A game of hangman and how the Soviets are screwing Syria

I finally got a chance to visit the 9/11 memorial (after my fraternity held a fundraiser for them earlier last year).  In my opinion, the place fails to really evoke the kind of sadness and memory that any memorial about such a disastrous event should.  Somewhere between the long wait to get in, the freezing cold, and the construction that is still going on around the memorial the compassion for all those that lost a family member that day is lost.  Hopefully, once the construction for the new World Trade Center is over, the memorial will finally fulfill its purpose, even though it will still be hard to find a moment of silence to commemorate the victims of 9/11 in the middle of the financial district.  For pictures check out this blog (it is in German, but hey pictures are pictures).

This week: Tightening the noose around each others neck, and why the Soviet Union matters in 2012.

Iran and the West: A game of hangman

Iran has warned its regional partners in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries that it would have severe consequences if any of them were to fill the shortfall of oil supply on the world market that is sure to follow the sanctions to be imposed by the United States and the EU on the country. The threat to other exporters (particularly Saudi Arabia) comes during a time where Western countries have once again reiterated their will to keep “all options on the table” (i.e. military action/invasion) when it comes to addressing the Iranian nuclear threat.  It is easy to forget that the real losers are the people of Iran that can do little to depose of the illegitimate regime that has chosen to exclude the majority of its own population from politics to eliminate the risk of being voted out of office.

To turn the sanctions put in place against Iran on its head and make the US and the EU suffer for their attempts to hinder the progress of their nuclear program seems to be one of the smartest moves coming out of Tehran so far.  The decrease in oil supply (and the rise in prices for oil), will only serve as encouragement for Saudi Arabia to churn out more oil.  Not only does it make more petrodollars on the barrel, but it also hurts its biggest opponent in the region, Shia Iran, by showing that the world market for oil could easily survive without it.  No threat will help to stop Saudi Arabia from picking up the slack that Iran will leave in terms of oil output.  The “invisible hand” as Adam Smith would say, will take care that there will be ample supply despite Iran’s loss. 

Let me say this again, it is time for the West to act!  You want to make sure Iran will be a responsible player once it gains nuclear capabilities then either do what you do best (or rather worst) and change the regime in Tehran or deliver on your promises and take military action.  Even better, solve two problems at once and support the people of Iran in their quest to get their voice heard in the Iranian political arena.  The West and Iran might be tightening the noose around each others neck, but the only ones that will hang by the end of the day are the people of Iran.

A Soviet remnant

As the last remnant of the global influence that the Soviet Union once had past its borders, the naval base at Tartus in Syria stands as controversial as ever in the uprising that still dominates Syria in the tenth month of violence.  President Assad of Syria is slowly losing the reigns in his own country (similar to Muammar Gaddafi last year) between continuous revolts and the force of the Free Syrian Army operating out of Turkey.  It seems so bad that he even moved to pardon those imprisoned during the uprisings (among them violent protesters and key leaders of the opposition).  Meanwhile, a military intervention sanctioned by Arab countries seems unlikely even tough Qatar’s leader, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, has voiced his believes that military intervention is the only option to stop the continuing bloodshed of the Syrian government against its own people.

How to keep your last naval base outside of the former Soviet Union? That’s the question that Russia is asking itself right now.  Where to get someone who can predict the future?  If Russia supports Assad’s regime like it has and the revolutionaries finally pull through and establish a new political order in Syria, the future for the base at Tartus seems short-lived.  When has the time come to support the opponents of the current regime?  Russia could play a crucial role in ending the bloodshed that has already cost 5000 lives and it could keep its naval base at Tartus.  All it has to do is to herald the cause of the Syrian people in the Security Council, where it could act to encourage other Arab leaders like the Qatari Sheikh to intervene in this conflict that is on the verge of civil war.

