Frankly Speaking: The Arab verdict on the US election debate

Short Url
Updated 30 June 2024
Follow

Frankly Speaking: The Arab verdict on the US election debate

  • Middle East Institute Senior Fellow Firas Maksad shares his assessment of, and key takeaways from, recent Biden-Trump debate
  • Describes how the Gaza war might impact US election outcome, offers three scenarios for a Hezbollah-Israel full-scale war

DUBAI: If the statements made by US President Joe Biden and his rival Donald Trump during Thursday’s election debate are anything to go by, it will be bad news for the Palestinian people no matter who wins the White House race in November.

Indeed, in the first televised head to head of the US election campaign, Biden reiterated his commitment to siding with Israel in the war in Gaza and accused Hamas of resisting efforts to end the conflict.

For his part, Trump called Biden “a weak and a very bad Palestinian” — using the name of the national group as a slur — and argued that Israel should be given a free hand to finish the job in Gaza.

Firas Maksad, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington D.C., says the arguments posed by the candidates during the debate should not be considered their official stance.

“This is American electioneering at its worst,” Maksad said during an appearance on the Arab News current affairs show “Frankly Speaking.” “We all know that American elections tend to be the silly season.

“Candidates will say anything to get elected pretty much, only to turn around and change their position, or at least adjust their position, and in favor of a more nuanced one once they are in fact in the Oval Office. So, I think much of what was said (ought to be taken) with a grain of salt.”




Appearing on “Frankly Speaking,” Firas Maksad, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington D.C., said the arguments posed by the candidates during the debate should not be considered their official stance. (AN Photo)

Maksad said it was “quite shameful” for Trump to use the term Palestinian in a “derogatory” way in a bid to undermine Biden by painting him as being relatively pro-Palestinian. “This, while both candidates were falling over themselves to demonstrate their support for Israel.”

Maksad, who is also the Middle East Institute’s senior director for strategic outreach, believes the style and tone of the debate is “just the reality of American electoral dynamics” and should not be considered a concrete policy position of either candidate.

“We can take our pick in terms of examples in the past where candidates have said one thing about nations in the Middle East, only to reverse course and even visit these countries once they become elected president,” he said.

One point that commentators were united on following the election debate was how poorly Biden performed — struggling to express his ideas clearly, fumbling over his words, and pausing for long periods, raising fresh doubts about his cognitive ability.

Although Trump is also prone to meandering speeches, commentators agreed the Republican nominee delivered a more concise and agile performance than the Democratic incumbent.

“I think it’s safe to say that most Americans were shell-shocked by the debate that they saw,” Maksad told “Frankly Speaking” host Katie Jensen.

“Going into this, the Democratic Party objective was to make this, first and foremost, about (Trump’s legal woes) rather than on the cognitive ability, or lack thereof, of President Biden.

“I think what we clearly saw was the Trump campaign had a great night, a celebratory night, whereas most of the Democratic operatives, fundraisers, and supporters of the president are left scrambling, wondering whether it’s too late in the game to try and draft in another last-minute, 11th hour candidate.”

Although many commentators said Biden offered more substance in his remarks, his poor delivery appears to have cost him in the eyes of voters.

“I very much had that debate with close friends in the Democratic circle, some of whom had served in the White House, as this debate was ongoing, and they kept pointing out to that very point, which is listen to the substance. Our candidate has much more substance,” Maksad said.

“Trump, in fact, rambles and says very little in terms of substance, not much in terms of specific policy focus and policy options being put on the table here. I think that’s true. I take the point, but I do think that in elections and American elections, how you come across to a voter is equally, if not more, important.

“And it was abundantly apparent that (former) President Trump was the more capable, confident, powerful in his presence on stage in this debate.”

If those watching the debate were hoping to learn more about where the rivals stood on the big foreign policy questions of the day, they would have been sorely disappointed as Biden and Trump focused mainly on domestic issues.

There were, however, some minor indications of similarities and differences on Middle East policy.

