US Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook said at a press conference in Saudi Arabia on Monday that Iran’s arrest warrant for President Donald Trump and 35 other people in connection with the killing of prominent military commander Qassem Soleimani was just a “propaganda stunt.”
Iran issued on Monday what it said was an “arrest warrant” against US President Donald Trump and dozens of others believed to have been involved in the drone attack that killed Soleimani in Iraq on January 3.
The Iranian Fars News Agency reported on June 29 that Tehran asked the International Police (Interpol) for assistance in detaining the accused.
Standing next to the Saudi minister of state for foreign affairs, Hook said: “Our assessment is that Interpol does not interfere by issuing red flyers based on requests of a political nature.”
“This is a matter of political nature, and has nothing to do with national security, world peace or the promotion of stability … It is a propaganda ploy that no one takes seriously,” he added.
Interpol later responded to Tehran, saying it “would not consider requests of this nature.” The organization added in a statement that its guidelines prohibit “any interference or activities of a political nature.”
On January 3, 2020, an American drone strike in Iraq killed Soleimani, the commander of the Qods Force in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Washington had accused Soleimani of masterminding attacks by armed factions allied with Iran on American forces in the region.
Iran, however, deemed the extrajudicial killing an act of “terrorism and murder,” and retaliated by striking a US military base in Iraq. Tensions have since been running high in the region.
In the wake of a massive backlash, US President Trump deleted a Twitter video he posted on Sunday featuring a supporter chanting “white power” at anti-Trump protestors.
Someone one the scene took the video during Trump’s campaign visit to “The Villages,” a retirement community in Florida. The Republican president retweeted the video at 7:30 a.m. on June 28. In the first seconds of the clip, a man driving a gulf buggy emblazoned with “Trump 2020” and “America First” signs can be heard screaming “white power” at a counter-protestor holding a “Make America Sane” placard.
Trump captioned the video, originally posted by an unidentified user, “thank you to the great people of The Villages. The Radical Left Do Nothing Democrats will Fall in the Fall. Corrupt Joe [Biden] is shot. See you soon!!!”
The tweet comes at a time when the United States’ explosive Black Lives Matter protests and movement has massive momentum, and racial tensions in America are running high in the wake of George Floyd’s death.
Trump’s implied endorsement of a white supremacist slogan triggered an overwhelming wave of negative backlash and by 11:00 a.m. the video was deleted from Trump’s twitter feed.
American response
People from both sides of America’s political divide united in their criticism of the tweet. Black Republican South Carolina Senator Tim Scott labelled the tweet “indefensible,” telling CNN, “he [Trump] should not have retweeted.”
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden responded on Twitter on June 28 saying, “Today the President shared a video of people shouting ‘white power’ and said they were ‘great.’ Just like he did after Charlottesville” — a reference to a 2017 Trump tweet where he referred to neo-Nazis as “very fine people.”
“We’re in a battle for the soul of the nation — and the President has picked a side. But make no mistake: it’s a battle we will win,” he added.
Biden followed up those comments on Monday declaring, “white supremacy should be rooted out and relegated to the pages of history — not promoted by the President of the United States.”
The White House responded to the incendiary tweet with a statement that failed to apologize, instead claiming Trump did not hear the “white power” comment.
“President Trump is a big fan of The Villages. He did not hear the one statement made on the video,” White House Deputy Press Secretary Judd Deere said in a statement.
“What he did see was tremendous enthusiasm from his many supporters.”
Health Secretary Alex Azar also jumped to the president’s defense during a CNN interview saying that although he had not seen the tweet in question, “obviously neither the President, his administration nor I would do anything to be supportive of white supremacy or anything that would support discrimination of any kind.”
Nationalism is on the rise worldwide. A new form of nationalism has emerged in the last decade that pits nativists, xenophobes, and populists against an increasingly globalized world. “Neo-nationalism” as the trend has become known is leading to increasing belligerence between nations and an uninformed suspicion of the “other” that could lead to far-reaching international confrontation.
Three countries exemplify this trend like none other, with deepening consequences to their national reputation and diplomatic standing in the world. India’s Hindu nationalism is leading to an economic boycott of its most important trade partner, the disastrous pandemic response in the US is diminishing its standing, and Israeli nationalism is bringing it ever closer to annexation.
