Emirates Group Warns of ‘Huge’ Future COVID-19 Impact Despite Profit

United Arab Emirates flagship air carrier and freight company Emirates Group reported a profit of $456 million for the 32nd year running for the financial year 2019-20. 

The group, which includes Emirates Airline and the Dubai National Air Transport Association (dnata), reported a strong performance last financial year but says it will have to increase debt to weather the COVID-19 crisis after the pandemic halted its passenger operations in March.

Emirates Airline and Group Chairman Sheikh Ahmed bin Saeed Al Maktoum said the company performed strongly for the first 11 months of 2019-20 and had been on track to deliver against business targets until the COVID-19 crisis struck.

“From mid-February things changed rapidly as the COVID-19 pandemic swept across the world, causing a sudden and tremendous drop in demand for international air travel as countries closed their borders and imposed stringent travel restrictions,” Al Maktoum said in an official statement.

Emirates Group overall finished the 2019-20 year with a strong cash balance of $7 billion, but due to the COVID-19 crisis decided not to pay a dividend to Investment Corporation of Dubai in order to protect its liquidity for the uncertain times ahead.

Nevertheless, Emirates plans to borrow cash in the first quarter of 2020-21 to guard against COVID-19-related liquidity shortfalls.

Al Maktoum said the airline and travel business is always vulnerable to external shocks, and the company has implemented “aggressive cost management measures” to safeguard Emirates Group until business resumes.  

“The COVID-19 pandemic will have a huge impact on our 2020-21 performance, with Emirates’ passenger operations temporarily suspended since 25 March, and dnata’s businesses similarly affected by the drying up of flight traffic and travel demand all around the world,” the Chairman said. 

“We expect it will take 18 months at least before travel demand returns to a semblance of normality,” Al Maktoum predicted. 

Emirates Airlines recorded a $288 million profit, up 21% from the previous year, off the back of strong third- and fourth-quarter revenue and lower operating costs, primarily thanks to lower fuel prices.

The airline reported that the COVID-19 crisis in the last quarter and Dubai Airport runway closures shaved 6% off total revenue. It also said the strong US dollar caused the negative currency impact to jump substantially from $156 million to $262 million for this reporting period. 

Meanwhile, dnata recorded a profit of $168 million despite a “sharp profit decline” of 57% due to losses from its travel division, the impact of COVID-19 on all activities, and write-offs from the Thomas Cook failure.

Without the one-off gain from divesting of its shares in IT company Accelya, dnata’s profits would have been down 72% compared to the same period last year. 

 

Read also: Etihad Airways to Start Flying May 16, Emirates Airlines Offers Refunds

Egypt Amends Emergency Law, Empowering Presidency

On Friday, May 8, the Egyptian government approved amendments to the country’s laws that dictate the limits of its COVID-19 state of emergency. The amendments formalize lockdown measures and grant the president and security agencies the power to suspend education and quarantine citizens.

Such measures are already in place across Egypt, and the law also officializes government powers to ban any type of public and private meetings, protests, celebrations, and any form of public assembly. While these bans would not be uncommon in our current pandemic-oriented zeitgeist, many fear the law could provide an indefinite waiver for state violence.

Since his military overthrew the elected Egyptian government that followed the fall of dictator Hosni Mubarak, President Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi has cracked down on dissent and attempted to silence opposition. The country is one of the worst offenders of press freedom in the world and often jails journalists and human rights activists that speak out against the military regime.

Fears over increased repression

International NGO Human Rights Watch (HRW) protested the amendments with a statement on May 7. “President al-Sisi’s government is using the pandemic to expand, not reform, Egypt’s abusive Emergency Law,” the rights watchdog’s deputy Middle East and North Africa director, Joe Stork, stated.

HRW accused the Egyptian government of using the COVID-19 crisis as an opportunity to increase state repression in a similar way to what recently occurred in Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s Hungary. The Egyptian government already applies many of the new powers introduced by the amendments, causing the NGO to fear the changes will be of a more permanent nature.

The current state of emergency is nothing new for Egyptians. The country has lived under such conditions for over four decades as Hosni Mubarak used his emergency powers to control the public. As the new amendments feature no set end date, the law could be used indefinitely to quell protests.

Legislative changes

The Egyptian constitution does compel the government to extend a state of emergency by three-month increments, but el-Sisi’s control over parliament means there is little parliamentary oversight, according to Human Rights Watch.

The severity of punishments introduced in the amendments form another point of concern for the NGO. With sentences of 15 years in prison for violations, the absence of free trials during a state of emergency could lead to increased prosecution of political dissidents, including activists.

While HRW expressed its concerns over the amendments, it also commended the inclusion of government powers to suspend taxes and utility payments during the current crisis. Whether the watchdog’s fears will materialize should become clear after the pandemic eases. Whether or not President el-Sisi will lift the state of emergency should determine the implication of this week’s changes.

My Secular Ramadan

Ramadan amid COVID-19 is a strange thing. It is only the second Ramadan I have experienced since moving to Morocco in October 2018, yet the yearly Islamic festival of fasting and feasting is already precious to me.

