive and shared regional collective security mechanism based on fairness, justice, multilateralism, comprehensive governance, and the containment of differences. In the final analysis, Chinese and Russian signalling that there was an unspoken big power consensus likely reinforced American messaging and gave Middle Eastern states a further nudge to change course and demonstrate a willingness to control tensions and differences. Implicit in the unspoken big power consensus was not only the need to dial down tensions but also the projection of a reduced, not an eliminated, US presence in the Middle East. While there has been little real on-the-ground reduction of US forces, just talking about it seemingly opened pathways. It altered the US’ weighting in the equation. “The US has a habit of seeing itself as indispensable to regional stability around the world, when in fact its intervention can be very destabilising because it becomes part of the local equation rather than sitting above it,” noted Raad Alkadiri, an international risk consultant. While important, the United States’ willingness to get out of the way is no guarantee that talks will do anything more than at best avert conflicts spinning out of control. Saudi and Iranian leaders and officials have sought to put a positive spin on several rounds of direct and indirect talks between the two rivals. Yet, more important than the talk of progress, expressions of willingness to bury hatchets, and toning down of rhetoric is Saudi King Salman’s insistence in remarks last month to the United Nations General Assembly on the need to build trust. The monarch suggested that could be achieved by Iran ceasing "all types of support" for armed groups in the region, including the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and pro-Iranian militias in Iraq. The potential monkey wrench is not just the improbability of Iran making meaningful concessions to improve relations but also the fact that the chances are fading for a revival of the 2015 international agreement that curbed Iran’s nuclear program. “We have to prepare for a world where Iran doesn’t have constraints on its nuclear program and we have to consider options for dealing with that. This is what we are doing while we hope they do go back to the deal,” said US negotiator Rob Malley. Already, Israeli politicians, unhappy with the original nuclear deal and the Biden administration's effort to revive it, are taking a more alarmist view than may be prevalent in their intelligence services. In Washington this week, Foreign Minister Yair Lapid told US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan that Iran was “becoming a nuclear threshold state.” Back home Yossi Cohen, a close confidante of Mr Netanyahu, who stepped down in June as head of the Mossad, asserted at the same time that Iran was “no closer than before” to obtaining a nuclear weapon. There is no doubt, however that both men agree that Israel retains the option of a military strike against Iran. "Israel reserves the right to act at any moment in any way," Mr. Lapid told his American interlocutors as they sought to resolve differences of how to deal with Iran if a revival of the agreement proves elusive. Meanwhile, a foreplay of the fallout of a potential failure to put a nuclear deal in place is playing out on multiple fronts. Tension have been rising along the border between Iran and Azerbaijan. Iran sees closer Azerbaijani-Israeli relations as part of an effort to encircle it and fears that the Caucasian state would be a staging ground for Israeli operations against the Islamic republic. Iran and Azerbaijan agreed this week to hold talks to reduce the friction. At the same time, Iran, Turkey and Israel have been engaged in a shadow boxing match in predominantly Kurdish northern Iraq while a poll showed half of Israeli Jews believe that attacking Iran early on rather than negotiating a deal would have been a better approach. Taken together, these factors cast a shadow over optimism that the Middle East is pulling back from the brink. They suggest that coordinated big power leadership is what could make the difference as the Middle East balances between forging a path towards stability and waging a continuous covert war and potentially an overt one. A Johns Hopkins University Iran research program suggested that a US return to the nuclear deal may be the catalyst for cooperation with Europe, China, and Russia. “Should the United States refuse to re-join the agreement following sufficient attempts by Iran to demonstrate flexibility in their negotiating posture, Russia and China will ramp up their economic and security cooperation with Iran in a manner fundamentally opposed to US interests,” the program warned. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh announced this week that Russia and Iran were finalizing a ‘Global Agreement for Cooperation between Iran and Russia’ along the lines of a similar 25-year agreement between China and the Islamic republic last year that has yet to get legs. Even so, Iran scored an important victory when the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in which China and Russia loom large last month agreed to process Iran’s application for membership. (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinion | US military presence in the Middle East: The less the better

Expressing concern over the recent escalation at the Gaza strip,&nbsp;India's foreign secretary Harsh Shringla on Monday called on all the parties to exercise restraint and maintain ceasefire along the region.

Addressing the United Nations Security Council's (UNSC) monthly meeting on the Middle East Peace Process, he said, "We call on all parties to the conflict to respect the ceasefire and refrain from acts that could exacerbate tensions and worsen the security situation&nbsp;and recognise the efforts made by the UN and regional countries to prevent the renewed hostilities from escalating into another military conflict."

In May this year, a full-blown crisis erupted&nbsp;between Israel and Palestine, which lasted for 11 days. The situation escalated following violence in Jerusalem and the possible eviction of Palestinians from Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan neighbourhoods. Over 250 Palestinians died in Gaza and 10 Israelis died in the rocket firing.

On the current situation in the Palestinian territories, Shringla called for "regular and predictable transfer of aid and other essential items to Gaza to ease the humanitarian situation"&nbsp;and "facilitate early reconstruction, as well as for appropriate use of such aid".&nbsp;

He pointed out that it is "important that the international community support&nbsp;the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip through the Palestinian Authority."&nbsp;

He also took note of the "incremental relaxation of restrictions on the entry of commodities into the Gaza Strip"&nbsp;and urged&nbsp;the parties to work together and ensure timely access to such relief for the Palestinians.

Recently, Israel, Qatar and the United Nations had reached an agreement to transfer cash payments to the "needy Palestinian families" in the Gaza Strip. Under the proposed agreement, around 1,00,000 families would get a monthly cash assistance of $100.

During the address, India asked both parties to "refrain from unilateral measures that undermine the viability of the two-state solution".&nbsp;

In his speech, Shringla noted that the decision by Israel to increase the number of work permits issued to Palestinians will help strengthen both the Palestinian and Israeli economies.

“Further, the recognition of COVID-vaccination certificates issued by the Palestinian Authority and the facilitation of passage of patients from the Gaza Strip to the West Bank are also positive signals,” he said.

During the address, the foreign secretary also reiterated calls for "resumption of direct peace negotiations" and a "long-standing and firm commitment to the establishment of a sovereign, independent, and viable State of Palestine, within secure, recognized, and mutually agreed borders, living side by side with Israel in peace and security".

Foreign secretary Harsh Shringla chaired the meeting as the president of the council. India is the president of the UNSC for the month of August and&nbsp;as the president, it decides the issues that need&nbsp;to be taken up by the council. He will be the president of the top UN body in December 2022.

Expressing concern over the recent escalation at the Gaza strip, India's foreign secretary Harsh Shringla on Monday called on all the parties to exercise restraint and maintain ceasefire along the region.

Expressing concern over the recent escalation at the Gaza strip, India's foreign secretary Harsh Shringla on Monday called on all the parties to exercise restraint and maintain ceasefire along the region. Addressing the United Nations Security Council's (UNSC) monthly meeting on the Middle East Peace Process, he said, "We call on all parties to the conflict to respect the ceasefire and refrain from acts that could exacerbate tensions and worsen the security situation and recognise the efforts made by the UN and regional countries to prevent the renewed hostilities from escalating into another military conflict." In May this year, a full-blown crisis erupted between Israel and Palestine, which lasted for 11 days. The situation escalated following violence in Jerusalem and the possible eviction of Palestinians from Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan neighbourhoods. Over 250 Palestinians died in Gaza and 10 Israelis died in the rocket firing. On the current situation in the Palestinian territories, Shringla called for "regular and predictable transfer of aid and other essential items to Gaza to ease the humanitarian situation" and "facilitate early reconstruction, as well as for appropriate use of such aid". He pointed out that it is "important that the international community support the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip through the Palestinian Authority." He also took note of the "incremental relaxation of restrictions on the entry of commodities into the Gaza Strip" and urged the parties to work together and ensure timely access to such relief for the Palestinians. Recently, Israel, Qatar and the United Nations had reached an agreement to transfer cash payments to the "needy Palestinian families" in the Gaza Strip. Under the proposed agreement, around 1,00,000 families would get a monthly cash assistance of $100. During the address, India asked both parties to "refrain from unilateral measures that undermine the viability of the two-state solution". In his speech, Shringla noted that the decision by Israel to increase the number of work permits issued to Palestinians will help strengthen both the Palestinian and Israeli economies. “Further, the recognition of COVID-vaccination certificates issued by the Palestinian Authority and the facilitation of passage of patients from the Gaza Strip to the West Bank are also positive signals,” he said. During the address, the foreign secretary also reiterated calls for "resumption of direct peace negotiations" and a "long-standing and firm commitment to the establishment of a sovereign, independent, and viable State of Palestine, within secure, recognized, and mutually agreed borders, living side by side with Israel in peace and security". Foreign secretary Harsh Shringla chaired the meeting as the president of the council. India is the president of the UNSC for the month of August and as the president, it decides the issues that need to be taken up by the council. He will be the president of the top UN body in December 2022.

At UNSC, India's foreign secretary calls on Israel and Palestine to exercise restraint

Iraq hosted a regional summit aimed at easing tensions in the Middle East while emphasising the Arab country’s new role as a mediator.

Iranian, Gulf Arab officials meet in Baghdad

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan has been invited to the ‘Middle East Green Initiative Summit’ by Saudi Arabia on Friday. The summit will be held in October.&nbsp;

The invitation for the prime minister was delivered at his office by Saudi Ambassador Nawaf bin Saeed Ahmad Al-Malkiy, a Dawn report said. In a statement, the PM Office said, Khan has accepted the invitation.&nbsp;

Earlier, Saudi Arabia had announced 118 humanitarian projects worth over $123 million for cash-strapped Pakistan in food security, health, education and water during Prime Minister Imran Khan's two-day visit, according to a report.&nbsp;

The King Salman Humanitarian Aid and Relief Center (KSrelief)'s Supervisor General Dr Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Rabeeah said that the assistance was announced in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.&nbsp;

He said that the kingdom has provided medical and preventive aid worth over USD 1.5 million to combat the pandemic.&nbsp;

Prior to this, both countries had vowed to reset ties, which had been strained over policy disagreements on Kashmir issue.&nbsp;

In a sharply worded statement in August last year, Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi called on the Saudi-based Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to convene a high-level meeting on Kashmir. &nbsp;

The call raised eyebrows in Riyadh, where it was widely seen as a warning that Pakistan was preparing to call for a session outside OIC auspices. &nbsp;

Saudi Arabia prides itself on its role as guardian of Islam's holiest sites and is particularly sensitive about any move that might undermine its leadership of the 57-member pan-Islamic body. &nbsp;

And while the wealthy nation has supported Pakistan with billions of dollars in aid and loans in recent years, observers say the kingdom is also keen not to upset India, a key business partner and importer of Saudi oil.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan has been invited to the ‘Middle East Green Initiative Summit’ by Saudi Arabia on Friday. The summit will be held in October.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan has been invited to the ‘Middle East Green Initiative Summit’ by Saudi Arabia on Friday. The summit will be held in October. The invitation for the prime minister was delivered at his office by Saudi Ambassador Nawaf bin Saeed Ahmad Al-Malkiy, a Dawn report said. In a statement, the PM Office said, Khan has accepted the invitation. Earlier, Saudi Arabia had announced 118 humanitarian projects worth over $123 million for cash-strapped Pakistan in food security, health, education and water during Prime Minister Imran Khan's two-day visit, according to a report. The King Salman Humanitarian Aid and Relief Center (KSrelief)'s Supervisor General Dr Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Rabeeah said that the assistance was announced in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. He said that the kingdom has provided medical and preventive aid worth over USD 1.5 million to combat the pandemic. Prior to this, both countries had vowed to reset ties, which had been strained over policy disagreements on Kashmir issue. In a sharply worded statement in August last year, Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi called on the Saudi-based Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to convene a high-level meeting on Kashmir. The call raised eyebrows in Riyadh, where it was widely seen as a warning that Pakistan was preparing to call for a session outside OIC auspices. Saudi Arabia prides itself on its role as guardian of Islam's holiest sites and is particularly sensitive about any move that might undermine its leadership of the 57-member pan-Islamic body. And while the wealthy nation has supported Pakistan with billions of dollars in aid and loans in recent years, observers say the kingdom is also keen not to upset India, a key business partner and importer of Saudi oil. (With inputs from agencies)

Pakistan PM gets Saudi Arabia invite for ‘Middle East Green Initiative Summit’ 

World Health Organisation said on Thursday that Delta variant was behind the "surge" in coronavirus outbreak in West Asia. This has triggered a "fourth wave", it said. Vaccination rates remain low in the region.