Other Links

Mohamed El-Baradei will end Egypt presidency bid

Iraq city of Ramidi hit by attacks on police station

Hezbollah chief rejects call by UN to disarm

Hamas to return to Abbas’ seized Gaza house

Saudi forces clash with protesters in Qatif

Forcing hands and loosening chains

The world of international studies is filled with indexes that attempt to give those unfamiliar with IR lingo a chance to understand in what direction certain countries or the planet as a whole are moving in terms of human development, equality, corruption, free press, etc.  The beauty of it all is of course that a numbered index can be abused to misrepresent what is actually happening.  The World Bank is probably case in point by trying to prove oh so hard that inequality is actually decreasing while in reality everyone (even us in the developed world) can witness an increase in inequality.  Anyways, the point I am trying to make here is that out of all the indexes I think one of the most interesting ones focuses on the number of times the word “recession” is used in the media.  If there is a correlation between “recession” and whether we find ourselves in a recession, shouldn’t there be a correlation between how many times Iran is mentioned across multiple news networks and how likely it is that the conflict with Iran will escalate?  I don’t know, just a thought because right now all I can see across the board is Iran, Iran, Iran.

That being said, this week will focus on (of course) Iran and on a review of the most important stories from 2011.  Happy New Years!!!

And another step closer

The semi-state controlled Fars News agency of Iran announced the past week that Iran had successfully tested mid-range surface-to-air missiles.  The test marks a milestone in Tehran’s quest for long-range missile capabilities to defend itself against what it deems US and Israeli aggression.  Ironically, the government denied the tests but issued a statement in which it stated that all kinds of missiles will be tested during the ten days of military exercises taking place in the Strait of Hormuz.  Meanwhile, Iran has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz if the US would succeed in pushing more sanctions against Iran’s oil and financial industries.

Okay how funny is it that an agency that is state influenced publishes something that goes strictly against the message the state is trying to send.  If that is not a sign of dysfunction in the Iranian propaganda machine then I don’t know what is.  On a more serious note it is concerning that Iran has developed mid-range capabilities.  Maybe President Bush was right to push so adamantly for a missile defense shield in the Czech Republic and Poland.  Of greater concern will be how to cope with an Iran that could close down the Strait of Hormuz and back up that blockade with a nuclear arsenal.  And this is not another case of a North Korean style rogue state.  Iran has got the oil and it has the tools to drive oil prices through the roof.  I am sure someone is willing to trade Iranian oil despite any kind of UN sanctions especially if Iran drives up the oil prices by closing the Strait (which sees 20% of world oil demand travel through it).  It will reach the point where there will be no other choice but to either force regime change in Tehran or to accept Iran for what it is and engage in open talks.  Pick your poison.

The highlights of 2011

I really recommend that all watch this short video (2:25) that shows the highlights of 2011.  The Times magazine was right to make “The Protester” the person of the year.  Tunisia not only sparked a revolution that swept through the Middle East and North Africa, but it also encouraged the Occupy protests around the world and some of the violence that took place in London and is still taking place in Athens over austerity measures.

I also want to take a second to commemorate the victims of the shootings in Norway.  Every time I see footage of that attack chills go down my spine.  To pick up the uniform of a policeman and to slaughter eighty individuals, most of them children, is such a personal and heinous crime that it must never be forgotten.  Norway lost its status as one of the most peaceful places in the world this year.  Shame on you Anders Breivik..

Other Links

Israelis and Palestinians to meet in Jordan

Iran's dangerous trade game

US pushes ahead with arms deal to Iraq

Cairo raids create climate of fear for NGOs

A Riche history

Deal and No Deal

This week a bunch of my friends went to the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations in downtown Manhattan.  I don’t think I have ever seen people at my school so divided over an issue that does not even fall within their usual area of interest.  And that is exactly where the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations become dangerous.  If people who have little to no idea about how the world economy works decide to take part in a demonstration that targets one of the main drivers of the world economy, why are they there?  I think many young people attend the demonstration because it is ‘cool’ to go to something that challenges the current system, even when this system is so well established that abandoning or altering it would be very difficult and probably detrimental.  Another thought that crosses my mind is whether the time at which these protests are occurring is related to the public uprisings in the MENA.  Given the recent success in Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt of political revolutions in disposing their infamous leaders, why not stage a revolution that challenges the economic system at a time where Western capitalism is struggling?