US nationalism meets COVID-19
For decades US politicians have considered their country to be the best of all, solely based on GDP and military might. Even though the US slipped in important metrics, including education and healthcare, it remained a taboo for politicians to declare the US anything but number one. The US is now not even in the top 10 in most fields that would be considered to be signs of “being the best.”
The US now ranks 27th in education in health, down from 6th place in the 1990s. The country is the 19th happiest country, and the 42nd most corrupt. The country is now the 27th in social mobility, which means that there are 26 countries where citizens are more likely to achieve the “American Dream,” or work their way up from poor to rich.
But amid this collapse of living standard and public services, amid a crumbling infrastructure that needs $4.5 trillion worth of repairs and maintenance before 2025, American nationalism has maintained the fiction that the US is the best country in the world. This mistaken analysis was evident in its approach to COVID-19 that has now cost 125,318 American lives.
The US has considered its privatized and decentralized healthcare system more than capable of resisting a shock that caused much more accessible healthcare systems in Western Europe to tremble. The country’s misplaced nationalism meant little extra effort was mobilized even as evidence of the pandemic’s severity emerged from Europe, leading to a disastrous and deadly failed response that has severely diminished the US’ standing in the world.
Israeli annexation fueled by nationalism
There are few people in the world as familiar with the dangers of unfettered nationalism than the Jewish diaspora. The rise of nationalism in Europe led to increasing antisemitism that concluded in the barbarous mass murder of millions of innocent Jewish people. But history is doomed to repeat itself as Israeli hardliners now fuel a similar type of nationalism within their own nation.
Far-right media continuously turn the native Palestinians into a dangerous “other” and push the country further right. Israeli neo-nationalism is visible on a daily basis in publications such as the Netanyahu-aligned newspaper Israel Hayom, and more mainstream publications such as the Jerusalem Post or the Times of Israel regularly feature highly problematic opinion pieces.
One feature of neo-nationalism that is visible from Hungary’s Prime Minister Victor Orban to Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro is the rapid mainstreaming of nationalist thinking. By employing marketing strategies and exploiting social media, neo-nationalists create a world of alternative facts for their supporters.
The world of alternative facts has turned UN-declared illegal settlers into “brave pioneers” and oppressed native people into “dangerous terrorists.” iI has turned the country’s nationalists against the United Nations, through which Israel was founded in the first place. Now misplaced nationalist zeal could lead Israel to commit a blatant violation of international norms and turn itself into a global pariah as nationalists urge Netanyahu to go further and annex even more Palestinian land.
Indian radical nationalism
India’s Hindu nationalists are transforming their country away from the legacy of Gandhi and Nehru and into a dangerously volatile chaos of misinformation, mob violence, and an increasing war fervor against neighboring China. India’s media has enthusiastically whipped up resentment and even violence against local minorities, blamed COVID-19 on local Muslims, and framed an undisciplined scuffle between border troops as a casus belli.
Indian neo-nationalism is likely the most entrenched form of the trend found globally. Mainstream politicians, news reporting, and the government itself continuously misinform and manipulate public frustrations.
The rise of mainstream nationalist fervor could be seen in Indian Prime Minister Nahendra Modi’s 2019 electoral campaign. After his first successful campaign focused on economic development, whipping up nationalism proved easier to deliver. “We were nationalist, we are nationalists and we will remain nationalists,” he said in a campaign speech.
Similar to neo-nationalism in Israel and the US, Indian nationalism is producing a dangerous feedback loop that could turn disastrous.
When a hand-to-hand fight between a few dozen Chinese and Indian border troops led to casualties, there was no critical media left to see the event as what it was. Troops showing poor discipline that should have been court-martialed instead became national martyrs as ill informed masses cried for war against a country with a far superior military and economy.
Divide and conquer
In the end neo-nationalism serves but one purpose: It masks the negative effects our global neoliberal economics have on the poor and middle classes and instead pitches them against each other. By fueling resentment and hatred of the “other,” neoliberal leaders such as Modi, Netanyahu, and Trump can hide the continuous wealth transfer from the poor and working classes to the rich.
Misinformed working-class Indians, Israelis, and Americans have much more in common with those who they are manipulated into hating, than the millionaires and politicians that foment this discord. Neo-nationalism has become the favored approach by politicians who can no longer promise economic development through neoliberalism, as that theory has again and again been roundly disproved.