WHO said that the highly transmissible Delta variant has been recorded in 15 out of 22 countries and territories of the region from Morocco to Pakistan.

"The circulation of the Delta variant is fuelling the surge in Covid-19 cases and deaths in an increasing number of countries in WHO's Eastern Mediterranean Region," it said in a statement.

"Most of the new cases and hospitalised patients are unvaccinated people. &nbsp;We are now in the fourth wave of Covid-19 across the region," said Ahmed al-Mandhari, director of WHO's Eastern Mediterranean region.

As of the last week of July, "only 41 million people, or 5.5 percent, of the region's population, had been fully vaccinated," the WHO said.

There is an increase in infections by 55 per cent. Deaths have risen by 15 per cent. More than 310,000 case and 3,500 deaths have been recorded weekly.

Countries such as Tunisia, which has suffered the biggest number of Covid-19 deaths in North Africa, have been struggling to contain the outbreak.

Critical shortages of oxygen tanks and intensive care beds have stretched the capacities of healthcare systems regionally.

WHO noted the rapid spread of the Delta variant was quickly making it "the dominant strain" in the region.

According to a recent paper in the journal Virological, the amount of virus found in the first tests of patients with the Delta variant was 1,000 times higher than patients in the first wave of the virus in 2020, greatly increasing its contagiousness.

(With inputs from agencies)

World Health Organisation said on Thursday that Delta variant was behind the "surge" in coronavirus outbreak in West Asia. This has triggered a "fourth wave", it said.

World Health Organisation said on Thursday that Delta variant was behind the "surge" in coronavirus outbreak in West Asia. This has triggered a "fourth wave", it said. Vaccination rates remain low in the region. WHO said that the highly transmissible Delta variant has been recorded in 15 out of 22 countries and territories of the region from Morocco to Pakistan. "The circulation of the Delta variant is fuelling the surge in Covid-19 cases and deaths in an increasing number of countries in WHO's Eastern Mediterranean Region," it said in a statement. "Most of the new cases and hospitalised patients are unvaccinated people. We are now in the fourth wave of Covid-19 across the region," said Ahmed al-Mandhari, director of WHO's Eastern Mediterranean region. As of the last week of July, "only 41 million people, or 5.5 percent, of the region's population, had been fully vaccinated," the WHO said. There is an increase in infections by 55 per cent. Deaths have risen by 15 per cent. More than 310,000 case and 3,500 deaths have been recorded weekly. Countries such as Tunisia, which has suffered the biggest number of Covid-19 deaths in North Africa, have been struggling to contain the outbreak. Critical shortages of oxygen tanks and intensive care beds have stretched the capacities of healthcare systems regionally. WHO noted the rapid spread of the Delta variant was quickly making it "the dominant strain" in the region. According to a recent paper in the journal Virological, the amount of virus found in the first tests of patients with the Delta variant was 1,000 times higher than patients in the first wave of the virus in 2020, greatly increasing its contagiousness. (With inputs from agencies)

West Asia virus surge due to Delta variant: WHO

The&nbsp;Pentagon&nbsp;said Friday it was cutting the number of troops and air defence units deployed to the Middle East, confirming a Wall Street Journal report that eight Patriot batteries were being moved out from the region.

The move comes as President Joe Biden's administration seeks to ease tensions with Iran after they heated up in 2019 and saw a strong escalation in the US military presence across the region.

The Wall Street Journal said the Patriot anti-missile batteries were being removed from Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, and that a separate anti-missile system, called THAAD, was being transferred from Saudi Arabia as well.

Each battery requires hundreds of troops and civilians to operate and support them.

Pentagon&nbsp;spokesperson Commander Jessica McNulty said that some of the units were being redeployed to other countries and some were returning to the United States for maintenance.

She would not say where the redeployed units were being moved to.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/judge-under-us-sanctions-set-to-take-over-iran-presidency-392512">Also Read |&nbsp;Judge under US sanctions set to take over Iran presidency</a>

"This decision was made in close coordination with host nations and with a clear eye on preserving our ability to meet our security commitments," she said in an email.

"We maintain a robust force posture in the region appropriate to the threat and are comfortable that these changes do not negatively impact our national security interests," McNulty said.

"We also retain the flexibility to rapidly flow forces back into the Middle East as conditions warrant."

The US military is rapidly adjusting its global footprint as it pulls out of Afghanistan entirely and sees a greater threat from China in the Asia-Pacific region.

The&nbsp;Pentagon&nbsp;also slashed its troop presence in Iraq last year to 2,500, supporting Iraqi forces in their fight against the Islamic State group.

Iran is still viewed as a major threat across the Middle East, but the Biden administration is in negotiations to restore the agreement on Tehran halting its nuclear development program, which would also see some sanctions on the country lifted.

"The Defense Department maintains tens of thousands of forces in the Middle East, representing some of our most advanced air power and maritime capabilities, in support of US national interests and our regional partnerships," McNulty said.

The Pentagon said Friday it was cutting the number of troops and air defence units deployed to the Middle East, confirming a Wall Street Journal report that eight Patriot batteries were being moved out from the region.

The Pentagon said Friday it was cutting the number of troops and air defence units deployed to the Middle East, confirming a Wall Street Journal report that eight Patriot batteries were being moved out from the region. The move comes as President Joe Biden's administration seeks to ease tensions with Iran after they heated up in 2019 and saw a strong escalation in the US military presence across the region. The Wall Street Journal said the Patriot anti-missile batteries were being removed from Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, and that a separate anti-missile system, called THAAD, was being transferred from Saudi Arabia as well. Each battery requires hundreds of troops and civilians to operate and support them. Pentagon spokesperson Commander Jessica McNulty said that some of the units were being redeployed to other countries and some were returning to the United States for maintenance. She would not say where the redeployed units were being moved to. Also Read | Judge under US sanctions set to take over Iran presidency "This decision was made in close coordination with host nations and with a clear eye on preserving our ability to meet our security commitments," she said in an email. "We maintain a robust force posture in the region appropriate to the threat and are comfortable that these changes do not negatively impact our national security interests," McNulty said. "We also retain the flexibility to rapidly flow forces back into the Middle East as conditions warrant." The US military is rapidly adjusting its global footprint as it pulls out of Afghanistan entirely and sees a greater threat from China in the Asia-Pacific region. The Pentagon also slashed its troop presence in Iraq last year to 2,500, supporting Iraqi forces in their fight against the Islamic State group. Iran is still viewed as a major threat across the Middle East, but the Biden administration is in negotiations to restore the agreement on Tehran halting its nuclear development program, which would also see some sanctions on the country lifted. "The Defense Department maintains tens of thousands of forces in the Middle East, representing some of our most advanced air power and maritime capabilities, in support of US national interests and our regional partnerships," McNulty said.

US cutting forces, missile batteries in Middle East

Lauding India, Kuwait ties, Kuwait's Ambassador's to India Jasem Ibrahem Al Najem has said that it’s a "great story to be told for generations" with relations on the "right track" even as both countries work together with each other amid the Covid pandemic.&nbsp;

Highlighting how India helped his country last year, Alnajem speaking to WION said, “during the pandemic last year, India played a key role by sending a medical team from the army in the first month of the pandemic in April 2020..we received first vaccine amount of 200,000 doses of covishield. What Kuwait did this year or during pandemic by sending liquid medical oxygen, it’s the same, we are together".

An Air and sea bridge has been established between the 2 countries. Earlier this week, Indian Navy ship Tarkash arrived in Mumbai from Kuwait bringing with it 785 Oxygen cylinders in the 3rd phase of medical supplies. SO far 425 MT of liquid Medical Oxygen and 3800 Oxygen cylinders have arrived in Indian ports during the first and second phase of medical supply. 
&nbsp; 
His comments come even as External Affairs Minister Dr S Jaishankar is in Kuwait during which he will meet the political leadership and the significant Indian community members.

Envoy Al Najem said, “Recently Kuwaiti minister of foreign affairs was in Delhi, it’s a healthy thing. Two ministers exchanged 3 calls in 40 days. We are on the right track for this relation". Adding, “pandemic offer opportunity and we have to take it and use this chances to strengthen the relation bilaterally"

He called for cooperation on vaccines. Kuwait gave $40 million to COVAX, with the envoy saying "each country has to play its role in the global fight”.

Lauding India, Kuwait ties, Kuwait's Ambassador's to India Jasem Ibrahem Al Najem has said that it’s a "great story to be told for generations" with relations on the "right track" even as both countries work together with each other amid the Covid pandemic.

Lauding India, Kuwait ties, Kuwait's Ambassador's to India Jasem Ibrahem Al Najem has said that it’s a "great story to be told for generations" with relations on the "right track" even as both countries work together with each other amid the Covid pandemic. Highlighting how India helped his country last year, Alnajem speaking to WION said, “during the pandemic last year, India played a key role by sending a medical team from the army in the first month of the pandemic in April 2020..we received first vaccine amount of 200,000 doses of covishield. What Kuwait did this year or during pandemic by sending liquid medical oxygen, it’s the same, we are together". An Air and sea bridge has been established between the 2 countries. Earlier this week, Indian Navy ship Tarkash arrived in Mumbai from Kuwait bringing with it 785 Oxygen cylinders in the 3rd phase of medical supplies. SO far 425 MT of liquid Medical Oxygen and 3800 Oxygen cylinders have arrived in Indian ports during the first and second phase of medical supply. His comments come even as External Affairs Minister Dr S Jaishankar is in Kuwait during which he will meet the political leadership and the significant Indian community members. Envoy Al Najem said, “Recently Kuwaiti minister of foreign affairs was in Delhi, it’s a healthy thing. Two ministers exchanged 3 calls in 40 days. We are on the right track for this relation". Adding, “pandemic offer opportunity and we have to take it and use this chances to strengthen the relation bilaterally" He called for cooperation on vaccines. Kuwait gave $40 million to COVAX, with the envoy saying "each country has to play its role in the global fight”.

India-Kuwait relation is a great story to be told for generations: Kuwait's envoy to India

In May 2021, during holy month of Ramzan, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict flared up again and resulted in huge loss of life, property, infrastructure in Gaza and Israel. Authorities in Gaza estimate that worth tens of millions of dollars worth of damage occurred. The United Nations estimates that more than 72,000 Palestinians were displaced by the fighting. Hamas and Israel agreed on a ceasefire on May 21.

Most of the analysts throughout the world have examined this episode in terms of condemning both Hamas and Israel. The latter in particular, was criticised for what was perceived as disproportionate military action. This disproportionate action by the Israeli state is not new. What is important here is to underline and understand the political message by the Israeli state which it intends to convey through disproportionate action. In the present context it may have been linked to the domestic politics of Israel wherein such retribution against Palestinians was intended to increase the longevity of the political life of the Netanyahu government.

However, far more important factor behind this military adventurism was Israel testing the strength of Abraham Accords signed with UAE and Bahrain.

It also intended to check its growing relationship with Saudi Arabia. Israeli government has initiated informal discussions with Saudi Arabia which are aimed at normalisation of the political relationship between the two countries.

It may be recalled here that earlier, the infamous Sabra and Shatila massacre, Lebanese massacre (1982) tested the peace and friendship treaty between Israel and Egypt (1979)

This time it appeared that the state of Israel became internationally isolated and drew flak from most world leaders and it appeared that there was genuine global sympathy for suffering Palestinians.

This explains why United Nations Human Rights Commission has decided to establish a permanent committee, Commission of Inquiry to investigate the allegation of human rights abuses and war crimes in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank.

However, larger question is still about whether there ever be a 'two-state solution' in the region leading to creation of viable state of Palestine and whether the cycle of violence will end.

It is strange and highly disappointing that global policymakers are looking at the Palestinian issue only from the humanitarian perspective, offering economic and other kinds of support as confirmed by visit of EU envoy Sven Kuhn von Burgsdorff, on 1st June, 2021 &nbsp;to Gaza City for the first time since the ceasefire agreement with Israel. While visiting Gaza, he made a commitment for the reconstruction of parts of Gaza and said, “The reconstruction of Gaza needs several steps, including a unified Palestinian government and the lifting of the 15-year-old Israeli blockade.”