As a Dutch person who was brought up in a secular family, religious holidays never meant much to me, except from the obvious joy of having a day off and sharing an occasional nice dinner or gifts. The first time I experienced Ramadan, however, still holds a special meaning for me.

Coming to Morocco

In the summer of 2018 my wife and I had decided to make what some deemed a radical move. We wanted to move away from my native Netherlands and move to North Africa. We felt weighed down by bills, taxes, and stress. After years of fruitlessly trying to secure residency papers for my Indonesian wife, the frustration about the lack of welcome we felt drove us south.

My wife and I had met studying international politics in the Netherlands, but following our graduation, Europe held little promise in the ways of fulfilling jobs or an outlook for a comfortable life. Around us we saw the people in our low-income neighborhood suffer under increased austerity and diminishing social benefits, leaving behind exactly those that needed the most support.

So we did our research, looked for a country that held potential for the future, with a positive outlook and enough stability to build a new life. That country for us was Morocco. In October 2018 we exhausted our funds on a second-hand car, packed our dog and all our worldly belongings in the back, and set off on a 3,000-kilometer drive south.

Cultural differences

I had found one of the few jobs that would guarantee me a contract, income, and a way to get a residency permit, working in a call center that served European customers. The job was demanding of my time and energy and provided no satisfaction, but it helped pay the rent and meant we would get to live in our new home country.

The months that followed were a mix of wondrous adventures, as we discovered the city of Rabat, met our neighbors, and rapidly made friends. Our first months also saw some struggle, as our lack of knowledge of the French and Arabic languages meant we often felt lost in translation or trapped in bureaucracy.

We knew one thing for certain: We felt welcome. Everybody we met welcomed us with open arms, street vendors took the time to explain the local names for our groceries, and our friends quickly introduced us to the pleasures and difficulties of growing up in Morocco. As our comprehension of the local Arabic dialect increased, we felt more and more at home.

Relief and celebration

It was Ramadan that cemented for me the shared experience between us and our new community. I knew a few things about Ramadan, but outside of refraining from eating on public transport near anyone who looked like they might be fasting, the Islamic holy month had meant very little to me.

My experience of Ramadan in 2019 instilled in me a sense of brotherhood that would otherwise have taken years to develop. With shops closed, and drinking or smoking taboo, the sense of self-sacrifice and discipline that I saw endeared me to the holy month’s origins and intent.

In the days prior to the official sighting of the crescent moon that indicates the start of Ramadan, I could sense an apprehensive joy in my colleagues.

Heavy smokers were drawing down their habit and the usually unkempt nerdy colleagues suddenly arrived at work neatly shaven and in fresh clothes. Everyone was getting ready for something I was not sure what to make of. Seeing my colleagues’ struggle through the first few days of fasting, in what were some particularly hot days, revealed to me both the dedication of those fasting, but also the palpable sense of shared suffering.

Sharing is caring

I had volunteered to work night shifts, so that my Muslim colleagues could share iftar meals with their families, but what started as grueling, long shifts turned into a special experience. Every night, as the time arrived for the breaking of the fast, people would offer us dates and milk. Many stared at the clock in hungry anticipation as they counted down the minutes.

Even as we continued to work, we would munch on pastries and sweets that were provided to those who had to work during the breaking of the fast. We would go get boxes of food for each other, share in the meal, and share in the sense of relief that hydration and nourishment brings. Even though I only “fasted” while I was in public, the feeling of not being able to drink water when thirsty, even for a moment, is a sensation many fortunate people should experience.

I noticed how even though people were deprived of food and drink, they made a little more effort to give to the poor, lend a hand, or simply greet each other. Similar to how the shared experience of our COVID-19 lockdowns have created a bond between people, so did Ramadan for me. As someone who has always been most concerned with how society treats its weakest members, I felt Ramadan provided a brief but valuable glimpse into a life of poverty.

A new year begins

As Ramadan drew to a close, I had become accustomed to a diet of nighttime pastries and sweets, and as we shared the last iftar meal, I felt the experience had brought me closer to my colleagues and neighbors. The month-long experience had reconfirmed my beliefs that when we all take care of each other, we can overcome even dire situations.

Ramadan ends with the feast of Eid al Fitr, when joy and relief can be seen on everyone’s faces. My colleagues had told me most people like to dress up, so off I went to work wearing a Moroccan djellaba, filled with a sense that a new year, and a new chapter in our Moroccan life, had started.

As a non-Muslim, my experience was much less grueling compared to those of my friends and neighbors. I had slept normal hours and could sneak a few sips of water or the occasional cigarette here and there, but as Ramadan ended I felt part of the community like never before.

I feel the symbolic value of Ramadan is universal. For most people it is hard to imagine a life worse than ours, and Ramadan provides a brief window into what it means to not always have needs–and wants–available. The festival of giving to the poor that follows Ramadan feels like a recognition of our shared humanity and the need to look out for each other.