“Divide and conquer” appears to be the political mantra of our era, with potentially disastrous consequences for us all.
Fakhruddin Alton, head of the Turkish Republic’s Communications Department, has hit back at the claims made by former US National Security Adviser John Bolton in his new book. The book includes references to discussions between Turkey and the United States.
Recent publication of a book authored by a high-level former U.S. official includes misleading, one-sided and manipulative presentations of our leader President Erdogan’s conversations with the US President Donald Trump.
Alton explained that, according to Bolton’s account of the meetings, it is clear that the talks held by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his US counterpart Donald Trump were “one-sided” and “manipulative”
“We find it reprehensible that former high-level officials attempt to use serious diplomatic conversations and efforts to resolve outstanding issues between allies like the U.S. and Turkey for their domestic political agendas,” Alton continued.
Alton also stated that “President Erdogan and Trump are keen on repairing and maintaining stable Turkish-American relations, despite deep differences, and despite the votes targeting Turkey in Washington.”
Bolton’s book alleges that in 2018 Trump offered to step and help Erdogan with a Justice Ministry investigation. Erdogan was suspected of breaching US sanctions on Iran through links to a Turkish bank. Bolton wrote that Trump told Erdogan: “I will take care of things.”
Bolton alleged that Trump said “they are not his [Trump’s] people (close to him) but they are Obama’s people” and that the problem will be solved when they are replaced by his [Trump’s] people.
“Erdoğan provided a memo by the law firm representing Halkbank, which Trump did nothing more than flip through before declaring he believed Halkbank was totally innocent of violating U.S. Iran sanctions. Trump asked whether we could reach Acting U.S. Attorney General Matt Whitaker, which I sidestepped. Trump then told Erdoğan he would take care of things, explaining that the Southern District prosecutors were not his people, but were Obama people, a problem that would be fixed when they were replaced by his people.” Bolton wrote in his tell-all book.
The Turkish statement came a day after South Korea slammed Bolton’s new book. South Korea clarified that the account of discussions between US President Donald Trump and the leaders of the two Koreas were inaccurate and distorted.
“It does not reflect accurate facts and substantially distorts facts,” South Korea’s National Security Adviser Chung Yue Young said.
While Chung did not elaborate on specific points that South Korea considers inaccurate, he said the book sets a “dangerous precedent.”
“Unilaterally publishing consultations made based on mutual trust violates the basic principles of diplomacy and could severely damage future negotiations,” he added.
A book that annoys Trump
Bolton became Trump’s national security adviser in April 2018 but left his post in September 2019 due to differences between him and Trump over dealing with countries that pose major challenges for the United States, including Iran, North Korea, and Afghanistan.
In his book, “The Chamber that Happened the Events ” Bolton presents President Trump as a reckless leader.
Bolton’s book was published on June 23, after a federal judge in the United States ruled on Saturday, June 20, that former National Security Adviser John Bolton could go on publishing his book. The ruling came despite the efforts made by President Donald Trump’s administration to prevent the book from being released due to concerns that classified information could be revealed.
The United States has set a new unfortunate record in its problematic COVID-19 response, reporting 38,672 new infections on June 24. The epidemic appears to be spreading most rapidly in the urban centers of conservative states with Arizona, Texas, and South Carolina leading the nation in new infections.
But US President Donald Trump has a plan to radically bring down the number of reported infections: Reducing testing. During a campaign rally in Tulsa on June 22, Trump admitted that he asked his team to “slow the testing down please,” which his new plan to stop federal funding for COVID-19 testing sites clearly reflects.
The real news today is that the U.S. set a record for new cases today: 38,672.
— The COVID Tracking Project (@COVID19Tracking) June 24, 2020
Rising cases
Since the start of the US epidemic, the country has reported more than 2.3 million cases and 120,955 deaths, with the coronavirus now claiming more American lives than World War I. The US has so far performed 28.6 million COVID-19 tests, meaning less than 10% of its population has been tested for the virus.
While the initial outbreak in the US was mostly situated on the East Coast with hot-spots in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, those states appear to have brought transmission down significantly. But while tightly controlled lockdowns helped curb the spread of the virus in the East, resistance to government measures in traditionally conservative states kept the outbreak from ever concluding its first wave.