Earlier US President Joe Biden, the liberal icon of the world, made a similar commitment towards rehabilitation and reconstruction of devastated Gaza. He said that he would work through the UN and other international stakeholders “to provide rapid humanitarian assistance and to marshal international support for the people in Gaza and in the Gaza reconstruction efforts"

Such measures are welcome and badly needed but the question remains whether they are sufficient to create permanent peace among Palestine and Israel because while these helping hands are important, they have only reconfirmed the 2nd November, 1917 Balfour Declaration.

It may be recalled here that the Balfour Declaration has made a commitment for the creation of homeland for Jewish people in Palestine while maintaining the social and religious rights of Palestinians.

Since then the Palestinian problem has been projected as a humanitarian crisis which has also been incorporated in the UN Resolution of 242 and 338. Such an approach of international community has traditionally benefitted the Israeli state as it does not uphold the political rights of Palestinians to have their own nation and state.

The time has come for world leaders to provide a political solution by supporting the idea of two nation-states. It is true that Israel is too strong as a state and capable of defending itself, while Arab world is too weak at the moment and Palestinians are increasingly reduced to a defenceless community.

Therefore, neither Palestinians nor the Arab world is in a position to bargain with Israel, thus it is important for India, the emerging global power to become the beacon of hope and courage and trailblaze this noble cause along with other international bodies like United Nations which can help in the creation of Palestinian state.

As humanity is entering a new phase of globalization in the 21st century it is important that this only BLACK DOT from the earth should be removed.

This requires that the major nations of the world Like USA, Russia, Germany, China, Japan, European Union should rise above their narrow national interest and support this just cause for the purpose of ensuring peace, stability in the region and ensuring a good and healthy life for the future generations.

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

In May 2021, during holy month of Ramzan, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict flared up again and resulted in huge loss of life, property, infrastructure in Gaza and Israel.

In May 2021, during holy month of Ramzan, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict flared up again and resulted in huge loss of life, property, infrastructure in Gaza and Israel. Authorities in Gaza estimate that worth tens of millions of dollars worth of damage occurred. The United Nations estimates that more than 72,000 Palestinians were displaced by the fighting. Hamas and Israel agreed on a ceasefire on May 21. Most of the analysts throughout the world have examined this episode in terms of condemning both Hamas and Israel. The latter in particular, was criticised for what was perceived as disproportionate military action. This disproportionate action by the Israeli state is not new. What is important here is to underline and understand the political message by the Israeli state which it intends to convey through disproportionate action. In the present context it may have been linked to the domestic politics of Israel wherein such retribution against Palestinians was intended to increase the longevity of the political life of the Netanyahu government. However, far more important factor behind this military adventurism was Israel testing the strength of Abraham Accords signed with UAE and Bahrain. It also intended to check its growing relationship with Saudi Arabia. Israeli government has initiated informal discussions with Saudi Arabia which are aimed at normalisation of the political relationship between the two countries. It may be recalled here that earlier, the infamous Sabra and Shatila massacre, Lebanese massacre (1982) tested the peace and friendship treaty between Israel and Egypt (1979) This time it appeared that the state of Israel became internationally isolated and drew flak from most world leaders and it appeared that there was genuine global sympathy for suffering Palestinians. This explains why United Nations Human Rights Commission has decided to establish a permanent committee, Commission of Inquiry to investigate the allegation of human rights abuses and war crimes in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank. However, larger question is still about whether there ever be a 'two-state solution' in the region leading to creation of viable state of Palestine and whether the cycle of violence will end. It is strange and highly disappointing that global policymakers are looking at the Palestinian issue only from the humanitarian perspective, offering economic and other kinds of support as confirmed by visit of EU envoy Sven Kuhn von Burgsdorff, on 1st June, 2021 to Gaza City for the first time since the ceasefire agreement with Israel. While visiting Gaza, he made a commitment for the reconstruction of parts of Gaza and said, “The reconstruction of Gaza needs several steps, including a unified Palestinian government and the lifting of the 15-year-old Israeli blockade.” Earlier US President Joe Biden, the liberal icon of the world, made a similar commitment towards rehabilitation and reconstruction of devastated Gaza. He said that he would work through the UN and other international stakeholders “to provide rapid humanitarian assistance and to marshal international support for the people in Gaza and in the Gaza reconstruction efforts" Such measures are welcome and badly needed but the question remains whether they are sufficient to create permanent peace among Palestine and Israel because while these helping hands are important, they have only reconfirmed the 2nd November, 1917 Balfour Declaration. It may be recalled here that the Balfour Declaration has made a commitment for the creation of homeland for Jewish people in Palestine while maintaining the social and religious rights of Palestinians. Since then the Palestinian problem has been projected as a humanitarian crisis which has also been incorporated in the UN Resolution of 242 and 338. Such an approach of international community has traditionally benefitted the Israeli state as it does not uphold the political rights of Palestinians to have their own nation and state. The time has come for world leaders to provide a political solution by supporting the idea of two nation-states. It is true that Israel is too strong as a state and capable of defending itself, while Arab world is too weak at the moment and Palestinians are increasingly reduced to a defenceless community. Therefore, neither Palestinians nor the Arab world is in a position to bargain with Israel, thus it is important for India, the emerging global power to become the beacon of hope and courage and trailblaze this noble cause along with other international bodies like United Nations which can help in the creation of Palestinian state. As humanity is entering a new phase of globalization in the 21st century it is important that this only BLACK DOT from the earth should be removed. This requires that the major nations of the world Like USA, Russia, Germany, China, Japan, European Union should rise above their narrow national interest and support this just cause for the purpose of ensuring peace, stability in the region and ensuring a good and healthy life for the future generations. (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinion: For just cause of Palestine

Pope Francis said Sunday he would invite Lebanon's Christian leaders to the Vatican on July 1 to reflect and pray for "peace and stability" in the stricken Middle Eastern nation.

Lebanon is in the throes of a double economic and political crisis.&nbsp;

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/protests-in-lebanon-over-economic-crisis-political-deadlock-368865">Protests in Lebanon over economic crisis, political deadlock</a>

It is experiencing its worst financial downturn since the 1975-1990 civil war, with more than half the population now living below the poverty line.

Meanwhile, bickering political leaders have yet to agree on a new government to replace the outgoing cabinet of caretaker prime minister Hassan Diab who resigned in the wake of last summer's deadly port explosion.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/caretaker-pm-threatens-to-stop-running-government-in-lebanon-368500">Caretaker PM threatens to stop running government in Lebanon</a>

"On July 1 I will meet in the Vatican with the main leaders of the Christian communities in Lebanon, for a day of reflection on the country's worrying situation and to pray together for the gift of peace and stability", the pope said.

Delivering his Sunday Angelus message, Francis urged the faithful "to accompany the preparation of this event with solidarity prayers, invoking a more peaceful future for that beloved country".&nbsp;

Pope Francis said Sunday he would invite Lebanon's Christian leaders to the Vatican on July 1 to reflect and pray for "peace and stability" in the stricken Middle Eastern nation.

Pope Francis said Sunday he would invite Lebanon's Christian leaders to the Vatican on July 1 to reflect and pray for "peace and stability" in the stricken Middle Eastern nation. Lebanon is in the throes of a double economic and political crisis. Also Read | Protests in Lebanon over economic crisis, political deadlock It is experiencing its worst financial downturn since the 1975-1990 civil war, with more than half the population now living below the poverty line. Meanwhile, bickering political leaders have yet to agree on a new government to replace the outgoing cabinet of caretaker prime minister Hassan Diab who resigned in the wake of last summer's deadly port explosion. Also Read | Caretaker PM threatens to stop running government in Lebanon "On July 1 I will meet in the Vatican with the main leaders of the Christian communities in Lebanon, for a day of reflection on the country's worrying situation and to pray together for the gift of peace and stability", the pope said. Delivering his Sunday Angelus message, Francis urged the faithful "to accompany the preparation of this event with solidarity prayers, invoking a more peaceful future for that beloved country".

Pope to host July 1 summit with Lebanon's Christian leaders

The first meetings of peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority back in 2007 were very emotional.

Each of us — I, as Israel’s chief negotiator, and Ahmed Qurei, known as Abu Ala, the former Palestinian prime minister — tried to convince the other who has more rights to the land, the Jewish people or the Palestinians.

Unsurprisingly, we left these sessions frustrated and unconvinced. After two such meetings, we agreed that these discussions would lead us nowhere and that any peace agreement would not determine which narrative prevailed, and instead we should focus only on how to establish a peaceful future.

The argument over historical narratives hasn’t changed. It won’t. Those on both sides that insist on forcing their narrative on the other side, or turning the conflict into a religious war, cannot make the compromises needed for peace. This is true also for those from the international community supporting one side and denying the rights of the other. This is destructive and only strengthens extremists.

Peace based on the vision of two states for two peoples gives an answer to the national aspirations of both the Jewish people and the Palestinians and requires compromises by both.

The solution of a Jewish State and an Arab State has actually existed for some 75 years. It was laid out by the United Nations in 1947 as a just solution to the conflict between Jews (including my own parents) and Arabs who already lived between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

National conflicts cannot be resolved by wars and violence, but only by a political resolution, leadership and compromise. A religious conflict is not a conflict over rights, but a fight against the right of the other to live by their faith. For religious ideologists there is no compromise.

The past two weeks were a wake-up call. The message is not only that conflict is unsustainable, but also that the very nature of the conflict is turning into a religious one. That religious element has seeped into Israel itself and turned into violence between the Israeli citizens — Arabs and Jews — within Israeli cities.

We cannot and should not cede the floor to religious extremists.

The cease-fire in Gaza provides a window of time we must use to change the long-term reality. An essential decision is to return to the vision of two states for two people, to strengthen the pragmatic forces and weaken the extremists and end the terror.

Hamas is a radical Islamic terror organization that is fighting not to establish a Palestinian state but against the existence of Jewish “infidels” living in Israel.

In 2006 the so-called Quartet — the United States, the United Nations, the European Union and Russia — set forward parameters for Hamas that included acceptance of previous peace agreements between Israel and the Palestinians, commitment to nonviolence and recognition of Israel. Hamas refused.

These parameters were published after Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip, uprooted the settlements and pulled out its military forces, and Hamas won the Palestinian elections. Had Hamas adopted these principles, the lives of the residents of the Gaza Strip might today look different, and Gaza could flourish. But for Hamas, “ending the conflict” is something to which it will never agree.

Without accepting these conditions, there’s no hope for peace with Hamas, therefore we cannot, and should not, give it legitimacy.

When one looks at any conflict from afar, it is only natural to identify with the weaker side. But there is no doubt, as President Biden rightfully expressed, that a country has the right to defend itself. In this case, we must defend ourselves against terror by a group that does not accept our very existence. Criticizing any government policy is legitimate (I myself was a political opponent of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu), but denying the right of a country to defend its citizens is not.

We must cooperate and support everything that strengthens pragmatism and weakens extremists. This seems so obvious as to appear basic. And yet the U.S.-Israeli policy in the past few years was completely the opposite. The Trump administration supported efforts of the Israeli government to move toward annexation of land. Had all those efforts come to pass, we would have reached the point of no return. The land would no longer be divisible, and the political future of two states would have been closed to us forever. Further, this policy weakened and delegitimized the Palestinian Authority and included cutting off financial support.

Indeed, the check on rampant expansion came from what would once have been a fantastical source: The Gulf States’ condition for normalization with Israel, through the Abraham Accords, was that Israel take annexation off the table. With President Biden’s inauguration in January, the vision of a two-state solution supported by the United States has made a comeback. The statements of President Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken send a message of hope to the pragmatic forces in the region.

The problem is that reaching two states has also never seemed farther away. That’s not for lack of effort, though all attempts to reach the finish line have always fallen short, including most recently in 2014, when the United States proposed parameters for negotiation in accordance with two states for two peoples.

This last missed opportunity and other political trends in Israel and the Palestinian Authority may lead to an understanding that it is a dream that is impossible to fulfill, and frankly if I had another idea how to end the conflict, I would have adopted it. The violence of the past two weeks with Hamas and within Israel gave all of us a taste of what one state between the river and the sea, with a violent domestic religious and national conflict, would look like. The two-state solution thus seems as important as ever.

Even if peace is not around the corner, the point of no return is closer than ever before. We must not go there. The most important thing for now is to keep the road open. We must create a joint policy among the United States, regional countries and of course, Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

After recharging our joint GPS with the two states as a destination, we need to support that goal with concrete steps, avoiding — and preventing — everything that puts obstacles on this road.