Ramadan amid a pandemic

One year on, life has changed immensely. I have a job I love, my wife and I no longer struggle to communicate in Arabic, and for the first time in my life, Ramadan seemed like a much bigger event than Christmas. I now share the sense of loss that my local community faces, as the pandemic has limited the physical connections with family and friends that are essential to the traditional Ramadan experience.

There are no crowds of brightly-clothed people making their way to the mosque everyday or shared meals with colleagues. What does prevail is the sense of togetherness and shared suffering. Especially in these difficult days when we fear for our elderly and vulnerable friends and relatives, Ramadan feels like another yearly reminder to care.

It is a time to give a little extra, and receive a little less. It is a time when although we cannot hug or even shake each other’s hands, a friendly greeting between neighbors can be worth so much. Ramadan, to me, means dedicating a moment for overt and deliberate compassion, to break from our bubbles and experience our shared hopes and fears.

Although this year the conclusion of Ramadan will miss some of its sparkle and joy, the enduring legacy of compassion and understanding that accompanies the month of fasting is more important than ever before.

US Aims to ‘Reaffirm Ties’ with Iraq’s New Prime Minister

The approval of Iraq’s first ministerial cabinet since November 2019 received a warm welcome from observers around the world. Key players in the region released messages of support as Iraq finally broke its political deadlock. Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the US all confirmed their commitment to work with the new government in Baghdad.

The US appeared desirous to provide a boost to the new prime minister, granting another waiver for the nation to buy Iranian energy, but the granted “permission” highlights Iraq’s precarious position and its dependence on foreign actors.

Iraq’s new prime minister, Mustafa al-Kadhimi, is the country’s former intelligence chief and has spent much of his career working in London. The US appears confident it can make overtures to Kadhimi that could result in warming relations between the two countries.

Iraq’s government had in January ordered the expulsion of US military forces from the country as the government responded to demands of some of the largest protests in its history. The US has so far ignored the Iraqi parliament’s decision as it hopes to find common ground with the country’s new leader.

Needed reforms

Iraq is in need of drastic reform to stop pervasive violence, economic instability, and political chaos. Kadhimi’s cabinet formation came after several compromises, and only time will tell how much practical support the ministers can expect from Iraq’s fragmented political landscape.

Kadhimi’s government has committed to finalizing a new electoral law, limiting free access to weapons to state actors, launching a national dialogue in response to earlier protests, and emphasizing the fight against corruption. The government will have to accomplish these difficult tasks amid a COVID-19 epidemic and a crisis of large numbers of internally displaced people and refugees.

Addressing Iraq’s ineffective security institutions and the presence of various armed militias will prove a monumental task, especially as many armed factions are aligned with and funded by foreign powers. By limiting access to weaponry to state actors, Kadhimi aims to reestablish state control over a country that has become a battlefield in the stand-off between the US and Iran.

With both Iran and the US eager to influence Iraqi policy-making, Kadhimi’s ability to reestablish national sovereignty for his country could prove the most daunting task. With both US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif congratulating him, he may soon have to disappoint one, or both, of the foreign powers.

Amnesty International: Iraqi Government Must Prioritize Human Rights

Global human rights organization Amnesty International highlighted abuses documented during anti-government protests and the campaign against Islamic State (IS) in an open letter to Iraq’s new Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi, urging him to place human rights at the heart of his government’s agenda. 

The international rights charity asked the new Iraqi administration to protect the most vulnerable during the country’s COVID-19 lockdown, support Yazidi survivors of IS atrocities, and improve the treatment of internally displaced persons (IDPs)

“This new government has an opportunity to ensure that the promotion and protection of human rights in Iraq is prioritized after years of appalling violations,” said Amnesty International Iraq Researcher Razaw Salihy

The organization also called for an end to impunity for security forces violence, including killings and forced disappearances documented during Iraq’s campaigns against IS, and last year’s peaceful protests which overthrew the previous government. 

“The Iraqi people have paid too high a price for decades of impunity and what have so far been repeatedly hollow promises by the authorities. We welcome the government’s stated commitment to hold those responsible for protesters’ killings accountable, and to prioritize addressing the needs of the internally displaced people,” Salihy added.

According to Amnesty, somewhere between 500 and 600 Iraqis were killed and thousands were injured in protests beginning in October 2019. Protestors called for better public services and for an end to government corruption, high unemployment, and interference by foreign powers like the US and Iran.

Amnesty reports that Iraqi security forces, including Shia militias of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU), targeted “largely peaceful protesters with live ammunition, hunting rifles, live fire consistent with sniper fire, tear gas and water cannons.

The new administration, headed by former intelligence chief Kadhimi, is a product of the protests which prompted former PM Abdul Mahdi to resign.

“We are going through a critical phase in our history. Iraq is facing so many challenges – in our security, economy, healthcare and even socially, but it is not bigger than our determination to stand up to these challenges,” Kadhimi told Parliament after winning a confidence vote that rubber-stamped his nominated cabinet.

“The security, stability, and blossoming of Iraq is our path,” the new PM tweeted shortly after being sworn in.

