The Middle East Octopus

By Dr Khairi Janbek

When we think of contemporary Iran, one always believes that the Arab Middle East had always been dominated by three Non-Arab American allies: Iran of the Shah, Turkey and Israel. One thinks that those “neighborhood police stations” were the guarantors of stability through their convergence, and at times contradictions in the age of Cold War and oil. However, the Shah of Iran was deposed and the anti-communist Cold War ended, but that didn’t mean that oil stopped becoming important nor that both Russia and China were no longer threats.

One would say, that the rehabilitation of Iran and possibly turning it into a negotiations partner aims at keeping the third angle of the police stations triangle going, because non of the Arab countries, no matter how much they tried, could never replace Iran, because no “Arab police station” is permitted to emerge as a third angle.

Having said that, it would be beyond naive to think that the expansion of Iran’s power and influence happened by stealth or escaped the notice of the US and NATO. After all, Iran grew to become a Red Sea country through its influence on the Houthis in Yemen, a Mediterranean country through its influence in Syria as well Lebanon through Hezbollah, and the major Gulf country through its supporters in Iraq. In fact this Iranian domination of space is what has created a common space between all its long arm organizations in the region.

Essentially, if we compare Iran to an octopus, all those various groups are its tentacles, and they all serve the purpose of Iran’s strategic interests, albeit not through a push-button approach, but through not taking any action which would not please their master Iran. Of course, this puts Iran in a strong position to be a major player in the region and an inescapable negotiations partner for the US, which is also convenient for the Americans, in order to remind their Arab allies who is their protector in a region policed by Turkey, Israel and Iran.

Of course, this takes us to the point of saying that, for all intents and purposes, for the Americans a trusted adversary is more important than distrusted friends, and that it would be absurd to think that all those long arms of Iran in the Arab world can be amputated by military means; they certainly can be weakened, but without the consent of Iran and without the right price, so long as it remains behind them, nothing much can change.

At this point, from what one can only see, is that no one in their right mind or otherwise, will permit a war to emerge in which Israel is pitted against Iran and the US as well as NATO putting all their weight behind Israel and forcing the Arabs to choose their camp. That would be the scenario of the end of the world as we know it , or with major civil wars in the Arab countries controlled by the tentacles of Iran, and no one wants that.

Dr Janbek is a Jordanian writer based in Paris

Continue reading
In a Psychedelic Arab World

Dr Khairi Janbek

The Arab world has been for some time now like a theme park with all the trappings. There are zones of fun and entertainment, with bright lights, cafes and restaurants with people living in them whilst other zones stand like halls of mirrors with distort images, chambers of horror, and ghost trains with their own population.

The ones who run both zones tend to be standing outside them frequently greeting each other. But the people of the entertainment zone are always wary that the people of the other zone may envy them, so they give them enough to let them carry on with their lives as best as they can.

The obsession with the geographical and civilizational unity of the Arab world has always inflated expectations of Arab solidarity as a tool to solve the problems of Arab societies ranging from economic development and good governance, to conflict resolution.

As the expectations go unmet, popular frustration at the weakness of one nation, prompt further calls for solidarity accompanied with anger from the other Arab people, however, it seems, and for all intents and purposes, the pan-Arab hopes seem to be always unreasonable. In fact when the colonialists thought that the Arab peoples should be grateful to each have their own nation-states across the geographical span, the Arab peoples, as a whole, felt cheated for not having a single, one-state to represent them.

As for the current Palestinian tragedy, its roots in recent terms have been planted in 1974, when the late King Hussein was put under extreme pressure to accept the notion that, the PLO, being the sole representative of the Palestinian people, in other words transferring the Arab burden of the Palestinian problem to the shoulders of the late Yasser Arafat.

Of course, one is not going to repeat the horrors which came after that regarding this issue, but the idea that the Palestinian issue being an Arab cause, ended there and then. The Palestinian issue went from being a political issue, to a mere human rights concern, with the option for the Arab states to support according to the levels of anger expressed by their own populace regarding the Palestinian people’s plight.

It was Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990 that struck the final nail in the coffin of the illusion that there can be an Arab solution to Arab problems, but even this illusion did not apply to the Palestinian problem, because that concern was gone almost two decades earlier.

So today, it is natural for sympathy for the Palestinians to direct its call to the international community to react, because frankly this is the only quarter which can do something, whatever it may be, because the realization had set in from before that the Arabs will not do anything.

We live in times now, in which no Middle Eastern regime, in addition to those having a state within a state inside them, will be ever permitted to ever threaten Israel by the Trump administration, be that through the threats of dividing countries, or in throwing them to the jaws of poverty and destruction through economic extortion; in fact, we are in the era of enforced ugly peace.

Dr Janbek is a columnist based in Paris France.

Continue reading
Stranger Than Fiction: Hamas in Trump’s World

By Dr Khairi Janbek

We often use George Orwell’s 1984 novel as a metaphor for similar circumstances which we feel we are living in contemporary times. In fairness, many a time, the novel provides an apt description of these circumstances. But a novel which is forgotten or overlooked, is the trilogy of Isaac Asimov –  the Foundation – written in the early 1960s. Now, if he meant it to be a prophetic prediction of the future, one is likely to say he has come close to describing our epoch and circumstances.

In Asimov’s trilogy, and in a scientific fictitious world, a mathematical genius creates a world based on laws, order, and controlled emotions, in a sense, a world built on rationality. But suddenly, a mutant emerges, gathering a large following and support, and bent on destroying the existing norms, abolishing order, and breaking all laws. The author, calls it the mutant: The mule. Of course, one is talking here science fiction.

However, if we extrapolate from science fiction into real life, US President Donald Trump can be understood only by shedding the veil of absurdity that surrounds him, as, for all intents and purposes purposes, he is here here to break all the existing norms and order to the extent of firing even those whom have elected him.