We can start by recognizing that supporting only one narrative and denying the other will lead us nowhere and will strengthen extremism on both sides. The solution must reflect both sides’ legitimate rights, aspirations and interests, with compromises that allow us both to fulfill our legitimate national aspirations and live side-by-side in peace and security.

An agreement will be possible when pragmatic leadership on both sides understand that the price of not having an agreement for their people is far higher than the price of compromise.

The first meetings of peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority back in 2007 were very emotional. Each of us — I, as Israel’s chief negotiator, and Ahmed Qurei, known as Abu Ala, the former Palestinian prime minister — tried to convince the other who has more rights to the land, the Jewish people or the Palestinians.

The first meetings of peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority back in 2007 were very emotional. Each of us — I, as Israel’s chief negotiator, and Ahmed Qurei, known as Abu Ala, the former Palestinian prime minister — tried to convince the other who has more rights to the land, the Jewish people or the Palestinians. Unsurprisingly, we left these sessions frustrated and unconvinced. After two such meetings, we agreed that these discussions would lead us nowhere and that any peace agreement would not determine which narrative prevailed, and instead we should focus only on how to establish a peaceful future. The argument over historical narratives hasn’t changed. It won’t. Those on both sides that insist on forcing their narrative on the other side, or turning the conflict into a religious war, cannot make the compromises needed for peace. This is true also for those from the international community supporting one side and denying the rights of the other. This is destructive and only strengthens extremists. Peace based on the vision of two states for two peoples gives an answer to the national aspirations of both the Jewish people and the Palestinians and requires compromises by both. The solution of a Jewish State and an Arab State has actually existed for some 75 years. It was laid out by the United Nations in 1947 as a just solution to the conflict between Jews (including my own parents) and Arabs who already lived between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. National conflicts cannot be resolved by wars and violence, but only by a political resolution, leadership and compromise. A religious conflict is not a conflict over rights, but a fight against the right of the other to live by their faith. For religious ideologists there is no compromise. The past two weeks were a wake-up call. The message is not only that conflict is unsustainable, but also that the very nature of the conflict is turning into a religious one. That religious element has seeped into Israel itself and turned into violence between the Israeli citizens — Arabs and Jews — within Israeli cities. We cannot and should not cede the floor to religious extremists. The cease-fire in Gaza provides a window of time we must use to change the long-term reality. An essential decision is to return to the vision of two states for two people, to strengthen the pragmatic forces and weaken the extremists and end the terror. Hamas is a radical Islamic terror organization that is fighting not to establish a Palestinian state but against the existence of Jewish “infidels” living in Israel. In 2006 the so-called Quartet — the United States, the United Nations, the European Union and Russia — set forward parameters for Hamas that included acceptance of previous peace agreements between Israel and the Palestinians, commitment to nonviolence and recognition of Israel. Hamas refused. These parameters were published after Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip, uprooted the settlements and pulled out its military forces, and Hamas won the Palestinian elections. Had Hamas adopted these principles, the lives of the residents of the Gaza Strip might today look different, and Gaza could flourish. But for Hamas, “ending the conflict” is something to which it will never agree. Without accepting these conditions, there’s no hope for peace with Hamas, therefore we cannot, and should not, give it legitimacy. When one looks at any conflict from afar, it is only natural to identify with the weaker side. But there is no doubt, as President Biden rightfully expressed, that a country has the right to defend itself. In this case, we must defend ourselves against terror by a group that does not accept our very existence. Criticizing any government policy is legitimate (I myself was a political opponent of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu), but denying the right of a country to defend its citizens is not. We must cooperate and support everything that strengthens pragmatism and weakens extremists. This seems so obvious as to appear basic. And yet the U.S.-Israeli policy in the past few years was completely the opposite. The Trump administration supported efforts of the Israeli government to move toward annexation of land. Had all those efforts come to pass, we would have reached the point of no return. The land would no longer be divisible, and the political future of two states would have been closed to us forever. Further, this policy weakened and delegitimized the Palestinian Authority and included cutting off financial support. Indeed, the check on rampant expansion came from what would once have been a fantastical source: The Gulf States’ condition for normalization with Israel, through the Abraham Accords, was that Israel take annexation off the table. With President Biden’s inauguration in January, the vision of a two-state solution supported by the United States has made a comeback. The statements of President Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken send a message of hope to the pragmatic forces in the region. The problem is that reaching two states has also never seemed farther away. That’s not for lack of effort, though all attempts to reach the finish line have always fallen short, including most recently in 2014, when the United States proposed parameters for negotiation in accordance with two states for two peoples. This last missed opportunity and other political trends in Israel and the Palestinian Authority may lead to an understanding that it is a dream that is impossible to fulfill, and frankly if I had another idea how to end the conflict, I would have adopted it. The violence of the past two weeks with Hamas and within Israel gave all of us a taste of what one state between the river and the sea, with a violent domestic religious and national conflict, would look like. The two-state solution thus seems as important as ever. Even if peace is not around the corner, the point of no return is closer than ever before. We must not go there. The most important thing for now is to keep the road open. We must create a joint policy among the United States, regional countries and of course, Israel and the Palestinian Authority. After recharging our joint GPS with the two states as a destination, we need to support that goal with concrete steps, avoiding — and preventing — everything that puts obstacles on this road. We can start by recognizing that supporting only one narrative and denying the other will lead us nowhere and will strengthen extremism on both sides. The solution must reflect both sides’ legitimate rights, aspirations and interests, with compromises that allow us both to fulfill our legitimate national aspirations and live side-by-side in peace and security. An agreement will be possible when pragmatic leadership on both sides understand that the price of not having an agreement for their people is far higher than the price of compromise.

There is a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken will travel to the Middle East "in the coming days," the State Department said Thursday after Israel and Hamas agreed to a ceasefire halting 11 days of fighting.

Blinken spoke with his Israeli counterpart Gabi Ashkenazi, who "welcomed Secretary Blinken's planned travel to the region," State Department spokesman Ned Price said in a statement.

The top US diplomat "will meet with Israeli, Palestinian and regional counterparts in the coming days to discuss recovery efforts and working together to build better futures for Israelis and Palestinians," Price said.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/israel-hamas-conflict-ceasefire-between-israel-and-hamas-takes-effect-after-11-day-conflict-leaves-hundreds-dead-386387">Ceasefire between Israel and Hamas takes effect after 11-day conflict leaves hundreds dead</a>

The announcement came after Blinken spoke twice Thursday with Ashkenazi ahead of implementation of the ceasefire, which was brokered by Egypt and followed mounting international pressure to stem the bloodshed.

"Both leaders expressed their appreciation for Egypt's mediation efforts, and the secretary noted that he would continue to remain in close touch with his Egyptian counterpart and other regional stakeholders," Price said.

Blinken was headed home Thursday following an Arctic tour overshadowed by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Working from hotel rooms and the airplane in the scramble for a ceasefire, he spoke to leaders on both sides, as well as from Arab nations with influence over Hamas.

The secretary "welcomed the (Israeli) foreign minister's confirmation that the parties had agreed to a ceasefire," Price said.

Earlier in the day Blinken announced that he was prepared to go to the Middle East "at any time."

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-sees-genuine-opportunity-for-peace-after-israel-hamas-ceasefire-386388">US President Joe Biden welcomed the ceasefire as a "genuine opportunity" for peace in a speech from the White House</a>.

"I believe we have a genuine opportunity to make progress and I'm committed to working toward it," Biden said.

The Israeli army said Hamas and other Islamist armed groups in Gaza have fired more than 4,300 rockets towards Israel, which have claimed 12 lives, including two children and an Israeli soldier.

Israeli strikes on Gaza have killed 232 Palestinians, including 65 children, as well as fighters, and have wounded another 1,900, according to the Gaza health ministry.

The truce also included Gaza's second-most powerful armed group, Islamic Jihad.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken will travel to the Middle East "in the coming days," the State Department said Thursday after Israel and Hamas agreed to a ceasefire halting 11 days of fighting.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken will travel to the Middle East "in the coming days," the State Department said Thursday after Israel and Hamas agreed to a ceasefire halting 11 days of fighting. Blinken spoke with his Israeli counterpart Gabi Ashkenazi, who "welcomed Secretary Blinken's planned travel to the region," State Department spokesman Ned Price said in a statement. The top US diplomat "will meet with Israeli, Palestinian and regional counterparts in the coming days to discuss recovery efforts and working together to build better futures for Israelis and Palestinians," Price said. Also read | Ceasefire between Israel and Hamas takes effect after 11-day conflict leaves hundreds dead The announcement came after Blinken spoke twice Thursday with Ashkenazi ahead of implementation of the ceasefire, which was brokered by Egypt and followed mounting international pressure to stem the bloodshed. "Both leaders expressed their appreciation for Egypt's mediation efforts, and the secretary noted that he would continue to remain in close touch with his Egyptian counterpart and other regional stakeholders," Price said. Blinken was headed home Thursday following an Arctic tour overshadowed by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Working from hotel rooms and the airplane in the scramble for a ceasefire, he spoke to leaders on both sides, as well as from Arab nations with influence over Hamas. The secretary "welcomed the (Israeli) foreign minister's confirmation that the parties had agreed to a ceasefire," Price said. Earlier in the day Blinken announced that he was prepared to go to the Middle East "at any time." US President Joe Biden welcomed the ceasefire as a "genuine opportunity" for peace in a speech from the White House. "I believe we have a genuine opportunity to make progress and I'm committed to working toward it," Biden said. The Israeli army said Hamas and other Islamist armed groups in Gaza have fired more than 4,300 rockets towards Israel, which have claimed 12 lives, including two children and an Israeli soldier. Israeli strikes on Gaza have killed 232 Palestinians, including 65 children, as well as fighters, and have wounded another 1,900, according to the Gaza health ministry. The truce also included Gaza's second-most powerful armed group, Islamic Jihad.

Blinken to travel to Middle East 'in the coming days'

The Israeli military and Hamas militants in Gaza continue to exchange rocket fire and airstrikes. The death toll continues to climb as violence spreads to the streets of mixed Arab-Jewish cities in Israel.

World leaders have called for an end to violence. Some have emphasized Israel's right to defend itself, while others warn of full-scale war if the two sides fail to de-escalate.

Hamas Gaza City commander, Bassem Issa, has been killed in one of the Israeli airstrikes along with our senior members, the Hamas group confirmed. 
 
The death toll in Gaza rose to 65 Palestinians, including 16 children and five women, according to Gaza`s Health Ministry. At least 365 people have been wounded, including 86 children and 39 women.&nbsp; 
 
Gravitas: Violence escalates between Israel, Gaza

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-violence-escalates-between-israel-gaza-384636/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

In a statement issued late on Wednesday, Blinken also “expressed his condolences for the lives lost” as a result of the Israeli bombardment of the Palestinian territory of Gaza, while also condemning the deadly rocket attacks into Israel.

“The Secretary also expressed his belief that Palestinians and Israelis deserve equal measures of freedom, dignity, security and prosperity,” said Ned Price, the state department spokesman.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke by telephone with <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> Joe Biden. The Prime Minister thanked President Biden for the American backing of Israel's right to self-defense.
— PM of Israel (@IsraeliPM) <a href="https://twitter.com/IsraeliPM/status/1392608255671771143?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 12, 2021</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">×</a></div>

Meanwhile, a five-year-old boy was killed and at least 20 Israelis were hurt as Gaza launched a fresh spade of rocket attacks that set off warning sirens in the Tel Aviv metropolitan area and cities in the south on Wednesday night, reported The Times of Israel. In a rare incident, rocket shrapnel punctured the shelter`s window, critically injuring the minor and also wounding his mother.&nbsp;

He was pronounced dead several hours later, reported local mediaWith the boy`s death, the number of fatalities has reached seven, including five Israeli civilians, an Indian national and an IDF soldier killed by anti-tank missile fire on the Gaza border. According to the Israeli army, 180 rockets were fired at Israel since 6 a.m. on Wednesday, of which 40 fell in Gaza.

In response to the rocket fire, the IDF launched strikes on upwards of 500 targets in the Gaza Strip, aimed at Hamas personnel, weaponry and infrastructure throughout the enclave Israeli police have said that 374 people have been arrested so far tonight in rioting throughout the country, with 36 cops hurt during events, reported The Times of Israel.