Kadhimi is also a former journalist who criticized Saddam Hussein’s bloody dictatorship from exile in neighboring Iraq. His new government has promised Iraqis justice for the loss of lives of protesters as well as support for the internally displaced, assurances Amnesty International has welcomed.

“It must now translate these promises into immediate and meaningful action, including addressing the Iraqi people’s longstanding socio-economic grievances,” Salihy warned.

 

Read also: Khadimi Wins Iraqi Parliament’s Confidence, Forms Government

US Signals Reduction of Peace-Keeping Troops on Egypt-Israel Border

US peace-keeping troops have been stationed on the Egypt-Israel border in the Sinai region for nearly four decades, making up the bulk of the Multinational Forces & Observers (MFO) mission. That could all change if US Secretary of Defense Mike Esper’s plan to reduce troop numbers in the restive peninsula can get past opposition from the State Department and close ally Israel. 

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported yesterday that Esper is keen for the 454 personnel-strong US contribution to the MOF to be scaled back. 

“The US Mission to the MFO (Multinational Force & Observers) is one of many missions DoD [Department of Defense] is currently assessing,” Navy Commander Sean Robertson told the WSJ.

Esper’s insistence on a Sinai drawdown is in line with a broader US strategy to reduce costs and reassess the US military’s global footprint, Pentagon officials told the WSJ. 

The US State Department and Israel are reportedly concerned a reduction in US troops could collapse the nearly 40-year-old peace-keeping operation, established in early 1981 after Egypt and Israel signed a peace treaty at Camp David in 1979. 

“The international force in Sinai is important, and (the) American participation in it is important,” Israel’s energy Minister Yuval Steinitz said during an interview with 102FM in Tel Aviv.

“Certainly, the issue will be raised between us and the Americans,” added Steinitz, who is also an Israeli security cabinet member. 

At present, the MOF comprises around 1,156 military personnel from 13 countries, who “supervise the implementation of the security provisions of the Egyptian-Israeli Treaty of Peace” across 10,000 square kilometres of the Sinai Peninsula.

The Sinai, particularly the northern part of the peninsula, has become a bastion of terrorist activity led by Al-Qaeda and Islamic State aligned groups since Egypt’s 2011 revolution. An April 30 attack on Egyptian troops near Bir al-Abd caused 10 casualties and highlights the growing challenges of ensuring MFO security in the troubled region.

For its part, the State Department opposes the troop withdrawal on diplomatic and anti-terrorism grounds. Maintaining a military presence in the Sinai, which is inaccessible to journalists and diplomats, allows the US to observe Egyptian and Israeli military activity and monitor the terrorist threat in the region.

On May 7, the state department reconfirmed its commitment to fighting terrorism on the peninsula by approving the sale of 43 AH-64E Apache attack helicopters to Egypt worth approximately $2.3 billion. 

A statement on the sale explained that the refurbished aircraft will be used “to modernize its [Egypt’s] armed forces to address the shared US-Egyptian interest in countering terrorist activities emanating from the Sinai Peninsula, which threaten Egyptian and Israeli security and undermine regional stability.”

“This proposed sale will support the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a friendly country that continues to be an important strategic partner in the Middle East,” the Defense Security Cooperation Agency said, adding that the sale “will not alter the basic military balance in the region.”

Value of US military investment in Egypt

Esper’s proposed drawdown of US military investment in Egypt and the attack helicopter sale announcement come a day after a joint report by the Project on Middle East Democracy (POMED) and Center for International Policy (CIP) said the US should reconsider its military aid to Egypt.

The report argued that corruption and patronage have rendered counterterrorism funding ineffective, the US and Egypt’s geopolitical objectives no longer align on a number of fronts, and the growing rights abuses under el-Sisi’s regime make Egypt an increasingly undesirable partner. 

POMED and CIP cited Democratic Congressman and Egypt critic Tom Malinowski who labels Egypt’s military “utterly, disastrously incompetent.”

“In exchange for the favors that Egypt gets from the White House, they don’t actually do anything for us. This is not a situation where we are trading off human rights for something that advances the US national interest. Egypt… contributes nothing to the goals of peace and security,” Malinoswki told a 2019 forum on the relationship between Washington and el-Sisi.

The report concluded that US military aid to Egypt should be cut by $300 million per annum and have increased conditionality and oversight.  

In April, rival Washington-based think tank Middle East Institute (MEI), however, found that the MFO, at least, is a cost-effective US investment that enhances regional security and gives Washington a crucial diplomatic standing in the region. 

“This is not the time to hang out the “Mission Accomplished” banner for the MFO. At a nominal cost to the US in money and manpower, for nearly 40 years, the mission has been a phenomenal success,” wrote MEI senior vice president and former ambassador Gerald Feierstein. 

“The mission ensures that the US has a seat at the table to preserve what remains of the signal US diplomatic achievement in the Middle East since the end of World War II: Israeli-Egyptian peace. Neither the UN nor any other third party could play that role should the US walk away,” Feierstein concluded.

Domestic desire for US military pull-back

It is difficult to pin down the effectiveness of MFO or US military aid to Egypt, but it is likely that Esper’s interest in reducing US involvement in the Sinai is, in reality, more about domestic than regional concerns.