This week, I will focus on the prisoner swap that is taking place between Hamas and the Israeli government, and recent developments between Iran and the USA. As always make sure to check the end of the post for additional links (this week particularly about Occupy Wall Street).

A Game of Numbers

Israel agreed to release 1,027 Palestinians for the return of one of their soldiers, Gilad Shalit, who was captured five years ago, on June 25^th, 2006, at the age of 19 by the Islamist organization Hamas in the Gaza Strip.  The Economist’s headline “An extraordinary exchange rate” probably summarizes best what can be described as a pretty lopsided deal.  Both parties are likely to gain fame among their own populations and abroad at a time where it is needed to secure a solid base of support in a region in transition.  Hamas was able to secure many of its most infamous members who have been serving decades of prison terms for committing acts of terrorism during both intifadas.  The return of over a thousand Palestinians, many of which were expected to remain locked in Israeli prisons for the remainder of their lives, is sure to give Hamas renewed legitimacy from Palestinians not just in the Gaza Strip, but also in the West Bank and abroad.  Israel, working closely with Egypt to ensure the smooth transfer of prisoners, is sure to gain support domestically from a population that has been waiting for Sergeant Shalit to be freed and internationally from countries that see this prisoner transfer as a step towards mutual recognition between Hamas and the Israeli state.  Without a doubt many of those released will pick up arms to fight Israel again.  So in the long-run is it going to be worth it for Israel to release so many of its public enemies?  Cooperation over the release with Egypt will help to fix the strained ties between the two countries and when looking at it that way, the release of some one thousand prisoners is worth a peace treaty that took thirty years and four wars to come about.

“Me? Nahhhhhh.”

This past week, Iran proved once again that it is the number one state in the world when it comes to denial.  After a plot to assassinate the Saudi Arabian Ambassador was unveiled by a US undercover agent acting as a member Mexican drug gangster, President Obama was quick to accuse the Iranian regime of planning the attack on the Saudi envoy’s life.  Ayatollah Khamenei and President Ahmadinejad both denied the claim that this assassination was ordered by their regime, even though one of the two planners was identified as belonging to the Quds Force, a special unit under direct control of the Ayatollah tasked with exporting the Islamist Revolution beyond the borders of Iran.  Both of them also advised the United States from refraining from any kind of retaliation.  (If that in itself is not a sign of guilt I don’t know what is!)  Iranian experts chimed into the condemnation of the United States by stating that Iran would have no benefit from assassinating the Saudi ambassador in Washington.  While some might claim that a state-sponsored act of terrorism could lead to a war between the United States and Iran, I have to agree with the remarks made at the end of this Deutsche Welle article.  It is unlikely that the United States will be willing to enter another prolonged war in a region that is already in great turmoil.  The chance to attract more negative attention is simply too great.  I support President Obama for wanting to prosecute Iran internationally and I hope that he will be able to use the international system to weaken the legitimacy of Iran’s leadership.  Oh and one last note: Do you really think that Iran has no reason to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States?  Wouldn’t that just show how ‘high and mighty’ Iran is if it is able to murder the envoys of its greatest regional enemy, Saudi Arabia, even in the most secure state of the world?  I don’t think we need to look any further than Iraq and Bahrain to see that those two states are so pitted against each other that I would not put the assassination of diplomats in other states beyond them.

Other Links

Report: Arab Spring upheaval cost $55bn

In pictures: Occupy the World

What is money?

Arab League foreign ministers discuss Syria

Libya: Bulldozers raze Gaddafi Bab al-Aziziya compound