The ongoing violence between Israel and Palestine marks a dramatic escalation of tensions linked to the potential eviction of Palestinian families from East Jerusalem by Israeli settlers and access to one of the most sacred sites in the city, which is a key hub for Islam, Judaism and Christianity.

A senior Hamas official on Wednesday said the terror organisation is ready to end the current intensive fighting with Israel, the Times of Israel reported citing the Russian foreign ministry`s statement. Deputy Chairman of the Hamas political bureau conditioned it on Israel halting strikes and on the international community pressuring the Jewish state to end "military actions" at the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount.

Tensions between Israel and Palestine are rapidly rising with the ramping up of rocket attacks and the United Nations has warned that the conflict is moving towards a `full-scale war`.United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East, Tor Wennesland, called on both sides to de-escalate tensions the day before.

"Stop the fire immediately. We are escalating towards full-scale war. Leaders on all sides have to take responsibility for de-escalation. The cost of war in Gaza is devastating and is being paid for by ordinary people. The UN is working with all sides to restore calm. Stop the violence now," he tweeted.

(With inputs from agencies)

The Israeli military and Hamas militants in Gaza continue to exchange rocket fire and airstrikes. The death toll continues to climb as violence spreads to the streets of mixed Arab-Jewish cities in Israel.

The Israeli military and Hamas militants in Gaza continue to exchange rocket fire and airstrikes. The death toll continues to climb as violence spreads to the streets of mixed Arab-Jewish cities in Israel. World leaders have called for an end to violence. Some have emphasized Israel's right to defend itself, while others warn of full-scale war if the two sides fail to de-escalate. Hamas Gaza City commander, Bassem Issa, has been killed in one of the Israeli airstrikes along with our senior members, the Hamas group confirmed. The death toll in Gaza rose to 65 Palestinians, including 16 children and five women, according to Gaza`s Health Ministry. At least 365 people have been wounded, including 86 children and 39 women. Gravitas: Violence escalates between Israel, Gaza In a statement issued late on Wednesday, Blinken also “expressed his condolences for the lives lost” as a result of the Israeli bombardment of the Palestinian territory of Gaza, while also condemning the deadly rocket attacks into Israel. “The Secretary also expressed his belief that Palestinians and Israelis deserve equal measures of freedom, dignity, security and prosperity,” said Ned Price, the state department spokesman. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke by telephone with @POTUS Joe Biden. The Prime Minister thanked President Biden for the American backing of Israel's right to self-defense. — PM of Israel (@IsraeliPM) May 12, 2021 × Meanwhile, a five-year-old boy was killed and at least 20 Israelis were hurt as Gaza launched a fresh spade of rocket attacks that set off warning sirens in the Tel Aviv metropolitan area and cities in the south on Wednesday night, reported The Times of Israel. In a rare incident, rocket shrapnel punctured the shelter`s window, critically injuring the minor and also wounding his mother. He was pronounced dead several hours later, reported local mediaWith the boy`s death, the number of fatalities has reached seven, including five Israeli civilians, an Indian national and an IDF soldier killed by anti-tank missile fire on the Gaza border. According to the Israeli army, 180 rockets were fired at Israel since 6 a.m. on Wednesday, of which 40 fell in Gaza. In response to the rocket fire, the IDF launched strikes on upwards of 500 targets in the Gaza Strip, aimed at Hamas personnel, weaponry and infrastructure throughout the enclave Israeli police have said that 374 people have been arrested so far tonight in rioting throughout the country, with 36 cops hurt during events, reported The Times of Israel. The ongoing violence between Israel and Palestine marks a dramatic escalation of tensions linked to the potential eviction of Palestinian families from East Jerusalem by Israeli settlers and access to one of the most sacred sites in the city, which is a key hub for Islam, Judaism and Christianity. A senior Hamas official on Wednesday said the terror organisation is ready to end the current intensive fighting with Israel, the Times of Israel reported citing the Russian foreign ministry`s statement. Deputy Chairman of the Hamas political bureau conditioned it on Israel halting strikes and on the international community pressuring the Jewish state to end "military actions" at the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount. Tensions between Israel and Palestine are rapidly rising with the ramping up of rocket attacks and the United Nations has warned that the conflict is moving towards a `full-scale war`.United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East, Tor Wennesland, called on both sides to de-escalate tensions the day before. "Stop the fire immediately. We are escalating towards full-scale war. Leaders on all sides have to take responsibility for de-escalation. The cost of war in Gaza is devastating and is being paid for by ordinary people. The UN is working with all sides to restore calm. Stop the violence now," he tweeted. (With inputs from agencies)

Israel-Hamas violence: At least 65 killed in Gaza, 7 in Israel as clashes intensify

The health ministry controlled by Hamas in Gaza territory has said that 83 people have died since the violence outbreak, 17 of them children, and 487 have been wounded.

The Israeli military said it had struck Gaza more than 600 times since Monday evening while Hamas has fired more than 1,600 rockets towards Israel.&nbsp;

"Dozens of those killed were terrorists and that additionally, some Palestinian fatalities were caused by misfired rockets from Gaza that failed to reach Israel and fell short in the Strip," The Times of Israel reported quoting Israel Defense Forces.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The Israeli-Palestine conflict 
 
"The situation on the ground is simply tragic, you have two and a half million Palestinians in Gaza who are under siege, who have no shelter to seek safety in": <a href="https://twitter.com/nour_odeh?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nour_odeh</a>, senior journalist and Palestinian Legislative Council candidate<a href="https://twitter.com/SaroyaHem?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SaroyaHem</a> <a href="https://t.co/V7RBv9xv1k">pic.twitter.com/V7RBv9xv1k</a>
— WION (@WIONews) <a href="https://twitter.com/WIONews/status/1392769913534570500?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 13, 2021</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">×</a></div>

The ongoing violence between Israel and Palestine marks a dramatic escalation of tensions linked to the potential eviction of Palestinian families from East Jerusalem by Israeli settlers and access to one of the most sacred sites in the city, which is a key hub for Islam, Judaism and Christianity. 
 
Gravitas: Violence escalates between Israel, Gaza

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-violence-escalates-between-israel-gaza-384636/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Tensions between Israel and Palestine are rapidly rising with the ramping up of rocket attacks and the United Nations has warned that the conflict is moving towards a `full-scale war`.

United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East, Tor Wennesland, called on both sides to de-escalate tensions the day before.

"Stop the fire immediately. We are escalating towards full-scale war. Leaders on all sides have to take responsibility for de-escalation. The cost of war in Gaza is devastating and is being paid for by ordinary people. The UN is working with all sides to restore calm. Stop the violence now," he tweeted.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Stop the fire immediately. We’re escalating towards a full scale war. Leaders on all sides have to take the responsibility of deescalation. The cost of war in Gaza is devastating &amp; is being paid by ordinary people. UN is working w/ all sides to restore calm. Stop the violence now
— Tor Wennesland (@TWennesland) <a href="https://twitter.com/TWennesland/status/1392218044433420291?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 11, 2021</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">×</a></div>

(With inputs from agencies)

The health ministry controlled by Hamas in Gaza territory has said that 83 people have died since the violence outbreak, 17 of them children, and 487 have been wounded.

The health ministry controlled by Hamas in Gaza territory has said that 83 people have died since the violence outbreak, 17 of them children, and 487 have been wounded. The Israeli military said it had struck Gaza more than 600 times since Monday evening while Hamas has fired more than 1,600 rockets towards Israel. "Dozens of those killed were terrorists and that additionally, some Palestinian fatalities were caused by misfired rockets from Gaza that failed to reach Israel and fell short in the Strip," The Times of Israel reported quoting Israel Defense Forces. The Israeli-Palestine conflict "The situation on the ground is simply tragic, you have two and a half million Palestinians in Gaza who are under siege, who have no shelter to seek safety in": @nour_odeh, senior journalist and Palestinian Legislative Council candidate@SaroyaHem pic.twitter.com/V7RBv9xv1k — WION (@WIONews) May 13, 2021 × The ongoing violence between Israel and Palestine marks a dramatic escalation of tensions linked to the potential eviction of Palestinian families from East Jerusalem by Israeli settlers and access to one of the most sacred sites in the city, which is a key hub for Islam, Judaism and Christianity. Gravitas: Violence escalates between Israel, Gaza Tensions between Israel and Palestine are rapidly rising with the ramping up of rocket attacks and the United Nations has warned that the conflict is moving towards a `full-scale war`. United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East, Tor Wennesland, called on both sides to de-escalate tensions the day before. "Stop the fire immediately. We are escalating towards full-scale war. Leaders on all sides have to take responsibility for de-escalation. The cost of war in Gaza is devastating and is being paid for by ordinary people. The UN is working with all sides to restore calm. Stop the violence now," he tweeted. Stop the fire immediately. We’re escalating towards a full scale war. Leaders on all sides have to take the responsibility of deescalation. The cost of war in Gaza is devastating & is being paid by ordinary people. UN is working w/ all sides to restore calm. Stop the violence now — Tor Wennesland (@TWennesland) May 11, 2021 × (With inputs from agencies)

Hamas health ministry says 83 killed in Gaza since the start of violence

In service for nearly a decade to protect Israel from rocket fire from the Gaza Strip and Lebanon, Iron Dome is credited with helping Israel to maintain military supremacy over its neighbours.&nbsp;

But Iron Dome failed to intercept the projectile late Tuesday resulting in a major pipeline belonging to an Israeli state-owned energy company was hit in a rocket attack.

In the worst flare-up of violence in seven years, Israel&nbsp;launched hundreds of airstrikes and Palestinians fired hundreds of missiles so far this week, killing more than 70 people and injuring hundreds more amid rising fears the conflict could spiral into all-out war.

What started as a week of tense clashes in Jerusalem escalated on Wednesday into an aerial conflict and violent unrest on the streets of mixed Arab-Israeli towns.

Meanwhile, US President Joe Biden spoke to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the Israel-Palestine conflict and said he hopes that the hostilities will come to a conclusion.

"My expectation and hope are that this will be closing down sooner than later. But Israel has a right to defend itself when you have thousands of rockets flying into your territory. But I had a conversation for a while with the -- with the Prime Minister of Israel. And I think that -- my hope is that we will see this coming to a conclusion sooner than later," Biden told reporters at the White House.

(With inputs from agencies)

In service for nearly a decade to protect Israel from rocket fire from the Gaza Strip and Lebanon, Iron Dome is credited with helping Israel to maintain military supremacy over its neighbours.

In service for nearly a decade to protect Israel from rocket fire from the Gaza Strip and Lebanon, Iron Dome is credited with helping Israel to maintain military supremacy over its neighbours. But Iron Dome failed to intercept the projectile late Tuesday resulting in a major pipeline belonging to an Israeli state-owned energy company was hit in a rocket attack. In the worst flare-up of violence in seven years, Israel launched hundreds of airstrikes and Palestinians fired hundreds of missiles so far this week, killing more than 70 people and injuring hundreds more amid rising fears the conflict could spiral into all-out war. What started as a week of tense clashes in Jerusalem escalated on Wednesday into an aerial conflict and violent unrest on the streets of mixed Arab-Israeli towns. Meanwhile, US President Joe Biden spoke to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the Israel-Palestine conflict and said he hopes that the hostilities will come to a conclusion. "My expectation and hope are that this will be closing down sooner than later. But Israel has a right to defend itself when you have thousands of rockets flying into your territory. But I had a conversation for a while with the -- with the Prime Minister of Israel. And I think that -- my hope is that we will see this coming to a conclusion sooner than later," Biden told reporters at the White House. (With inputs from agencies)

Gaza rocket attack: Israeli energy pipeline hit as Iron Dome fails to intercept missile

Israel, the UAE, Greece and&nbsp;Cyprus&nbsp;said they would seek to deepen their cooperation in fields ranging from energy to fighting COVID, saying budding ties could change the face of a region more synonymous with conflict.

"The evolving web of regional cooperation is creating a new narrative, one that is cracking the glass ceiling of the prevailing (one) of our neighbourhood as a region of turmoil, conflict and crisis," said Cypriot Foreign Minister and host Nikos Christodoulides.

The UAE and fellow Gulf state Bahrain in September became the first Arab states in a quarter of a century to sign agreements to establish formal ties with Israel, forged largely through shared fears of Iran.

The so-called Abraham Accords are US-brokered agreements which have ushered in public rapprochements between Israel and several Arab states.