In March, Trump delivered on his promise to get US troops out of Afghanistan after an 18-year-long, bloody, and some argue pointless intervention. Esper said on May 5 that the US is still on track to reach its goal of 8,600 troops remaining in Afghanistan by July, despite constant attacks from the Taliban, in contravention of their February 29 deal.

Trump has previously declared that it is time to extricate the US military from “ridiculous endless wars, many of them tribal, and bring our soldiers home.”

An April survey by conservative lobby “Concerned Veterans for America” (CVA), which has close ties to the Trump presidency, found a majority of US veterans and their families surveyed were in favor of a reduction in overseas military engagements.

Over 70% of the 700 surveyed military veterans said they support the full withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, while 68% of the 800 military families who responded to the survey also support the drawdown.

“I think this shows the fatigue of almost two decades of war,” said CVA’s executive director Nate Anderson. “And I think there is increased awareness among the American public about how long we have been fighting.”

It remains to be seen if Esper, cost-saving, and Trump’s increasingly-inward gaze will triumph over the US-Israel relationship and State Department disapproval. The COVID-19 public health crisis and related economic fallout may further accelerate the US withdraws from its international engagements, like military funding in Egypt or the World Health Organization, and accelerate its retreat from its long-standing role as global hegemon.

 

Read also: US Tells Gulf States to Pick a Side in New Cold War

Khadimi Wins Iraqi Parliament’s Confidence, Forms Government

The political squabbling and uncertainty that has marked Iraqi politics for the past six months came to a head yesterday, when parliament approved Kadhimi’s proposed government in a vote of confidence. The political battles are not over as only 15 of Kadhimi’s 22-member proposed cabinet gained a majority of the legislature’s votes.

Two prime minister-designates prior to Kadhimi had tried and failed to form a government. Thanks to an intense last-gasp flurry of deal-making, concessions, and a degree of pragmatism which materialized ahead of Wednesday’s confidence vote, the former intelligence chief and one time journalist is now the new leader of a troubled Iraq. 

“We are going through a critical phase in our history. Iraq is facing so many challenges – in our security, economy, healthcare and even socially, but it is not bigger than our determination to stand up to these challenges,” Kadhimi told parliament after the vote, in effectively his first as prime minister. 

The Vote

Wednesday’s confidence vote was close-run, according to Al Jazeera, and Kadhimi will begin governing without his full cabinet after parliament rejected his nominations for the justice, agriculture and trade portfolios. The assembly also agreed to delay the vote on the key foreign and oil ministries, after failing to reach a consensus on candidates for the powerful roles. 

Ahead of the vote, the former Iraqi National Intelligence Service chief promised fellow lawmakers his government would be “solution-based, not a crisis government,” adding that early elections will be forthcoming. 

Iraq has been mired in political deadlock since widespread anti-establishment protests sparked by socio-economic and political issues forced former Prime Minister Abdul Mahdi’s resignation in November. One of the major issues for protesters was a rejection of Iraq’s opaque power sharing apportionment system “muhasasa,” which they hold responsible for the endemic corruption that has crippled Iraq’s economy and investment in public services.

Khadimi, like his two predecessors Mohammed Tawfiq Allawi and Adnan al-Zurfi, had struggled to find a way forward that would please the various ethno-religious political blocs and the Iraqi people’s desire for change. 

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also weighed in on Iraq’s political woes at the end of April.

“Iraqi leaders must put aside the sectarian quota system and make compromises that lead to government formation for the good of the Iraqi people, and for the partnership between the United States and Iraq,” he said in a press briefing on April 29.

It appears that Kadhimi was forced to be pragmatic, and allow political factions to effectively pick the majority of his cabinet to enable it to pass. It also seems his new cabinet has done little to end sectarian squabbling, with some parties abstaining from the vote and criticizing it for favoring their Shia rivals.

“He had 10 percent of freedom to choose his cabinet, and 90 percent were determined by the parties and blocs,” according to Iraq commentator Fadel Abu Ragheef. 

The National Coalition party led by Iyad Allawi, and ex-Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s State of Law Alliance abstained from the vote because they were not offered ministries. National Coalition MP Kadhim Al Shammery decried the voting process, calling Kadhimi’s approach “strange” and saying it set “a dangerous precedent in the Iraqi political scene.”

“The candidates of his cabinet – that’s 12 ministers – were presented to the Shia parties, and they gave their point of view but it was not shared with the rest of the political parties. It’s as if the Shia powers are the guardians of the political process,” Al Shammery said in an interview with Al Jazeera. 

Challenges Facing New PM

Khadimi faces major internal problems and must also find a way to navigate Iraq’s difficult geopolitical position, which places it in an unenviable position between feuding powers, the US and neighboring Iran.

“The security, stability and blossoming of Iraq is our path,” Kadhimi tweeted after his elevation to the premiership, but that path is paved with a multitude of complex problems.