Florida, Arizona, Texas, and South Carolina all reported record-high cases while California stood out as another new hotspot, recording 5,019 new cases in a single day. The spread of the virus in populous states like California, which is home to 39.5 million, and Texas, where 29 million people live, means the epidemic is likely still on the increase.
As of June 23: More than 2.3 million #COVID19 cases have been reported in the U.S., with 40 states and jurisdictions reporting more than 10,000 cases. See how many cases have been reported in your state or county here: https://t.co/wiuFBKR3Uhpic.twitter.com/UbfeLUso6m
The Trump administration confirmed on Wednesday, June 24, that it plans to end federal funding for some COVID-19 testing sites, many of which are in hard-hit Texas. The move would end funding for 13 testing sites, seven of which are in Texas. The funding would end on July 1 but four US congresspeople are urging the Trump administration to reconsider.
The four legislators called the move “harmful and irresponsible” in a letter to the Department of Health and Human Services and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). “We need the support of Fema now more than ever as our communities and the state of Texas see unprecedented growth in cases of the coronavirus disease,” the congresspeople added.
According to the Guardian, hospitalizations related to COVID-19 have increased by 60% in the last week alone. Limiting testing during a growing epidemic would make it difficult to stop the spread of the coronavirus. According to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the Trump administration has $14 billion in available funding for testing and tracing.
The fact that the government chose to defund critical testing sites could easily qualify as less a public health consideration and more a public relations strategy.
In an interview with the Associated Press published on June 24, Benjamin Pogrund stated that Israeli annexation would turn Israel into an apartheid state. “There will be Israeli overlords in an occupied area. And the people over whom they will be ruling will not have basic rights,” Pogrund described the potential future of Israel.
Prolific denier
Benjamin Pogrund was born and raised in South Africa and witnessed its Apartheid-era atrocities firsthand. He became a renowned writer on the topic and fostered friendships with Nelson Mandela and Robert Sobukwe as he wrote on Black issues in the white-ruled South African state.
But while Pogrund strongly opposed Apartheid in South Africa until its fall in the 1990s, in 1997 he moved to Israel and became a prominent denier of the similarities between the two countries’ treatment of their native populations. Not counting those people living in the occupied territories as citizens, Pogrund denied their treatment as apartheid-like.
Like many Israel apologetics, he made the convenient distinction of not counting Israel’s atrocities and racism outside its walls and fences. He authored a 2007 New York Times op-ed highlighting several successful Arab Israeli citizens as evidence for an absence of racial discrimination, while ignoring the people in occupied territories under de-facto Israeli rule.
Cognitive dissonance
Pogrund would, in the same article, deny that Jews and Arabs receive different treatment while also arguing Palestinian refugees could not return because they would become a majority, destroying Israel’s “purpose” of being a Jewish state. Those who called for a boycott on Israel Pogrund would label as antisemitic, while interpreting Israeli acts as a “response to Palestinian terrorism.”
For decades Pogrund has ignored the obvious similarities between both apartheid regimes. He appears to have conveniently ignored that while South Africa was in its last stages of shaking off colonization, Israel is still actively colonizing native land.
He downplayed the wall seperating Israelis from the West Bank as “mainly a wire fence, except in populated areas” that was there “primarily to keep out would-be suicide bombers.” By Pogrund’s definition, if South African whites had chased away the country’s Black population and kept them in occupied areas as does Israel, there would not have been “apartheid.”
After decades of witnessing and opposing South African Apartheid, he has spent the rest of his career making pro-Israeli arguments, similar to those of the South African regime that justified violence against Black citizens, as a logical government response to “violent terrorists.”
Changing definitions
Pogrund opposes annexation because it would undermine the cognitive dissonance that he and many others have applied to the Palestinian people living in the occupied territories. Annexing their land would result in them being considered to be some sort of Israeli citizen, and suddenly their treatment would indeed “count” as apartheid.
“At least it has been a military occupation. Now we are going to put other people under our control and not give them citizenship. That is apartheid. That is an exact mirror of what apartheid was,” Pogrund said.