As he projects his image on the domestic and international scenes, he comes out not as a president of a reality show but rather as a president of a “parallel” reality show. And what does that essentially mean? To the discerning observer it means that Trump is flip flopping between the two realities.

It was always known that president Trump dislikes multilateral and/or rather negotiations with blocs, whilst maintaining a preference for bilateral negotiations. So in carrying out his style of negotiations, he tends to pick the strongest or the wealthiest potential partners in any bloc to negotiate with. After all he is the one whom coined the dictum, if your rich and powerful then you must be right, but if you are rich but poor and weak, well, it’s your fault.

Consequently, this style of presidency, throws his allies and detractors into total confusion, and even close observers are finding it difficult to grapple with the US presidency bent on striking deals than reaching agreements.

He has no qualms about trying to reach a deal with Iran regarding its nuclear project, when in effect he was the one who tore up the nuclear agreement in the first place, but take note, it was an agreement not a deal.

He came out to negotiate directly with Hamas, though what’s the deal he is proposing, is not really known, but he doesn’t seem to have any qualms about breaking taboos and norms here.

So where does this leave his friends and allies? No man’s land really, in which you just go half way with him.

Dr Janbek is Jordanian writer based in Paris, France.

Continue reading
Trump, Theater of The Absurd and Gaza

By Dr Khairi Janbek

Evidently US President Donald Trump has raised the stakes very high in his proposed plan to solve the intractable Middle Eastern problem: The Palestinian issue and consequently reaching a wider normalization between the Arab states and Israel.

Of course not only the Arab world but also the rest of the world is learning how to cope with a new American presidency, more accustomed to making deals than in reaching agreements. Consequently the method used concerning the Arab states is that of threats to their national security and integrity with the existential being to their Palestinian brethren.

In scenes reminiscent of a play from the theatre of the absurd, we saw Mr Benjamin Netanyahu’s face light up like a child each time Mr Trump opened his mouth promising him presents which he always sought, although in this case those presents are not the property of Mr Trump and are not his to either have or give away.

Now, one has no wish to go to the distant American history, because the last time American manifest destiny was mentioned, native Americans paid the price with a big genocide and other nations were reduced to mere colonial status by the USA.

However, Trump never mentioned the term explicitly, but whether he realises it or not, the ethnic cleansing he is proposing to solve the problem of the Palestinians to the advantage of Israel is no different to the ethnic cleansing of native Americans. The times are different but the idea is the same.

On the other hand, the acid test for the Palestinian question is in how the world is going to react to these Trump advocated policies. One doesn’t think Russia with its war in Ukraine, at least for the near future, will have much say regarding the Palestinian issue or any other to that effect, while the Chinese, the question of trade war is far more important to them as a system, which puts trade and commerce above politics.

And the EU with the apparent cracks in its unity, it is still unclear what it will do; of course besides amiable legalistic positive rhetoric, will it continue to be the financier of the new American foreign policy, or become the backdoor for US handouts to nations which the United States has claimed will not support?

Ultimately, with the US and Israeli threats of forcible transfer of the Palestinians, it is the Arab states that are in the front line, the close allies of the USA and some of whom peace signatories with Israel.

Of course in the next day or two, the King of Jordan will meet President Trump in Washington, and it is rumored president Sisi will join them, also towards the end of the month, an emergency Arab summit will likely be held in Cairo.

One cannot predict the outcome, but judging from old references, everyone will try to escape responsibility with the Palestinian people keep paying the price.

Dr Khairi Janbek is a Jordanian commentator based in Paris

Continue reading
A World Without America?

By Dr Khairi Janbek

Away from the condom politics which seems to be just an obsession of a Washington administration suffering from erectile dysfunction, on thought it would be intriguing to imagine a world without America, which means deep cultural, economic as well as political implications. It’s a thought experiment which forces one to imagine how the world would look like without the specific influence, history and power dynamics that the USA has shaped.

On the geopolitical and global power level, other nations would have to step in into the void, vying for influence. Europe, China, Russia and India would probably play a central role on global politics, in addition, the Security Council of the UN will start looking very different, Europe would become the dominant force strengthening its collective military and political capabilities.

In terms of culture and society, American has played a central role in shaping global pop culture, Hollywood, music, fashion and hi-tech, indeed other nations would have come in, in Asia South Korea, Japan and India would take a central role in shaping global culture, with Europe asserting itself in the arts and literature.

In technology and innovation, the US has produced Silicon Valley and leading corporations in software, hardware and AI, however without, China and Europe would fill the hitech leadership role which probably would accelerate their breakthroughs.

As for the economy, without America, the world economy would be real different, the US dollar would not be the world reserve currency, with the Euro and the Yuan, being the global standard. Trade dynamics would be rearranged and institutions like the World Bank and the IMF would have other substitutes.

Regarding military and defense, American power is unmatched , without it global security dynamics would shift drastically, NATO might not exist, while regions powers like Russia, China and India, would become more aggressive in asserting their influence.

In terms of the environment and social movements, the US has been at the forefront of global debates on climate change, social Justice and human rights; taking note of course, with mixed results, but without it, certainly others would take the lead, for a start, Europe has been a leader in pushing for climate action , and in social action, countries like Brazil, South Africa, would fill in the gap with most probably leading to different outcomes. But , the USA has been a major donor for global and humanitarian aid, and their contribution would have to be substituted by other coalitions, which one assumes would be limited only to crisis.

Essentially, a world system without America, the international system would be less centered around one dominant great power, as power would be more diffuse with multiple centers of influence and more regional power struggles, but at the end of the day, the purpose for the use of condoms would be much clearer.

Dr Janbek is an opinion writer based in Paris

Continue reading