Domestically, the challenges facing Iraq have escalated dramatically in 2020, driven by COVID-19, a drop in global oil prices, and the political deadlock that Wednesday’s vote ended. Record-low oil revenues have hit the economy hard, while the country’s ill-equipped health system is struggling to deal with a COVID-19 outbreak suspected to be much larger than authorities have reported. 

According to Iraq political expert Hisham al-Hashimi, the new PM will have no trouble handing the “technical issues such as forming equitable laws and a fair commission.” It is the lawmakers themselves that will be harder for Kadhimi to handle–-he still needs to find candidates to fill the portfolios of foreign affairs, oil, justice, agriculture, and trade. While seen as a political pragmatist with friends across Iraq’s political divide, Wednesday’s vote showed Kadhimi will still have difficulties finding consensus and common ground in the halls of Iraq’s sectarian parliament. 

A small protest in Tahrir Square on Wednesday criticized his new government as a continuation of the status quo and was a reminder that the prime minister will have to work hard to regain the populace’s trust in government or risk a return to last year’s violent protests. Early elections will be paramount but if any failure to deliver the change the Iraqi people crave will complicate the country’s political future. 

On the security front, Iraq still faces a threat from ISIS fighters regrouping in the country’s North. It is also caught in the middle of rising tensions and tit-for-tat attacks with the US, often carried out on Iraqi soil. Washing has endorsed Kadhimi and the leader has made overtures to Iran, but balancing the relationships and maintaining Iraqi sovereignty, as he promised the parliament he would, will again be easier said than done. 

 

Read also: Rockets Hit Baghdad Airport Amid Iraqi Crises

US Tells Gulf States to Pick a Side in New Cold War

On May 7, a US diplomat provided the first tangible evidence of the emergence of a new cold war. US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs David Schenker told Reuters that Gulf states, when dealing with China, will have “to weigh the value of their partnership with the United States.” The rhetoric is reminiscent of the Cold War between the US and Soviet Russia that split the world into camps.

“We want our partner nations to do due diligence,” Schenker told Reuters, signaling that the US does not appreciate the increasing cooperation between China and Gulf states. The US is wary of the COVID-19 aid that China is providing, saying Chinese aid is “often predatory.” With the US in the midst of its own COVID-19 epidemic, its officials fear increasing Chinese “soft power” in the region.

Growing ‘soft power’

Soft power refers to the use of diplomacy, trade, and aid in order to build partnerships and ensure national interests.

The US undoubtedly has the most military power in the world, spending more on national defense than China, France, Germany, India, Saudi Arabia, the UK, and Russia combined. The soft power the nation has counted on to maintain its global hegemony, however, is rapidly declining.

For decades the United States had an unparalleled soft power approach, providing the world with significant financing for global institutions and development aid. In exchange for American dollars, the global community accepted the continuation of American dominance over global trade and economic policies.

Changing soft power balance

US influence has waned as President Donald Trump’s limited knowledge of international geopolitics and a misunderstanding of the influence that soft power buys has led to a decrease in US spending, culminating with the announcement it will stop funding the WHO. Trump has failed to realize that disproportionate spending in organizations like NATO is not “unfair” to the US but instead has for decades bought the acquiescence of its allies.

US soft power has been the reason the country is allowed to invade or bomb any country it pleases. It explains the support for US coup attempts in Latin America, including the 2019 overthrow of Bolivia’s democratically elected left-wing government and last month’s failed coup attempt in Venezuela.

A gap in international leadership

Amid the sudden decline in soft power, the US appears to be refocusing efforts on its hard power.

Clete Willems, a former Trump administration member, acknowledged the rising tensions in a May 5 interview with CNBC. “We have to be realistic and say we are on a cold war footing right now,” Willems said.

“I know people get uncomfortable with the terminology, but I do think we have to be honest and call this what it is.” Willems told the news network.

“This is the start of a new Cold War and if we’re not careful, things could get much, much worse,” he said.

The COVID-19 pandemic has laid bare the rising tensions between the US and China. Top US officials continue to falsely insinuate the virus had started in a Wuhan military laboratory and the US president has repeatedly called COVID-19 “the Chinese virus.” But as both countries’ officials bicker over exchanged insults, China is increasing its soft power by providing significant COVID-19 equipment, technology, and expertise to countries in need.

Post-COVID-19 leadership

While all over the world Chinese planes have delivered much-needed support, the global community watches in astonishment as the USA’s structural weaknesses are exposed. America’s crumbling infrastructure, for-profit healthcare, poor support for vulnerable communities, and pervasive structural racism has turned a health crisis into an unmitigated catastrophe.

Trump continues to posture and invent facts as America’s status plummets. When foreigners used to think of the US, they thought of the glimmering skyscrapers of New York City, but the COVID-19 crisis has revealed that much of the country is living in conditions worse than in many developing countries.

With Chinese soft power on the ascend, the US will undoubtedly reach for more desperate measures in order to continue its global hegemony. Pressuring Gulf states is likely only the first step in a dangerous process that could divide the world into two camps. With President Trump likely to win reelection and China advancing on its belt-and-road initiative, the two superpowers appear destined for a confrontation.

Is Nuclear Energy a Viable Oil Alternative for the MENA Region?