Pogrund started to have doubts when, in 2018, the Israeli parliament enacted the “Nation State Law.” This defined Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people while downgrading the status of another ethnic group, Arab Israelis. Yet, he frames his opposition not as revulsion with the treatment of local Arabs, but instead fears that it would reduce safety and prosperity for local Jewish Israelis.
Annexation
The increasingly colonial attitude of the Netanyahu government appears to have posed something of an intellectual crisis for Pogrund as he has slowly learned of his own complicity in defending Israeli actions. News about the government’s annexation plans made him unable to write on the topic: “I couldn’t bring myself to do it,” Pogrund said, adding that “quite frankly, I just feel so bleak about it, that it is so stupid and ill-advised and arrogant.”
Pogrund has long been a critic of Israeli treatment of the Palestinians, describing the occupation of the West Bank as “tyrannical,” but has avoided using the word apartheid. He considers the term “a deadly word” that requires “intentionality” and “institutionalization.” That intentionality and institutionalization already exist in the occupied territories, and by annexing these areas, even deniers like Pogrund will no longer be able to refute the obvious.
“Come July 1, if we annex the Jordan Valley and the settlement areas, we are apartheid. Full stop. There’s no question about it,” Pogrund said.
US President Donald Trump has repeated his accusation that China was responsible for the emerging Coronavirus, using the expression “Kung flu.”
The phrase is a play on “kung fu,” which refers to the famous Chinese martial art. Trump introduced the expression during his June 20 campaign rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma.
During another rally in Phoenix, Arizona, Trump listed several names for the virus, including “Wuhan,” and “kung flu,” which was welcomed by those present during his speech.
He added that some also called it “Chinese flu,” a term which he himself has repeatedly used.
Trump had previously said he was confident that the virus was created in a Chinese virology laboratory.
Since the outbreak in China, several countries and international institutions, including the United States, have accused Beijing of ambiguity and of covering up the spread of the virus, and the US president said that withholding information allowed the epidemic to spread around the world.
White House trade adviser Peter Navarro recently accused China of plotting to “seed” the virus, deliberately spreading it around the world by sending hundreds of thousands of its citizens abroad.
The Rand Research Center found in a recent study that there is strong evidence that the infection number reported in China is nearly 40 times less than the actual number, based on the researchers’ monitoring of commercial air traffic between countries.
The US is currently the worst affected country by the pandemic with over 2.39 million reported cases and more than 123,000 fatalities, as of June 24.
Scientists are racing time to create a vaccine or treatment in order to successfully curb the coronavirus outbreak.
Trump is seeking re-election in November against former Vice President Joe Biden, 77, who will be the Democratic Party’s candidate.
As ultranationalists within the Israeli government continue to push for annexation within the West Bank, the Middle East is confronted with the potential erasure of decades of peacebuilding. Meanwhile, Donald Trump’s United States maintains its support for Israel’s expansionist agenda, breaking with previous administrations’ commitment to a peaceful resolution to the conflict.
Since the Israeli government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu first entertained the idea of expansion into the West Bank, there has been a widespread outpouring of sympathy towards the Palestinian struggle.
One individual in particular has made international headlines in their effort to discourage Israel’s plans. On June 12, Yousef Al Otaiba—the United Arab Emirates’ ambassador to the United States—wrote an op-ed in the Hebrew newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth calling on Israelis to oppose Netanyahu’s plans for annexation.
US President Donald Trump with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu unveiling the details of Trump’s Middle East Peace Plan. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)
The op-ed, written in Hebrew in an attempt to speak directly to the Israeli people, appealing to the desire to end the conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbors. Otaiba, as a representative of the UAE, argued that annexation could shatter any opportunity for a peaceful solution to the conflict, and that it would throw regional stability into disarray.
Otaiba was not alone. Activists and politicians from around the world have condemned Netanyahu’s plans, placing increasing pressure on the prime minister to concede.
Whether or not Netanyahu will bow to this international pressure remains to be seen; however, with such high stakes, it is apparent that Israel’s response will greatly shape the future of the Middle East.
With or without annexation, the questions remain as to what Netanyahu envisions for Israel and whether Israel is willing to sacrifice decades of dialogue for more land in the West Bank.
The future for the West Bank
Though the government of Netanyahu tends to use the euphemism “extending Israeli sovereignty,” the Israeli government’s agenda for the settlements of Judea, Samaria, and others in the West Bank is nothing short of annexation.