Friday's encounter on the east Mediterranean island was attended by Anwar Gargash, a former UAE foreign minister who worked on the historic normalisation of relations with Israel last year. He was there in his capacity as diplomatic advisor to UAE President Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed.

"The Abrahamic accords were mainly driven by the necessity of an alternative strategic view of the region based on stability, prosperity and opportunity," Gargash said.

Discussions in&nbsp;Cyprus, he said, focussed on ways to enhance joint action in facing the fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic, medical research and the distribution of vaccines, as well as energy security in the region.

"This meeting is one of the results of the changes that have taken place in the Middle East over the past year, thanks to a brave and bold decision by leaders," said Israeli Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi.

He said the accords had created a 'real opportunity' to change the face of the Middle East.

"And if you don't believe that, ask yourselves if you could have seen this picture only just a year ago," he said, standing at a podium next to Gargash, against the backdrop of the calm seas of the east Mediterranean.

Israel, the UAE, Greece and Cyprus said they would seek to deepen their cooperation in fields ranging from energy to fighting COVID, saying budding ties could change the face of a region more synonymous with conflict.

Israel, the UAE, Greece and Cyprus said they would seek to deepen their cooperation in fields ranging from energy to fighting COVID, saying budding ties could change the face of a region more synonymous with conflict. "The evolving web of regional cooperation is creating a new narrative, one that is cracking the glass ceiling of the prevailing (one) of our neighbourhood as a region of turmoil, conflict and crisis," said Cypriot Foreign Minister and host Nikos Christodoulides. The UAE and fellow Gulf state Bahrain in September became the first Arab states in a quarter of a century to sign agreements to establish formal ties with Israel, forged largely through shared fears of Iran. The so-called Abraham Accords are US-brokered agreements which have ushered in public rapprochements between Israel and several Arab states. Friday's encounter on the east Mediterranean island was attended by Anwar Gargash, a former UAE foreign minister who worked on the historic normalisation of relations with Israel last year. He was there in his capacity as diplomatic advisor to UAE President Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed. "The Abrahamic accords were mainly driven by the necessity of an alternative strategic view of the region based on stability, prosperity and opportunity," Gargash said. Discussions in Cyprus, he said, focussed on ways to enhance joint action in facing the fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic, medical research and the distribution of vaccines, as well as energy security in the region. "This meeting is one of the results of the changes that have taken place in the Middle East over the past year, thanks to a brave and bold decision by leaders," said Israeli Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi. He said the accords had created a 'real opportunity' to change the face of the Middle East. "And if you don't believe that, ask yourselves if you could have seen this picture only just a year ago," he said, standing at a podium next to Gargash, against the backdrop of the calm seas of the east Mediterranean.

Let's shake narrative of bickering West Asia, say former foes in Cyprus

India's External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, Japan's State Minister of Defence Nakayama Yasuhide, former Sri Lankan Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and&nbsp;former US National Security Advisor John Bolton&nbsp;are among leaders who will address WION's Global summit 2021, to be held on March 24 in Dubai.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/globalsummit/dubai-2021">WION Global Summit: Fourth Edition, Dubai 2021 — click here for details</a>

The event will be aired live on the WION channel, as well as on its YouTube, Facebook and Twitter accounts, from 12.00 PM IST on Wednesday.

'Power Play in a Post-Pandemic World' is the theme of the fourth edition of the summit, which will have thought-provoking discussions in four sessions.&nbsp;

Jaishankar will be the chief guest at the event to be held at The Oberoi, Dubai, where world leaders, thinkers and influencers will engage in dialogue on the common challenges currently affecting the world.&nbsp; 
 
Pavan Kapoor, Indian Ambassador to UAE, will deliver the welcome note on behalf of the host nation, United Arab Emirates.

Panelists will focus their attention on issues at the intersections of global politics, economy, diplomacy and our daily lives in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The first session will focus on peace deals in West Asia. The discussion will touch upon several topics in the wake of the change of guard in the US and several nations formalising or normalising their diplomatic ties with Israel. Is the Abraham Accords a political win for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a foreign affairs victory for Donald Trump? What is the future of the annexation of West Bank? Does it amount to a betrayal for Palestine? In the context of a new administration at the White House led by Joe Biden, what's the future of West Asia? Will the US be returning to the talking table with Iran, considered the 'common enemy'? These are among the questions that will be discussed at this session.&nbsp;

The opening keynote address will be delivered by John Bolton. The dialogue partners for the session are Fleur Hassan-Nahoum, Deputy Mayor of Jerusalem; Mustapha Noman, Former Deputy Foreign Minister, Yemen; Ibrahim Shukralla, Emirati Editor from Abu Dhabi and Jason D Greenblatt, Former White House Middle East envoy.

The second session, titled The Post-Pandemic World Order, will explore how COVID-19 &nbsp;exposed the failure of multilateral institutions as well as the lack of global leadership. A key question that will be asked is, who will be the post-pandemic global leader, or will it have several global leaders?

There will be discussions on how the pandemic diminished the credibility of the US, the worst-hit by the pandemic, and exposed its lack of interest in global leadership. The session will also examine how the pandemic was a double whammy for West Asia, as it led to the oil market slump.

There will be discussions on the fight against political Islam in Europe. Other questions on the table would be: Has the pandemic opened opportunities for new alliances? Will the world reset its ties with China post the pandemic? Will there be a shift in economic power? Will there be a push towards multilateralism or ultra-nationalism? Besides these burning questions, the parleys will also focus on India's role in the post-pandemic world.&nbsp;

Nakayama Yasuhide, &nbsp;State Minister of Defence, Japan, will deliver the keynote address for the second session. Also addressing it are Youssef Chahed, Former Prime Minister of Tunisia; Michael Tsai, Former Defence Minister, Taiwan; Ranil Wickremesinghe, Former Prime Minister of Sri Lanka; Ahmed Naseem, Minister of Health, Maldives; Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee GBS JP, Chinese politician, member of ExCo &amp; LegCo and founder of New People's Party.

The third session, on World Economy: The Price of the Pandemic, will focus on how the coronavirus brought about an economic downturn not seen since World War II. It will examine economic trends of 2021, by the end of which global GDP is expected to be 7.5% lower than it would have been without the pandemic.&nbsp;

At issue are joblessness and business shutdowns, with 15% of young, previously employed, people out of jobs. The panelists will address areas such as US unemployment, which is highest since the Great Depression, as well as the future of pandemic-hit sectors such as oil, tourism and aviation. It will discuss why China is not being held accountable, even as several countries are pushed into a recession by the pandemic.&nbsp;

Those addressing these issues would be Jacek Rostowski, Former Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance of Poland; Ian Goldin, former Vice President of the World Bank; Alexander Downer, Former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Australia; and Alexander Dynkin, President, Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy.

The fourth and last session will explore the digital revolution that saw the world go online during the pandemic. While digital was always the future, the pandemic has accelerated the shift, with e-working and e-learning becoming common. At issue are questions like whether companies will move to permanent work from home, and whether it will take a toll on work-life balance. Are concerns about data security being addressed during this digital revolution? Is the world prepared for the move online?&nbsp;

Joining this session are Audrey Tang, Digital Minister, Taiwan; Maria Galindo, Advisor in International Digital Policy in Government of Catalonia; Kaimar Karu, Former Minister of Foreign Trade and Information Technology, Republic of Estonia; Jehudi Castro, Digital Advisor to the Colombian President and Former Vice-Minister of Digital Economy; Simon Lacey, Former VP, Huawei Technologies; and Gilles Babinet, Digital Champion at the European Commission for France.

India's External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, Japan's State Minister of Defence Nakayama Yasuhide, former Sri Lankan Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and former US National Security Advisor John Bolton are among leaders who will address WION's Global summit 2021, to be held on March 24 in Dubai.

India's External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, Japan's State Minister of Defence Nakayama Yasuhide, former Sri Lankan Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and former US National Security Advisor John Bolton are among leaders who will address WION's Global summit 2021, to be held on March 24 in Dubai. WION Global Summit: Fourth Edition, Dubai 2021 — click here for details The event will be aired live on the WION channel, as well as on its YouTube, Facebook and Twitter accounts, from 12.00 PM IST on Wednesday. 'Power Play in a Post-Pandemic World' is the theme of the fourth edition of the summit, which will have thought-provoking discussions in four sessions. Jaishankar will be the chief guest at the event to be held at The Oberoi, Dubai, where world leaders, thinkers and influencers will engage in dialogue on the common challenges currently affecting the world. Pavan Kapoor, Indian Ambassador to UAE, will deliver the welcome note on behalf of the host nation, United Arab Emirates. Panelists will focus their attention on issues at the intersections of global politics, economy, diplomacy and our daily lives in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. The first session will focus on peace deals in West Asia. The discussion will touch upon several topics in the wake of the change of guard in the US and several nations formalising or normalising their diplomatic ties with Israel. Is the Abraham Accords a political win for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a foreign affairs victory for Donald Trump? What is the future of the annexation of West Bank? Does it amount to a betrayal for Palestine? In the context of a new administration at the White House led by Joe Biden, what's the future of West Asia? Will the US be returning to the talking table with Iran, considered the 'common enemy'? These are among the questions that will be discussed at this session. The opening keynote address will be delivered by John Bolton. The dialogue partners for the session are Fleur Hassan-Nahoum, Deputy Mayor of Jerusalem; Mustapha Noman, Former Deputy Foreign Minister, Yemen; Ibrahim Shukralla, Emirati Editor from Abu Dhabi and Jason D Greenblatt, Former White House Middle East envoy. The second session, titled The Post-Pandemic World Order, will explore how COVID-19 exposed the failure of multilateral institutions as well as the lack of global leadership. A key question that will be asked is, who will be the post-pandemic global leader, or will it have several global leaders? There will be discussions on how the pandemic diminished the credibility of the US, the worst-hit by the pandemic, and exposed its lack of interest in global leadership. The session will also examine how the pandemic was a double whammy for West Asia, as it led to the oil market slump. There will be discussions on the fight against political Islam in Europe. Other questions on the table would be: Has the pandemic opened opportunities for new alliances? Will the world reset its ties with China post the pandemic? Will there be a shift in economic power? Will there be a push towards multilateralism or ultra-nationalism? Besides these burning questions, the parleys will also focus on India's role in the post-pandemic world. Nakayama Yasuhide, State Minister of Defence, Japan, will deliver the keynote address for the second session. Also addressing it are Youssef Chahed, Former Prime Minister of Tunisia; Michael Tsai, Former Defence Minister, Taiwan; Ranil Wickremesinghe, Former Prime Minister of Sri Lanka; Ahmed Naseem, Minister of Health, Maldives; Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee GBS JP, Chinese politician, member of ExCo & LegCo and founder of New People's Party. The third session, on World Economy: The Price of the Pandemic, will focus on how the coronavirus brought about an economic downturn not seen since World War II. It will examine economic trends of 2021, by the end of which global GDP is expected to be 7.5% lower than it would have been without the pandemic. At issue are joblessness and business shutdowns, with 15% of young, previously employed, people out of jobs. The panelists will address areas such as US unemployment, which is highest since the Great Depression, as well as the future of pandemic-hit sectors such as oil, tourism and aviation. It will discuss why China is not being held accountable, even as several countries are pushed into a recession by the pandemic. Those addressing these issues would be Jacek Rostowski, Former Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance of Poland; Ian Goldin, former Vice President of the World Bank; Alexander Downer, Former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Australia; and Alexander Dynkin, President, Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy. The fourth and last session will explore the digital revolution that saw the world go online during the pandemic. While digital was always the future, the pandemic has accelerated the shift, with e-working and e-learning becoming common. At issue are questions like whether companies will move to permanent work from home, and whether it will take a toll on work-life balance. Are concerns about data security being addressed during this digital revolution? Is the world prepared for the move online? Joining this session are Audrey Tang, Digital Minister, Taiwan; Maria Galindo, Advisor in International Digital Policy in Government of Catalonia; Kaimar Karu, Former Minister of Foreign Trade and Information Technology, Republic of Estonia; Jehudi Castro, Digital Advisor to the Colombian President and Former Vice-Minister of Digital Economy; Simon Lacey, Former VP, Huawei Technologies; and Gilles Babinet, Digital Champion at the European Commission for France.