“President Biden — very much in favor of diplomacy. Some might say even accommodating Iran in the region, its aspirations,” said Maksad. “President Trump — much more confrontational when it comes to Iran, looking to contain its influence in the region.

“But that’s not to say that there aren’t similarities, too. I think, when it comes to regional integration, a possible normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel, you see a bipartisanship on these issues here in Washington, D.C.”

Gaza, meanwhile, has become a deeply polarizing issue in the US, even beyond the Arab and Muslim communities, with protests taking place on university campuses across the country.

Asked whether the war is likely to influence the outcome of the election, however, Maksad said it was low down on the list of priorities for the majority of US voters.




If the statements made by US President Joe Biden and his rival Donald Trump during Thursday’s election debate are anything to go by, it will be bad news for the Palestinian people no matter who wins the White House race in November. (AFP)

“I think it’s both unimportant but also very crucial,” he said. “If you take the laundry list of issues for most Americans that they care about, priorities, I don’t think Gaza features anywhere near the top.”

Since the conflict in Gaza began in the wake of the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel, there have been fears that the war would spill over into the wider region. Lebanon, in particular, is seen as being especially vulnerable following months of tit-for-tat exchanges between Israel and Hezbollah.

Maksad, who is himself Lebanese and an expert on the nation’s troubled past, believes there are three likely scenarios, as all-out war appears increasingly inevitable.

“One is the current diplomatic efforts that are being spearheaded by Amos Hochstein, President Biden’s envoy on this issue, point person on this issue, who will be visiting areas and coordinating very closely with the French presidential envoy on this matter,” he said.

A diplomatic breakthrough of this kind would mean finding a way for Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah to step back from his position of a permanent ceasefire in Gaza.

“That might be through some Israeli withdrawal from the disputed points along the Blue Line, the border between Israel and Lebanon, northern Gaza being something to watch out for,” Maksad said.

“But if the diplomatic breakthrough that we’re all looking, and hoping, for in the coming weeks does not materialize, scenario two here is a limited war … limited to the deep populated areas of northern Israel and southern Lebanon.

“And the US and French diplomacy would then kick in to try and bring things back with the diplomatic track. And that could help dislodge the current stalemate.”

The “catastrophic scenario,” meanwhile, would be a situation that “starts out as an attempt at a limited conflict, a limited war in northern Israel and south Lebanon, very quickly expands to population centers like Beirut and Haifa and beyond that. And we see the 2006 scenario on steroids where Israel is flattening entire blocks of southern Beirut.”

The UK’s Daily Telegraph newspaper recently suggested that Rafic Hariri International Airport in Beirut is being used by Hezbollah to store and smuggle weapons. Although Hezbollah has denied the allegation, there are fears Israel may use the claims as a justification to bomb the airport.

“I’m not too sure that Israel needs a justification to bomb Beirut International Airport,” said Maksad. “They have done so in the past. They’ve done so repeatedly. They’ve cratered the runways. They have done so as far back as the 1960s when the PLO was the major concern operating out of Lebanon.

“So, there’s a long track record there of Israel targeting Lebanese infrastructure. And I’m not too sure that this particular article in the Telegraph is what the Israelis are looking for.

“But that said, also given my Lebanese ancestry, I mean, I think every Lebanese knows that the airport is by and large under the influence and control of Hezbollah or Hezbollah’s allies.”

He added: “Whether in fact the Telegraph article is accurate in that it’s being used as a storage base for Hezbollah missiles is something that’s beyond my capability in terms of being able to assess that.”

Asked whether Hezbollah is likely to make good on Nasrallah’s threat to attack Cyprus — a country that could host Israeli jets should Israel launch an aerial campaign against Hezbollah — Maksad said he thought the comments were merely intended to signal the potential reach of Iran and its regional proxies in the event of war.

“There are multiple views as to why Hassan Nasrallah chose to include Cyprus in the list of threats he made in his recent speech,” he said.