PRIME MINISTER Benjamin Netanyahu points to a map of the Jordan Valley (photo credit: YOSSI ZELIGER)
The Israeli annexation proposal targets dozens of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, as well as almost all of the Jordan Valley. Collectively, this would lead to the annexation of more than one-third of the West Bank. Moreover, the acquisition of the Jordan Valley would cut off Palestine from its border with Jordan, separating the two countries with a buffer zone of more than 1,000 kilometers.
However, annexation is no insignificant matter; rather, annexation is incredibly rare and is always met with backlash and widespread opposition.
As far in the past as 1917—amidst the bloodshed of the First World War—Lassa Oppenheim, a renowned scholar of international law, remarked that: “There is not an atom of sovereignty in the authority of the occupying power.”
International law continues to enshrine these sentiments over a century after they were first uttered. To this day, the United Nations strictly forbids annexation.
When Iraq under Saddam Hussein attempted to annex Kuwait in 1990, it was met with months of widespread international condemnation, coalescing in the US-led invasion of the country.
When Russia under Vladimir Putin annexed the Crimea peninsula in 2014, there was a near-universal outpouring of criticism and demands that the territory be returned.
Now, Israel’s designs to annex large swaths of the West Bank have threatened to put an end to ongoing peacebuilding efforts between Israel and the Arab world. In response, Israel has been met with condemnation from around the world, most prominently from within the Middle East.
A different approach
Ambassador Otaiba’s op-ed posits that Israel’s next steps will decide the future for Israeli-Arab relations in the Middle East. He contends that whether or not Israel succumbs to ultranationalist pressure and continues with annexation plans will decide how the Arab world will proceed with peace efforts.
“In the UAE and across much of the Arab world, we would like to believe Israel is an opportunity, not an enemy. We face too many common dangers and see the great potential of warmer ties,” Otaiba wrote.
“Israel’s decision on annexation will be an unmistakable signal of whether it sees it the same way.”
Otaiba’s statement also appeals to the common enemies of both Israel and the Arab world. Climate change, terrorism, food security, and access to clean water, Otaiba contends, are shared interests between Israel and the Arab World, ones that must be addressed collectively rather than individually.
In particular, Otaiba argues that the UAE and Israel, as two of the most powerful and influential countries in the Middle East, have the combined ability to change the region for the better.
“As the two most advanced and diversified economies in the region, expanded business and financial ties could accelerate growth and stability across the Middle East,” Otaiba wrote.
“Our shared interests around climate change, water and food security, technology and advanced science could spur greater innovation and collaboration.”
Unlike previous attempts at voicing grievances with Israel’s agenda, Otaiba decided to speak not to the Palestinian people, but to the Israeli people. In Hebrew, Otaiba promotes the concept that Israel and the Arab world have the opportunity to work together, but that any annexation in the West Bank would shatter this opportunity.
Otaiba argues that the UAE, as well as other Arab nations, want to establish relations with Israel, but he also points out that the annexation plan would become an obstacle to this.
Although Otaiba has garnered much support through his writing, he has also attracted many critics, including several of the more militant factions vying for Palestinian liberation.
The militant mindset
Thus far, Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad organization have been the most vocal critics of Otaiba’s approach. In particular, the groups accused Otaiba and the UAE of violating the Arab Peace Initiative and of conceding too much to Israel.
Some have also referenced Otaiba’s relationship with the Trump administration as an explanation for non-belligerence towards Israel. As ambassador, Otaiba has been a close ally to Jared Kusher, who drafted the Middle East Peace Plan that established US support for Israel’s intentions to annex territory in the West Bank.
Among other grievances, many critics feel as though Otaiba’s warnings were insufficient, especially due to Otaiba’s avoidance of hostile language against Israel.
However, this was ultimately the purpose of Otaiba’s letter. Rather than resort to condemnation, Otaiba wanted to convince the Israeli people that it is in their interests and in the interests of the Arab world to avoid annexation in the West Bank in order to preserve decades of peace talks and negotiation.
Democrats are elated at recent polling that pit Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden against the incumbent, Republican Donald Trump. After months of close polling, Biden appears to have pulled ahead to a double-digit lead, with most polls showing he built an 8-13% advantage. The Economist is giving Joe Biden a 97% chance of beating Trump in the all-important electoral college after projecting a 50-50 chance in early March.