With oil-producing countries in crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic has once again shown that a dependence on income from oil revenue is a risky gamble. From Algeria to Iraq, national governments are confronted with the fickle nature of their main source of income. Aspirations to diversify oil-rich economies have resulted in futuristic aspirations but few tangible results that could tempt producers to turn off the tap.

The lower the price of oil, the more difficult it is to realize green technology. Prices of green energy skyrocket, in a relative sense, whenever oil prices crash and endanger progress to implement cleaner alternatives. Luckily for the MENA, one viable alternative exists that might allow the region to wean itself off hydrocarbons and instead produce sustainable green energy.

Nuclear fears

Due to the threat of nuclear weapons during the Cold War and the technology’s inherent hazards, nuclear technology has become a focal point of protest by environmental groups. The fear for the civilization-ending power of nuclear weapons has driven many to ignore the technology’s peaceful application, as anything “nuclear” is now taboo.

The often-undeserved fear of nuclear energy meant that MRI scan technology had to hide its nuclear aspects in order to avoid public opposition. The technology was originally called NMRI (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging) but the “N” was dropped because of public fears of anything deemed “nuclear.”

Safety

Protests in the 1980s predicted that nuclear power plants would present a direct danger to safety, and that installing them could make events such as the Chernobyl explosion a regular occurrence. Four decades later, the 450 nuclear reactors around the world have seen only one accident. Fukushima, Japan saw explosions and meltdowns within its poorly prepared reactors after an unprecedented earthquake.

Modern safety guidance for power plants would never allow both the location and cost-cutting that was seen at Fukushima, and newly built power plants would face more stringent safety measures than is expected of any oil or gas installations, where explosions do occur occasionally.

Producing energy without carbon emissions or air pollution, nuclear energy might be the best compromise for renewable energy if we are to meet net-zero carbon emissions targets.

Storage

Nuclear waste storage has been problematic in the past. Both the US and USSR buried tons of waste in their deserts, without much consideration for safety. In contrast, modern storage facilities pose little threat and innovations in the recycling of nuclear waste mean alternatives exist.

France recycles its own nuclear waste in its North, where it manages to reuse much of the nuclear waste created by its power plants and military. Nuclear energy powers over three-quarters of France’s energy needs without releasing carbon dioxide or air pollution.

In contrast, Germany closing its nuclear plants resulted in an increase in carbon dioxide emissions of approximately 36 megatons per year, which have killed 1,100 people annually through air pollution.

Military use

Fears of misappropriating nuclear energy for military use appear to stem mostly from a fundamental misunderstanding of the differences between the fuel needed for each application. In order to produce nuclear weapons, nuclear material has to be compressed so much that it requires very different technology. Producing nuclear fuel is also not enough to create a weapon.

The advanced technology needed to actually produce weapons out of fissile material is well-protected and monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Producing a nuclear weapon therefore is not a logical “next step” if a country would build nuclear power plants.

Nuclear promises

The promise of nuclear technology could accommodate both increasing energy needs and a transition away from carbon emissions. As traditional energy producers, countries in the MENA region could benefit from long-standing economic links with energy-hungry countries, as well as having the expertise in operating advanced energy production.

Countries that do not traditionally depend on oil could benefit from a nuclear revolution by becoming energy self-sufficient instead of relying on foreign oil imports, and could even benefit from the associated recycling and storage of nuclear waste. Countries such as Algeria that cover vast swaths of uninhabited desert have plenty of space to build storage or recycling facilities and power plants.

The IAEA has itself published documents that highlight the potential benefits for MENA countries. If actors can guarantee safety and security, nuclear power could displace oil use, provide cheaper energy, and even support the region’s massive and energy-intensive desalination efforts to turn sea-water into drinkable water.

Coming changes

Several MENA countries have started to move towards nuclear energy. Countries that are planning projects or have expressed interests in nuclear development cover most of the region. Algeria, Kuwait, Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, and Qatar have all expressed interest, while nuclear power plants are being planned and built in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.

While the West and China currently have an advantage because of their mature nuclear energy industry, the MENA region could technologically leapfrog foreign competitors by building state-of-the-art plants that are more efficient, cheaper, and safer than any of the models from the 80s and 90s that operate in Europe and the US.

While the technology holds much promise, weaning economies off their addiction to oil revenue will require a concerted effort. The promise of cheaper and cleaner energy for citizens of the region, and a sustainable outlook for the mid to long term, could position the MENA region to contribute to the global energy market and make a rapid leap forward.

Facebook Introduces Problematic Oversight Board With Controversial Members

On Wednesday, May 6, Facebook introduced what could be a defining initiative for two of the world’s largest social media platforms. After repeated criticisms over “fake news” and political misinformation, Facebook is diverting responsibility for addressing controversial content to a group of external experts.

The first 20 members of the board that CNN dubbed “Facebook’s supreme court” will initially be tasked with overseeing appeals over content that was flagged or taken down on Facebook and Instagram. The move is facing criticism both as a potential threat to free speech online and as a superficial way for Facebook to divert criticism.