“I do think that, first and foremost, he was thinking from a military perspective in terms of where Israel, and particularly the air force, might be able to operate from if Hezbollah rained missiles on Israeli airports in the north and hamstrings Israel’s ability to operate against it. And Cyprus is high on that list of alternatives for Israel.

“But I do think that he’s also sending a broader message … which is one about Hezbollah’s ability to intercept and contradict and complicate shipping in the Eastern Mediterranean.

“And so through Hezbollah, you have Iran here very clearly signaling its ability to interdict and disrupt global commerce, not only in Hormuz, not only in Bab Al-Mandeb, but also in the Eastern Mediterranean, arguably as far south as Suez.”




Firas Maksad, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington D.C., says the arguments posed by the candidates during the debate should not be considered their official stance. (AN Photo)

He added: “This is part of Iran signaling its ability now to project influence and power into the Mediterranean, into the Red Sea and certainly within the Arab and Persian Gulf.”

As turmoil rages in the Middle East at the very moment that the US is turning its attention inward to the looming election, doubts have been raised about the possibility of securing the hotly anticipated deal between the US and Saudi Arabia.

“I see very low prospects of the Saudi-US deal being able to move forward,” said Maksad. “In fact, it will continue to be tethered to an Israeli leg with a precondition of a viable, non-reversible pathway towards a Palestinian state.

“But the politics is simply not there on the Israeli side, but also on the Palestinian side. This is the proposition that is entirely devoid of reality on the Israeli and Palestinian side.

“That said, the deal itself, the bilateral aspects of this deal, are largely negotiated and done. Whether it relates to a defense treaty or civil nuclear cooperation or commerce and AI and cyber, those issues have all been successfully negotiated by both the US and by Riyadh.

“But the issue is that if you are seeking a treaty which requires congressional, mainly Senate ratification, it is difficult to see that being passed in the Senate short of normalization with Israel.

“And normalization with Israel, given the very clear Saudi preconditions on the Palestinian state, or a pathway to a Palestinian state, are simply not there.”

 

 

 


Israeli strikes batter Lebanon, killing five medics

Updated 57 min 10 sec ago
Follow

Israeli strikes batter Lebanon, killing five medics

  • Israel has pushed on with its intense military campaign against Hezbollah, tempering hopes that efforts by a US envoy could lead to an imminent ceasefire
  • Hezbollah said it had fired rockets at Israeli troops east of Khiyam at least four times on Friday

BEIRUT: Israeli strikes battered southern Lebanon and the outskirts of the capital Beirut on Friday, killing at least five medics, as ground troops clashed with Hezbollah fighters in the south.
Israel has pushed on with its intense military campaign against the Iran-backed armed group Hezbollah, tempering hopes that efforts by a US envoy could lead to an imminent ceasefire.
US mediator Amos Hochstein said earlier this week in Beirut that a truce was “within our grasp.” He traveled on to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz before returning to Washington, according to the news outlet Axios.
His trip aimed to end more than a year of hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah along Lebanon’s southern border, which escalated dramatically when Israel ramped up its strikes in late September and sent ground troops into Lebanon on Oct. 1.
Israeli troops have fought Hezbollah in a strip of towns all along the border and this week pushed deeper to the edges of Khiyam, a town some six km (four miles) from the border. Hezbollah said it had fired rockets at Israeli troops east of Khiyam at least four times on Friday.
Lebanese security sources told Reuters that Israeli troops had also advanced in a string of villages to the west as well. They said Israel was most likely trying to isolate Khiyam ahead of a major attack on the town.
Israeli strikes on two other villages in southern Lebanon killed a total of five medics from a rescue force affiliated with Hezbollah, the Lebanese health ministry said.
The more than 3,500 people killed by Israeli strikes over the last year include more than 200 medics, the health ministry said.
Israel says its aim is to secure the return home of tens of thousands of people evacuated from Israel’s north due to rocket attacks by Hezbollah, which began firing across the border in support of Hamas at the start of the Gaza war in October 2023.
Israel also mounted more strikes on Beirut’s southern suburbs, a once densely populated stronghold of Hezbollah.
It issued evacuation orders on the social media platform X for several buildings in the area on Friday. Reuters footage showed one of the strikes appearing to pierce the center of a multi-story building, sending the whole structure toppling in a massive cloud of smoke.