Yet GOP officials on the Trump campaign told Politico they predict a “landslide” victory. “The more bad things happen in the country, it just solidifies support for Trump,” GOP chair for North Carolina’s Robeson County, Phillip Stephens said. It appears that Republican campaign officials are counting on a potential economic revival as the country gradually reopens, which would bring a flurry of good news for Trump to report.
Strangely, both campaigns appear highly confident of victory.“The campaign is Joe Biden’s to lose,” political commentator and former congressional candidate Cenk Uygur told the hosts of popular YouTube-broadcast show “The Young Turks.” But Uygur warned: “Never underestimate an establishment Democrat’s ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.”
Polls
As one of the most unpopular presidents in US history, Trump received his highest approval rating so far in April when 45% approved of his job performance, with 51% disapproving. But as the COVID-19 crisis unraveled business-as-usual, his polling numbers started to steadily decline. A Rasmussen poll on June 15 showed 58% of participants disapproving of the president’s performance, with 41% approving.
In head-to-head national polling, Abacus Data is showing Biden leading Trump 51% to 41%, while a June 10 YouGov poll showed Biden up 9%. In encouraging news for the Democrats, Biden is apparently less unpopular than Hillary Clinton, with 37% of voters seeing him positively in a June 2020 NBC News/WSJ poll.
While Biden is also gaining in battleground states, the United States’ intertwined crises in health and inequality, and the uncertain future of the coming months, leave much unclear.
Impact of COVID-19
The coronavirus epidemic has so far claimed more lives in the country than the US lost in World War I, with no sign of stopping anytime soon. Yet the extremely divided American media landscape means citizens remain divided on whether the country took the right measures to halt the epidemic.
Trump supporters have held protests to demand the “reopening” of their states and right-wing outlets have seen any criticism of the Trump administration’s approach, including from scientists, as political attacks against the Republican president.
Meanwhile, the country is reopening in the midst of what many consider to still be the first wave of infections. The GOP appears to be prioritizing the economy in order to recover some of the job losses before the election, but ever-increasing infection rates are already influencing markets and oil prices.
It is possible that continued COVID-19 infections leading up to November could mean radical changes to how Americans vote. Primaries held in the last months have seen an increase in voting by mail, which Republicans are now working hard to discredit.
Anti-Racism protests
While the protests following the death of George Floyd have now decreased when in terms of violence, the streets of large cities across the US continue to see passionate demonstrations. Following their eagerness to repeatedly publicize images of burning buildings, the media appears to have lost interest. Still, most Americans appear to trust their media and an untold amount of people will have perceived the protests incorrectly.
Whether the protests will energize Democratic voters or spur Republicans towards the polls remains to be seen. The Democrats have not presented any proposals that make the coming election an outright referendum on the rights of American minorities, instead opting for photo ops and symbolic messaging.
Furthermore, Biden’s problematic past remarks on Black Americans received little attention during the primaries, while the Trump campaign is sure to repeat them ad nauseam. The Democratic strategy of presenting Biden as the “anti-Trump” is nearly identical to Hillary Clinton’s strategy. Like Biden, Clinton also consistently polled higher than Trump in the lead up to the 2016 elections.
Repeating mistakes
In any other political system, the opposition would blame the incumbent for orchestrating the largest wealth transfer from the poor to the rich. The bailouts that followed the 2008 crash caused a political bloodbath among Republicans, but Democrats are complicit in the unanimous passing of the 2020 stimulus bill.
Democrats could highlight systemic inequality, but as the 2020 primaries revealed, many would rather not vote at all than even consider overhauling American economics by electing Sanders. The reason for Biden’s primary victory comes down to political maneuvering. Some candidates who secured more delegates than Biden in specific states suspended their campaigns and united behind him in order to prevent a Sanders candidacy.
The Democrats will be hard-pressed to make any strong arguments except for those to which the American public has already been desensitized, including his racism, cruelty, minimal intelligence, and vanity. Biden has chosen to remain quiet during the pandemic response in an effort to allow Trump to self-destruct, but in turn has not shown any substantial leadership himself.