At WION Global Summit, leaders to deliberate on post-pandemic world order

Four weeks into his presidency and President Biden realizes that it is not easy to set back the US's foreign policy aims to its traditional pillars. His outlook was summed up in his first foreign policy statement at the State Department on 4 February 2021 – which included an emphasis on the restoration of the habits of global cooperation and re-building the muscle of democratic alliances that have 'atrophied.' It also emphasized determining the US foreign policy course as a balance between geo-politics and respect for human rights.&nbsp;

Nowhere is this reset being harder to implement than the Middle East region, a volatile cocktail of nation-state conflicts, religious fundamentalism and terrorism and active superpower intervention. For one, some of the conflicts and issues in the Middle East today were created by the Obama era policies when Biden was the Vice President. Two nowhere else was the Trump-style break from a stated 'neutral' US foreign policy to doling out personal favors that changed the contours of interaction between the region's countries more prominent. Third, the absence of a US 'mediating' guarantee created a new/enlarged role for varied actors – Turkey, Russia, and&nbsp;China that the US will find hard to reset.

President Biden's main foreign policy challenge in the Middle East will be 'how you solve a problem like Iran.' Critics have said that given Biden's close involvement with the Iran deal under President Obama, the current administration runs the risk of adopting the 'old wine in a new bottle strategy.' Since Biden has assumed office – Iran has threatened to block a UN nuclear watchdog from conducting snap inspections of some nuclear sites.&nbsp;

Iran-backed Shiite militias have attacked the US-coalition forces in Erbil in northern Iraq, reflecting their growing power in a country embroiled in years of war. In Yemen, Iranian-backed Houthi rebels have escalated violence against the government forces in the oil-rich central province of Marib. They have also intensified drone attacks against the neighboring Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).&nbsp;

Marking a break from Trump’s four years, these developments are starting to create disquiet among the traditional US allies in the region – Israel, Saudi Arabia and UAE. Under Trump’s policy of maximum pressure on Iran, without any diplomacy, Arab states and Israel had forged a ‘tentative relationship’ focused on containing Iran in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon.

For their efforts at rapprochement with Israel (via the Abraham Accord), the Arab rulers were rewarded personally – when &nbsp;President Trump used his discretionary powers to look the other way as evidence of MBS’s involvement emerged in journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s murder. Or when he signed arms deals with UAE or refused to end the US support of the Yemen war despite a US Senate resolution. However, since Biden's victory, it has been made clear that the US will try and rebalance this 'one-sided' and obvious tilt.

This rebalancing has begun with Saudi Arabia. Supported by a Senate striving to reclaim its war-making powers, the US has ceased its support for the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen. Biden has personally criticized Saudi's track record on human rights and said in no uncertain terms that it would speak directly to King Salman and not to Crown Prince MBS, the country's de-facto leader.

The arms sale of F35 fighter jets to the UAE has been put on hold. Regarding Israel, though Biden is unlikely to reverse measures like shifting the US embassy to Jerusalem, there is a general consensus that PM Netanyahu will not be given free rein in the US calculations in the region.&nbsp;

However, as Iran steps up its offensive – Biden will be faced with some critical policy choices –&nbsp;

A) How much to bend to preserve the legacy of the Iran deal and what happens if Iran walks out.

B) How to recalibrate relationships with the allies in the above background.&nbsp;

What has the potential to complicate this balancing act is the new actors/dynamics that have emerged and gained strength in the region.&nbsp;

Of course, the first emphasis is on the US's most significant geopolitical and economic rival – China. While China has developed political, trading and economic linkages with countries across the board in the Middle East, its priorities are not a threat to the US interests just yet. However, three focal areas can complicate the geo-politics for the US.&nbsp;

The first is the partnership between Iran and China that gained strength under the Trump administration. China made huge purchases of Iranian crude oil in violation of US sanctions, invested in infrastructure projects and sold essential supplies to Iran.

A pro-China hardline faction in Iran has gained prominence and is likely driving a hard bargain with the Biden administration. With the Iranian presidential elections scheduled in June 2021, a probable win for this hardline wing could mean an end to all negotiations on the Iran deal and a further shift towards China.&nbsp;

What is problematic for the Biden administration is that China has gained currency as a 'strategic balancer' to the US across all genres of actors – Shiite militias from Iraq, Syria, Lebanon have taken Chinese support.

The region's Arab monarchies and Israel have similarly made investment deals and are using Chinese companies for infrastructure building. They have also chosen to ignore Chinese human rights violations in Uighur.&nbsp;

The second cog in the wheel is Russia’s relationship with Iran and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad that has complicated US attempts to detangle from Iraq and Syria.

Turkey has emerged as the ‘black swan’ with emerging stress points with the US – such as the sanctions over its possession of Russia’s S-400 air defense system and its unilateral action in the Kurdish (US allies) areas of Iraq and Syria. There is also an element of a European disengagement with the US stands in the region as Europe has learned to pursue independent stands on Iran, Russia, etc., under the Trump presidency.&nbsp;

After being confirmed, US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken’s initial addresses created a foreign policy roadmap for the Biden administration in which priorities were Asia-Pacific, rapprochement with European allies and then the Western hemisphere. However, developments in the past few weeks have shown that Middle East remains the region where US troops, resources and infra remain high at risk.

Therefore, it is not surprising that the new Biden administration's first military operation targeted Iran-backed fighters in Syria on 25 February. But with allies diverging, Iran belligerent, global consensus on issues such as Iran deal thin at best, US will have to think of out of box solutions.

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Four weeks into his presidency and President Biden realizes that it is not easy to set back the US's foreign policy aims to its traditional pillars. His outlook was summed up in his first foreign policy statement at the State Department on 4 February 2021 – which included an emphasis on the restoration of the habits of global cooperation and re-building the muscle of democratic alliances that have 'atrophied.

Four weeks into his presidency and President Biden realizes that it is not easy to set back the US's foreign policy aims to its traditional pillars. His outlook was summed up in his first foreign policy statement at the State Department on 4 February 2021 – which included an emphasis on the restoration of the habits of global cooperation and re-building the muscle of democratic alliances that have 'atrophied.' It also emphasized determining the US foreign policy course as a balance between geo-politics and respect for human rights. Nowhere is this reset being harder to implement than the Middle East region, a volatile cocktail of nation-state conflicts, religious fundamentalism and terrorism and active superpower intervention. For one, some of the conflicts and issues in the Middle East today were created by the Obama era policies when Biden was the Vice President. Two nowhere else was the Trump-style break from a stated 'neutral' US foreign policy to doling out personal favors that changed the contours of interaction between the region's countries more prominent. Third, the absence of a US 'mediating' guarantee created a new/enlarged role for varied actors – Turkey, Russia, and China that the US will find hard to reset. President Biden's main foreign policy challenge in the Middle East will be 'how you solve a problem like Iran.' Critics have said that given Biden's close involvement with the Iran deal under President Obama, the current administration runs the risk of adopting the 'old wine in a new bottle strategy.' Since Biden has assumed office – Iran has threatened to block a UN nuclear watchdog from conducting snap inspections of some nuclear sites. Iran-backed Shiite militias have attacked the US-coalition forces in Erbil in northern Iraq, reflecting their growing power in a country embroiled in years of war. In Yemen, Iranian-backed Houthi rebels have escalated violence against the government forces in the oil-rich central province of Marib. They have also intensified drone attacks against the neighboring Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Marking a break from Trump’s four years, these developments are starting to create disquiet among the traditional US allies in the region – Israel, Saudi Arabia and UAE. Under Trump’s policy of maximum pressure on Iran, without any diplomacy, Arab states and Israel had forged a ‘tentative relationship’ focused on containing Iran in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon. For their efforts at rapprochement with Israel (via the Abraham Accord), the Arab rulers were rewarded personally – when President Trump used his discretionary powers to look the other way as evidence of MBS’s involvement emerged in journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s murder. Or when he signed arms deals with UAE or refused to end the US support of the Yemen war despite a US Senate resolution. However, since Biden's victory, it has been made clear that the US will try and rebalance this 'one-sided' and obvious tilt. This rebalancing has begun with Saudi Arabia. Supported by a Senate striving to reclaim its war-making powers, the US has ceased its support for the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen. Biden has personally criticized Saudi's track record on human rights and said in no uncertain terms that it would speak directly to King Salman and not to Crown Prince MBS, the country's de-facto leader. The arms sale of F35 fighter jets to the UAE has been put on hold. Regarding Israel, though Biden is unlikely to reverse measures like shifting the US embassy to Jerusalem, there is a general consensus that PM Netanyahu will not be given free rein in the US calculations in the region. However, as Iran steps up its offensive – Biden will be faced with some critical policy choices – A) How much to bend to preserve the legacy of the Iran deal and what happens if Iran walks out. B) How to recalibrate relationships with the allies in the above background. What has the potential to complicate this balancing act is the new actors/dynamics that have emerged and gained strength in the region. Of course, the first emphasis is on the US's most significant geopolitical and economic rival – China. While China has developed political, trading and economic linkages with countries across the board in the Middle East, its priorities are not a threat to the US interests just yet. However, three focal areas can complicate the geo-politics for the US. The first is the partnership between Iran and China that gained strength under the Trump administration. China made huge purchases of Iranian crude oil in violation of US sanctions, invested in infrastructure projects and sold essential supplies to Iran. A pro-China hardline faction in Iran has gained prominence and is likely driving a hard bargain with the Biden administration. With the Iranian presidential elections scheduled in June 2021, a probable win for this hardline wing could mean an end to all negotiations on the Iran deal and a further shift towards China. What is problematic for the Biden administration is that China has gained currency as a 'strategic balancer' to the US across all genres of actors – Shiite militias from Iraq, Syria, Lebanon have taken Chinese support. The region's Arab monarchies and Israel have similarly made investment deals and are using Chinese companies for infrastructure building. They have also chosen to ignore Chinese human rights violations in Uighur. The second cog in the wheel is Russia’s relationship with Iran and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad that has complicated US attempts to detangle from Iraq and Syria. Turkey has emerged as the ‘black swan’ with emerging stress points with the US – such as the sanctions over its possession of Russia’s S-400 air defense system and its unilateral action in the Kurdish (US allies) areas of Iraq and Syria. There is also an element of a European disengagement with the US stands in the region as Europe has learned to pursue independent stands on Iran, Russia, etc., under the Trump presidency. After being confirmed, US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken’s initial addresses created a foreign policy roadmap for the Biden administration in which priorities were Asia-Pacific, rapprochement with European allies and then the Western hemisphere. However, developments in the past few weeks have shown that Middle East remains the region where US troops, resources and infra remain high at risk. Therefore, it is not surprising that the new Biden administration's first military operation targeted Iran-backed fighters in Syria on 25 February. But with allies diverging, Iran belligerent, global consensus on issues such as Iran deal thin at best, US will have to think of out of box solutions. (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinion: US foreign policy and its Middle East conundrum

Demonstrating for the third week their determination to force the country’s military to return to its barracks, protesters in Myanmar appear to be learning lessons from a decade of protest in the Middle East and North Africa.

By the same token, Myanmar’s protesters, in stark contrast to public silence about the military’s brutal repression of the Rohingya minority in recent years, seem to want to forge a national identity that supersedes past emphasis on ethnicity and/or religion.

In doing so, they, like their counterparts in Lebanon and Iraq, reject sectarian policies that allowed elites to divide and rule and distract attention from economic and social grievances held by all segments of the population.

As they resist the military’s February 01 coup that nullified a democratic election won in November in a landslide by Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) because of alleged electoral fraud, protesters confront many of the same obstacles that demonstrators in &nbsp;Thailand, Turkey, Sudan, and Algeria face.

The ability to address desperately needed reforms with buy-in from the military will shape a return to democracy and the sustainability of the transition. Taking military concerns into account reforms will have to include civilian control of the military, defining the military’s mission in national defence rather than ideological terms, and regulating the armed forces’ vast economic interests.

The Middle East and North Africa provide cautionary tales like Egypt that eight years after a coup has become a brutal dictatorship and Libya, Syria and Yemen that are wracked by war, as well as potential models, that would serve Myanmar’s democratisation well.

Tunisia, the one Arab country to have pushed political transition relatively successful, was able to do so because Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, the Tunisian autocrat who was overthrown in 2011, had ensured that the military had no vested interest in the country’s political system.

Mr Ben Ali decimated the military leadership, severely cut the budget of the armed forces early on in his 24-year rule and sidelined the military, relying instead on security forces and law enforcement. As a result, the military effectively stood aside when protesters staged mass anti-government demonstrations.