“I wish I could say that the Facebook review board was cosmetic, but I’m not even sure that it’s that deep,” said Siva Vaidhyanathan, a professor of media studies at the University of Virginia and author of a book on Facebook.

Threat to free speech

The platform’s oversight board will start its activities with a limited mandate, but free speech advocates fear the board’s powers could grow with time.

While many consider a focus on xenophobia, misinformation, and “fake news” to be warranted, the implications of Facebook’s proposed board could have far-reaching consequences for small content creators, journalists, and news outlets.

“People having the power to express themselves at scale is a new kind of force in the world — a Fifth Estate alongside the other power structures of society,” Zuckerberg said in an October 2019 speech emphasizing the importance of freedom of expression.

“People no longer have to rely on traditional gatekeepers in politics or media to make their voices heard, and that has important consequences,” he added.

Many fear that the task set before the board is so momentous, as Facebook regularly encounters millions of problematic cases, that efforts to control “accurate information” will lead to an increased reliance on large corporate news outlets.

Facebook had earlier made moves that aimed to de-prioritize news coming from smaller news outlets, which led to a rise in content take-downs.

“Our goal is to reduce misinformation and reach people who’ve seen it with facts. Whether or not showing people misinformation they’ve previously seen is an effective method of achieving this is subject to debate within the research community,” a Facebook spokeswoman told STAT News. Her statement came in response to the challenges of addressing misinformation even with established intent to regulate content for the public good.

Averting responsibility

While the future application of the oversight board troubles some, others believe the board does not go far enough to stop problematic misinformation on Facebook and Instagram. By having the oversight board take responsibility for content, many believe Facebook is in effect distancing itself from the contentious job of filtering “truth” from “lies.”

Facebook’s role in the 2016 US presidential elections highlighted the difficulties in discerning fact from fiction. Russian meddling through Facebook advertisements similarly revealed the ease with which foreign actors could manipulate the platform’s focus on free speech to spread misinformation.

Vaidhyanathan, a professor of media studies at the University of Virginia, emphasized her conviction that the board is nothing more than a facade to divert responsibility, calling the move to create the oversight body “greenwashing.”

“If Facebook really wanted to take outside criticism seriously at any point in the past decade,  it could have taken human activists seriously about problems in Myanmar; it could have taken journalists seriously about problems in the Philippines,” she argued.

Threat of personal bias

Facebook selected twenty established figures to form its initial board, but some fear the influence of its members’ personal ideologies could allow members to dangerously manipulate public narratives.

While members of the board are likely well-intentioned, the influence of personal biases from such a small group could skew the allowed discourse on platforms with billions of users worldwide.

One example of this dilemma is board member Tawakkol Karman, a world-renowned feminist activist and Nobel Prize winner who has garnered global admiration but also works for a Turkish news outlet controlled by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

While her voice on feminist issues and media freedom in the Middle East is well-respected, many fear that her views on the Muslim Brotherhood, which the US designates as a terrorist organization, and her financial links to the Turkish regime could influence reporting on these topics.

Facebook touts that the board members have lived in 27 countries and represent diverse opinions. Critics argue that appointing Karman as its “token” Arab member suggests the board falsely believes some of her extremist-linked opinions represent those of the Arab and Muslim populations as a whole.

Facebook would do well to shift its “focus on keeping extremist and terrorist content off their platforms,” said David Isben, executive director of the Counter Extremism Project (CEP).

Vanita Gupta, an outspoken Facebook critic and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, expressed satisfaction at Facebook’s efforts. At the same time, she stressed she does not believe “that this kind of board is going to be a substitute for some kind of public law regime or regulatory regime to deal with some of the big-impact issues.”

Setting a precedent for objective moderation

The appointment of Alan Rusbridger, former editor of the left-leaning UK newspaper the Guardian, similarly created speculation that the board could be hostile to right-wing news. Prominent British right-wing tabloid the Telegraph on Wednesday complained about the board’s potential left-wing bias.

John Samples of the Koch-backed Cato Institute think tank also sits on the new board. While he personally believes that “conservatives who believe social media platforms are biased against them lack sufficient proof,” he did express hope that the public will allow the board room for trial and error as they move toward establishing true political legitimacy.

Samples stressed the importance of working through “inevitable mistakes” to set a valuable precedent for other social media platforms looking to justly moderate content.

“It is our ambition and goal that Facebook not decide elections, that it not be a force for one point of view over another, that the same rules will apply to people of left, right and center,” said US Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, one of the board’s four co-chairs who selected its diverse members.

“It’s hard to develop a sense of legitimacy if decisions are not transparent and if people don’t trust that decisions are not being motivated by financial interest or political interest or reputational interest,” said Jamal Greene, another of the board’s co-chairs and professor of constitutional law at Columbia University.

“The board’s novelty is that it can mitigate some of those concerns by being set up to be independent,” Greene added. Board members will have no direct contact with Facebook executives and will even have the power to overrule Zuckerberg himself.

 

Read also: Facebook Shuts Down “Inauthentic” State-Backed Iranian Social Media Operation