Unfair game
In the end, American politics are not about convincing enough of the other parties’ voters. They are all about energizing the party’s pre-existing base. The reality is that Democrats have used much of their political ammunition during their “resistance” while Trump’s campaign has many yet-to-be-revealed details on Biden that could depress Democratic enthusiasm.
Even if Biden wins the most votes, that is no guarantee of victory, as Hillary Clinton learned in 2016. Beyond that threat, Trump still has the option to give the “green light” for Israeli annexation of the West Bank, which could upend the race.
While Biden’s polling currently looks good, there is no reason for Democrats to cheer just yet. Lessons from 2016 are still relevant, and Democrats appear to have very little beyond growing youth involvement that could help them this year. With Trump providing a perfect channel for his supporters’ rage, it is still unclear whether Democrats can similarly enthuse their traditional base.
The fact that Democrats are not in a clear lead against a candidate — one who has caused thousands of deaths and millions of unemployed people — reveals the need for deep reform in their party. It appears impossible to lose to Trump, but if anyone can do it, it is the Democrats.
On June 10, a Greek navy ship approached a Turkish cargo vessel in the high seas off the coast of Libya. The European ship, tasked with upholding the Libyan arms embargo, approached the vessel and sent a message requesting to board and inspect the suspicious cargo ship. This is a standard procedure that regulatory ships have repeated 75 times in recent months, but this time it yielded unprecedented results.
The cargo freighter did not respond; instead a Turkish warship appeared that told the Greeks to back off. With no mandate to forcibly board the freight ship, the Greek naval ship was forced to retreat without any inspection. French President Emmanuel Macron called the act “unacceptable” as the event adds fuel to an escalating diplomatic row between France and Turkey.
UN mandate
An EU spokesman on June 11 was reluctant to give details about the events, instead referring to the head of “Operation Irini” in Rome, which hosts the task force monitoring the Libyan arms embargo.
The renewed focus on the repeated breaches of the UN embargo on the supply of arms to Libya had earlier resulted in UN Resolution 2526, which mandates a naval force with daily inspections of vessels approaching and departing the Libyan coast.
The task force aims to stop the flow of arms in exchange for Libyan oil by inspecting naval trade, with the results of these inspections going to a UN panel of experts tasked with evaluating the situation. While the arms embargo faces no opposition in diplomatic circles, in practice most foreign actors involved in the chaotic conflict breach it daily.
French response
With a fresh round of peace negotiations approaching, military operations on the ground are accelerating as both sides hope to make “gains” which they can then use in negotiations. Macron had earlier highlighted Turkish “broken promises” as the new GNA gains appear to be the result of a large-scale Turkish intervention that has introduced new aerial capabilities for the Tripoli government through the use of drones.
News confirmed the horror of the Libyan conflict yet again on June 12, when UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres expressed deep shock over the discovery of mass graves in the country. But the Turkish intervention last week that prevented UN inspection of one of its vessels presents a new escalation according to the French.
“The Turks are behaving in an unacceptable manner and are exploiting NATO. France cannot just stand by,” a French official stated, while another added that France had concerns over the “even more aggressive and insistent stance from Turkey, with seven Turkish ships deployed off the Libyan coast and violations of the arms embargo.”
Further chaos
France nominally supports both sides in the conflict. As part of the UN, it recognizes the Tripoli GNA government, but France also supports Libya’s eastern LNA faction led by leader Khalifa Haftar. Macron hosted Haftar at the Elise Palace in March and has attempted to mediate a cease-fire, but with Haftar’s forces in retreat after several GNA victories, the conflict has changed.
As the GNA advances, it has brushed aside calls for a cease-fire, as the LNA did when they were at their strongest. The inconclusive back-and-forth between the two factions has led to a radical escalation of foreign troops, mercenaries, and weaponry, all in a clear breach of the embargo.
The chaotic conflict has turned Libya into a lawless state where already desperate refugees hoping to reach Europe face exploitation and die by the dozens in Libyan slave markets and refugee camps or drown in the Mediterranean Sea.
What was initially a civil war fought by Libyan militias using civilian cars and light arms has devolved into a proxy war featuring Naval frigates, fighter jets, anti-air batteries, and drones. What was once an internal conflict over the future of the country has become a sandbox for a proxy-war between foreign nations, where the Libyans themselves have little to do with an eventual resolution.