The positioning of Tunisia’s armed forces may not offer Myanmar immediate options, but it highlights the need for a military that understands itself as a national institution rather than a party with vested political and economic interests.

Of more immediate importance to Myanmar is the fact that Mr Ben Ali as well as the leaders of Egypt, Libya and Yemen were toppled by an informal alliance between civil society and either faction of the military or the armed forces as a whole. They shared a short-term interest in removing the incumbent from power.

The same is true for Southeast Asia’s people power revolts in the Philippines and Indonesia in the 1980s and 1990s. In Myanmar, it was the military that opted for a degree of political liberalization following decades of intermittent mass protest.

It took Tunisian civil society’s engagement with the security forces as well as other segments of society and the existing power structure to nurture the democratization process. By contrast, the process was derailed in much of the Middle East by a post-revolt breakdown of the alliance, often aggravated and/or manipulated by external forces.

The Tunisian approach enabled all parties to manage the inevitable divergence of interests once Mr Ben Ali had been toppled, juxtaposing civil society’s quest for wholesale political and economic reform with the security forces’ insistence on the preservation of their economic and political interests and rescue of as much of the ancien regime as possible.

In Tunisia, like in other post-revolt countries, the divergence kicked in the moment the incumbent was removed. The Middle East and Southeast Asia’s experience demonstrates that the pitfalls are embedded in the compromises made to establish a transitionary government.

Inevitably, the military and/or security forces either constitute the transition government or are a powerful part of it. Their track record is one of taking liberties in protecting their interests.

Like in Myanmar this month, the military crosses red lines when the transition endangers those prerogatives. Learning how to counter the pitfalls of perilous but inevitable cooperation with at least segments of the military and/or security forces is a work in progress.

Turkey provides a different set of lessons. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s turn towards repression and authoritarianism in the wake of a failed military coup in 2016 suggests that civilian control does not offer a magic wand even if the takeover was foiled by protesters who set aside their social, ideological, and political differences.

If this is a cautionary tale, Turkey also offers solutions to at least one of the issues: the military’s economic interests. Turkey’s military, even before the imposition of civilian control, put its economic house in order by creating a conglomerate, one of the country’s largest, that is owned by the military pension fund and subject to regulation, civic and commercial law, and markets like any other privately held institution.

As civil obedience in Myanmar persists, protesters have certain advantages.

Rather than being on their own, the protesters benefit from being at the forefront of a wave of defiance and dissent that for the past decade and no doubt the next is fueled by a breakdown in confidence in political systems and leadership.

With the pandemic, the widespread mismanagement of public health responses, the global economic downturn and dislocation, and technological change, the coming decade promises to be perhaps even more turbulent.

In addition, Myanmar protesters’ may be beneficiaries of the electoral defeat of US President Donald Trump and the rise of Joe Biden, who has pledged to make human rights a central plank of his foreign policy.

Granted, US adherence in its foreign policy to its human rights values has at the best of times been checkered.

Nonetheless, Mr Biden’s approach, even if imperfectly applied, erases the permissive environment that autocrats enjoyed during the Trump years.

There is, moreover, a reason to believe that Mr Biden will be truer to his pledge because it is key to US efforts to repair the credibility and reputational damage suffered by the United States because of Mr Trump’s America First policy; disdain for multilateralism, international institutions, and international law; empathy with autocrats; and disregard for human rights.

Playing into Mr Biden’s emphasis on human rights is the fact that the protests, like in Lebanon and Iraq, appear to have broken down ethnic and religious fault lines.

Yangon’s usually hidden Rohingya community has openly joined the protests four years after detained democratically elected Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi stood by and later defended the military’s ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya, more than 700,00 of which fled to Bangladesh.

Burmese who in recent years used Twitter to attack and threaten Rohingya activists living in exile have apologized since the February coup, recognizing that military rule poses a threat to all.

Political transition, like reconciliation, is a long-drawn-out process that can take up to half a century to play out. It is a process of two steps forward and steps backwards as Myanmar is discovering now. &nbsp;

The Myanmar military understands that tacit Russian and Chinese support may not be as much of a lifesaver as it was in the past. That may explain the military’s reluctance to crush the protests even if the likelihood of an imminent crackdown is high.

If the experience of Egypt is anything to go by, the military can brutally suppress and keep a lid on unrest for a period of time. It may preserve the military’s interests for a while, but it cannot provide sustainable economic solutions or ensure stability.

In contrast to Egypt, protesters in Myanmar have the advantage that they are demanding recognition of a current election outcome that could put a new government in a position to redefine the role of the military and regulate its economic interests.

Based on the experience of Egypt, one core bone that the government would likely have to throw the military is immunity against prosecution for past crimes. That may be a bitter pill to swallow and violate principles of truth and accountability as an important pillar of transition.

As Egypt demonstrates, it offers no guarantee of keeping the military in its barracks, but it may be the carrot that helps entice the military to make the concessions needed for a democratic transition.

For now, Myanmar cries out for non-partisan independents capable of helping the military and the protesters to back away from a zero-sum game that seems destined to result in bloodshed.

That is likely to prove a gargantuan task as Indonesian Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi spearheads efforts by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to mediate a way back from the brink.

In the words of former International Crisis Group Myanmar analyst Morten B. Pedersen “when a military obsessed with order and stability…confronts an essentially leaderless popular movement driven by youthful anger and shattered hopes, compromise is perhaps the hardest thing of all.”

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Demonstrating for the third week their determination to force the country’s military to return to its barracks, protesters in Myanmar appear to be learning lessons from a decade of protest in the Middle East and North Africa.

Demonstrating for the third week their determination to force the country’s military to return to its barracks, protesters in Myanmar appear to be learning lessons from a decade of protest in the Middle East and North Africa. By the same token, Myanmar’s protesters, in stark contrast to public silence about the military’s brutal repression of the Rohingya minority in recent years, seem to want to forge a national identity that supersedes past emphasis on ethnicity and/or religion. In doing so, they, like their counterparts in Lebanon and Iraq, reject sectarian policies that allowed elites to divide and rule and distract attention from economic and social grievances held by all segments of the population. As they resist the military’s February 01 coup that nullified a democratic election won in November in a landslide by Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) because of alleged electoral fraud, protesters confront many of the same obstacles that demonstrators in Thailand, Turkey, Sudan, and Algeria face. The ability to address desperately needed reforms with buy-in from the military will shape a return to democracy and the sustainability of the transition. Taking military concerns into account reforms will have to include civilian control of the military, defining the military’s mission in national defence rather than ideological terms, and regulating the armed forces’ vast economic interests. The Middle East and North Africa provide cautionary tales like Egypt that eight years after a coup has become a brutal dictatorship and Libya, Syria and Yemen that are wracked by war, as well as potential models, that would serve Myanmar’s democratisation well. Tunisia, the one Arab country to have pushed political transition relatively successful, was able to do so because Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, the Tunisian autocrat who was overthrown in 2011, had ensured that the military had no vested interest in the country’s political system. Mr Ben Ali decimated the military leadership, severely cut the budget of the armed forces early on in his 24-year rule and sidelined the military, relying instead on security forces and law enforcement. As a result, the military effectively stood aside when protesters staged mass anti-government demonstrations. The positioning of Tunisia’s armed forces may not offer Myanmar immediate options, but it highlights the need for a military that understands itself as a national institution rather than a party with vested political and economic interests. Of more immediate importance to Myanmar is the fact that Mr Ben Ali as well as the leaders of Egypt, Libya and Yemen were toppled by an informal alliance between civil society and either faction of the military or the armed forces as a whole. They shared a short-term interest in removing the incumbent from power. The same is true for Southeast Asia’s people power revolts in the Philippines and Indonesia in the 1980s and 1990s. In Myanmar, it was the military that opted for a degree of political liberalization following decades of intermittent mass protest. It took Tunisian civil society’s engagement with the security forces as well as other segments of society and the existing power structure to nurture the democratization process. By contrast, the process was derailed in much of the Middle East by a post-revolt breakdown of the alliance, often aggravated and/or manipulated by external forces. The Tunisian approach enabled all parties to manage the inevitable divergence of interests once Mr Ben Ali had been toppled, juxtaposing civil society’s quest for wholesale political and economic reform with the security forces’ insistence on the preservation of their economic and political interests and rescue of as much of the ancien regime as possible. In Tunisia, like in other post-revolt countries, the divergence kicked in the moment the incumbent was removed. The Middle East and Southeast Asia’s experience demonstrates that the pitfalls are embedded in the compromises made to establish a transitionary government. Inevitably, the military and/or security forces either constitute the transition government or are a powerful part of it. Their track record is one of taking liberties in protecting their interests. Like in Myanmar this month, the military crosses red lines when the transition endangers those prerogatives. Learning how to counter the pitfalls of perilous but inevitable cooperation with at least segments of the military and/or security forces is a work in progress. Turkey provides a different set of lessons. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s turn towards repression and authoritarianism in the wake of a failed military coup in 2016 suggests that civilian control does not offer a magic wand even if the takeover was foiled by protesters who set aside their social, ideological, and political differences. If this is a cautionary tale, Turkey also offers solutions to at least one of the issues: the military’s economic interests. Turkey’s military, even before the imposition of civilian control, put its economic house in order by creating a conglomerate, one of the country’s largest, that is owned by the military pension fund and subject to regulation, civic and commercial law, and markets like any other privately held institution. As civil obedience in Myanmar persists, protesters have certain advantages. Rather than being on their own, the protesters benefit from being at the forefront of a wave of defiance and dissent that for the past decade and no doubt the next is fueled by a breakdown in confidence in political systems and leadership. With the pandemic, the widespread mismanagement of public health responses, the global economic downturn and dislocation, and technological change, the coming decade promises to be perhaps even more turbulent. In addition, Myanmar protesters’ may be beneficiaries of the electoral defeat of US President Donald Trump and the rise of Joe Biden, who has pledged to make human rights a central plank of his foreign policy. Granted, US adherence in its foreign policy to its human rights values has at the best of times been checkered. Nonetheless, Mr Biden’s approach, even if imperfectly applied, erases the permissive environment that autocrats enjoyed during the Trump years. There is, moreover, a reason to believe that Mr Biden will be truer to his pledge because it is key to US efforts to repair the credibility and reputational damage suffered by the United States because of Mr Trump’s America First policy; disdain for multilateralism, international institutions, and international law; empathy with autocrats; and disregard for human rights. Playing into Mr Biden’s emphasis on human rights is the fact that the protests, like in Lebanon and Iraq, appear to have broken down ethnic and religious fault lines. Yangon’s usually hidden Rohingya community has openly joined the protests four years after detained democratically elected Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi stood by and later defended the military’s ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya, more than 700,00 of which fled to Bangladesh. Burmese who in recent years used Twitter to attack and threaten Rohingya activists living in exile have apologized since the February coup, recognizing that military rule poses a threat to all. Political transition, like reconciliation, is a long-drawn-out process that can take up to half a century to play out. It is a process of two steps forward and steps backwards as Myanmar is discovering now. The Myanmar military understands that tacit Russian and Chinese support may not be as much of a lifesaver as it was in the past. That may explain the military’s reluctance to crush the protests even if the likelihood of an imminent crackdown is high. If the experience of Egypt is anything to go by, the military can brutally suppress and keep a lid on unrest for a period of time. It may preserve the military’s interests for a while, but it cannot provide sustainable economic solutions or ensure stability. In contrast to Egypt, protesters in Myanmar have the advantage that they are demanding recognition of a current election outcome that could put a new government in a position to redefine the role of the military and regulate its economic interests. Based on the experience of Egypt, one core bone that the government would likely have to throw the military is immunity against prosecution for past crimes. That may be a bitter pill to swallow and violate principles of truth and accountability as an important pillar of transition. As Egypt demonstrates, it offers no guarantee of keeping the military in its barracks, but it may be the carrot that helps entice the military to make the concessions needed for a democratic transition. For now, Myanmar cries out for non-partisan independents capable of helping the military and the protesters to back away from a zero-sum game that seems destined to result in bloodshed. That is likely to prove a gargantuan task as Indonesian Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi spearheads efforts by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to mediate a way back from the brink. In the words of former International Crisis Group Myanmar analyst Morten B. Pedersen “when a military obsessed with order and stability…confronts an essentially leaderless popular movement driven by youthful anger and shattered hopes, compromise is perhaps the hardest thing of all.” (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinion- Myanmar: Exploiting lessons learnt in the Middle East

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