UN reports heavy clashes between Israeli troops and Hezbollah in south Lebanon

Updated 22 November 2024
Follow

UN reports heavy clashes between Israeli troops and Hezbollah in south Lebanon

  • “We are aware of heavy shelling in the vicinity of our bases,” UNIFIL spokesman Andrea Tenenti said
  • Asked if the peacekeepers and staff at the headquarters are safe, Tenenti said: “Yes for the moment”

BEIRUT: Israeli troops fought fierce battles with Hezbollah fighters on Friday in different areas in south Lebanon, including a coastal town that is home to the headquarters of UN peacekeepers.
A spokesman for the UN peacekeeping force known as UNIFIL told The Associated Press that they are monitoring “heavy clashes” in the coastal town of Naqoura and the village of Chamaa to the northeast.
UNIFIL’s headquarters are located in Naqoura in Lebanon’s southern edge close to the border with Israel.
“We are aware of heavy shelling in the vicinity of our bases,” UNIFIL spokesman Andrea Tenenti said. Asked if the peacekeepers and staff at the headquarters are safe, Tenenti said: “Yes for the moment.”
Several UNIFIL posts have been hit since Israel began its ground invasion of Lebanon on Oct. 1, leaving a number of peacekeepers wounded.
The fighting came a day after the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his former defense minister and a Hamas military leader, accusing them of war crimes and crimes against humanity over their 13-month war in Gaza and the October 2023 attack on Israel respectively.
The warrant marked the first time that a sitting leader of a major Western ally has been accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity by a global court of justice.
Israel’s war has caused heavy destruction across Gaza, decimated parts of the territory and driven almost the entire population of 2.3 million people from their homes, leaving most dependent on aid to survive.
Israel launched its war in Gaza after Hamas-led militants stormed into southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, killing some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and abducting another 250. Around 100 hostages are still inside Gaza, at least a third of whom are believed to be dead.
Israel has also launched airstrikes against Lebanon after the Hezbollah militant group began firing rockets, drones and missiles into Israel the day after Hamas’ attack last October. A full-blown war erupted in September after nearly a year of lower-level conflict.


Gaza ministry: hospitals to cut or stop services ‘within 48 hours’ over fuel shortages

Updated 22 November 2024
Follow

Gaza ministry: hospitals to cut or stop services ‘within 48 hours’ over fuel shortages

  • All hospitals in Gaza would have to stop or reduce services “within 48 hours“

GAZA: The Hamas government’s health ministry warned Friday all hospitals in Gaza would have to stop or reduce services “within 48 hours” for lack of fuel, blaming Israel for blocking its entry.
“We raise an urgent warning as all hospitals in Gaza Strip will stop working or reduce their services within 48 hours due to the occupation’s (Israel’s) obstruction of fuel entry,” Marwan Al-Hams, director of Gaza’s field hospitals, said during a press conference.


Israel says to end ‘administrative detention’ for West Bank settlers

Updated 22 November 2024
Follow

Israel says to end ‘administrative detention’ for West Bank settlers

  • Practice allows for detainees to be held for long periods without being charged or appear in court
  • The Palestinian Prisoners Club advocacy group said in August that 3,432 Palestinians were held in administrative detention

JERUSALEM: Israeli authorities will stop holding Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank under administrative detention, or incarceration without trial, the defense ministry announced Friday.
The practice allows for detainees to be held for long periods without being charged or appear in court, and is often used against Palestinians who Israel deems security threats.
Defense Minister Israel Katz said it was “inappropriate” for Israel to employ administrative detention against settlers who “face severe Palestinian terror threats and unjustified international sanctions.”
But, according to settlement watchdog Peace Now, it is one of only few effective tools that Israeli authorities to prevent settler attacks against Palestinians, which have surged in the West Bank over the past year.
Katz said in a statement issued by his office that prosecution or “other preventive measures” would be used to deal with criminal acts in the West Bank.
B’Tselem, an Israeli rights group, said authorities use administrative detention “extensively and routinely” to hold thousands of Palestinians for lengthy periods of time.
The Palestinian Prisoners Club advocacy group said in August that 3,432 Palestinians were held in administrative detention.
Israeli daily Haaretz reported on Friday that eight settlers were held under the same practice in November.
Yonatan Mizrahi, director of settlement watch for Peace Now, said that although administrative detention was mostly used in the West Bank to detain Palestinians, it was one of the few effective tools for temporarily removing the threat of settler violence through detention.
“The cancelation of administrative detention orders for settlers alone is a cynical... move that whitewashes and normalizes escalating Jewish terrorism under the cover of war,” the group said in a statement, referring to a spike in settler attacks throughout the Israel-Hamas conflict over the past 13 months.
Western governments, including Israel’s ally and military backer the United States, have recently imposed sanctions on Israeli settlers and settler organizations over ties to violence against Palestinians.
On Monday, US authorities announced sanctions against Amana, a movement that backs settlement development, and others who have “ties to violent actors in the West Bank.”
“Amana is a key part of the Israeli extremist settlement movement and maintains ties to various persons previously sanctioned by the US government and its partners for perpetrating violence in the West Bank,” the US Treasury said.
Excluding Israeli-annexed east Jerusalem, the West Bank — which Israel has occupied since 1967 — is home to three million Palestinians as well as about 490,000 Israelis living in settlements that are illegal under international law.


UK would arrest Netanyahu over ICC warrant: Senior politician 

Updated 22 November 2024
Follow

UK would arrest Netanyahu over ICC warrant: Senior politician 

  • Emily Thornberry: Britain has ‘obligation under Rome Convention’ to arrest Israeli PM if he enters country 
  • Court: ‘Reasonable grounds to believe’ Netanyahu responsible for war crimes, crimes against humanity in Gaza

LONDON: The UK will arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he enters the country, a senior British politician has said.

The International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Netanyahu on Thursday for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, alongside his former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, pertaining to the Gaza war.

Emily Thornberry — Labour chair of the foreign affairs committee, and former shadow foreign secretary and shadow attorney general — told Sky News: “If Netanyahu comes to Britain, our obligation under the Rome Convention would be to arrest him under the warrant from the ICC.

“(It is) not really a question of should — we are required to, because we are members of the ICC.”

UK Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has refused to be drawn on whether Netanyahu would be arrested if he set foot on British soil, saying it “wouldn’t be appropriate for me to comment.”

She told Sky: “We’ve always respected the importance of international law, but in the majority of the cases that they pursue, they don’t become part of the British legal process.

“What I can say is that obviously, the UK government’s position remains that we believe the focus should be on getting a ceasefire in Gaza.”

Netanyahu’s arrest warrant is the first to be issued against the premier of a major Western ally by an international court for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.

His office denounced the warrant as “anti-Semitic,” adding that Israel “rejects with disgust the absurd and false actions.” Israel is not an ICC member and rejects the court’s jurisdiction.

US President Joe Biden called the warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant “outrageous,” adding: “Whatever the ICC might imply, there is no equivalence — none — between Israel and Hamas.”

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said he plans to invite Netanyahu to visit Budapest, adding that the arrest warrant will “not be observed” by his government.

The Italian and French governments, however, have indicated that Netanyahu will be arrested if he visits either country.

The ICC said on Thursday it has “reasonable grounds to believe” that Netanyahu and Gallant “bear criminal responsibility” for “the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts.”

The court also issued a warrant for Hamas commander Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Israel says Al-Masri, believed to have been the mastermind behind the Hamas attack of Oct. 7, 2023, was killed in Gaza earlier this year.

The ICC said it issued the warrant for his arrest because of insufficient evidence to prove his death.