Connect with us

Middle East

The worse consequence of regional tensions

Published

on

Afghanistan cannot be exempted from the positive and negative consequences of current tensions in other parts of the world. The war in Eastern Europe and the Middle East has negative consequences for Afghanistan, but not for the Taliban, because they are making efforts to extend their government as much as they can by using the turbulent situation.

In Afghanistan, eyes are focused on the decision of the world, especially the great powers, to open a way to overcome the current impasse. But the countries involved in the Afghanistan conflict have forgotten this country and have defined more important missions for themselves in other parts of the world.

After the Taliban returned to power, the war in Ukraine broke out, where the world has reverted its attention from the Afghanistan crisis, and the war in Ukraine turned into the main topic and agenda of the world leaders.

In the war in Ukraine, not only Russia, but also the United States and the European Union were involved, the two major blocks, and if they want they can end the Afghan crisis.

Now that more than two years have passed since the war in Ukraine, not only is there no news of the end of the crisis, but more costs and resources are pouring in from all sides to sustain the war. Even some security experts admit that the war in Ukraine may last for years.

Before finding a way out of the Ukraine crisis, the Gaza war broke out — the war that has turned the Middle East into a “powder keg” and so far no way to overcome this situation has been found.

The regional and global actors have failed to manage the situation, or even break a deal for a short-term ceasefire to help reduce civilian casualties in Gaza.

The US is not only involved in the war in Ukraine, but also in the war in Gaza — the factor that has caused Washington to think only about the survival and security of Israel and not care about the problem of Afghanistan.

Unfortunately if Tehran and Tel Aviv enter into a cycle of extensive conflict, the war in the Middle East will take on a regional nature

Instead of ending the Gaza war, it became the cause of another war in Lebanon. What is happening in Lebanon these days is the result of the Gaza war and the most annoying is that civilians are again the target.

For the USA, not only the war in Ukraine and Gaza, but also the war in Lebanon is a big concern. Likewise, France, as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, is involved in the Lebanon war.

Iran, as a neighbor of Afghanistan and a regional power, finds itself stuck in the battle of Lebanon. The Lebanese crisis is also a concern of Saudi Arabia. The aid that Riyadh has sent to Lebanon in the last few months has not been sent to Afghanistan in the last three years.

Like the other two crises, the prospect of the end of the Lebanon war looks dark, at least in the short term. It is not unlikely that a bigger crisis will be born from it — the war between Israel and Iran.

Not long ago, Tehran launched nearly two hundred ballistic missiles towards Israel, to which Tel Aviv has not yet responded. For three weeks, the eyes of the world’s inhabitants have been focused on Israel’s possible response — an answer that is unlikely to light the fire of a full-scale war between the two sides.

Obviously, when Tehran and Tel Aviv enter into a cycle of extensive conflict, the war in the Middle East will take on a regional nature. When Gaza, Lebanon, Israel, Iran, etc. are involved in war, what is happening in the Middle East can be called a regional war. In that case, the allied militias of Iran from Yemen, Iraq, etc. will also shoot at Israel, and there will be no doubt that the war is regional.

Fortunately, war in Afghanistan has ended

In the meantime, among other crises and conflicts, the Afghanistan crisis would be forgotten. Whereas, if it were not for the above crises, the presence of the Taliban in Afghanistan, especially the rights of women to work and girls to education would be on top agenda of the world leaders.

Now, compared to other crises, the situation in Afghanistan is not described as a crisis. It is true that Afghanistan is suffering from statelessness, but according to many, the war has ended there. If terrorism is active in Afghanistan, it has not seriously and directly threatened the interests of other countries. In case if there is any threat it is nothing in the eyes of the world compared to other current crises.

Even if the economic crisis is rampant in Afghanistan, in the eyes of the world, the image of the refugees and famine victims of Gaza and Lebanon will be better than the hungry people of Afghanistan. This is the image created in the world’s mind of the Afghanistan crisis. The big regional and global actors are looking for their interests in the end of other crises than the Afghan crisis.

The big regional and global actors are looking for their interests in the end of every war

In the last few months, only organizations such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, etc., publish statements describing the situation in Afghanistan as dangerous and calling for the serious attention of the world.

Or the World Food Program and other humanitarian agencies write about the increase in hunger and the spread of diseases such as tuberculosis, etc. that even for that cause, there are no eyes to see and no ears to listen. The rest of the world’s effective institutions and powers involved in Afghanistan are silent and are watching what is happening in Gaza, Lebanon, and Ukraine.

Summarizing the challenges of stateless Afghanistan to seasonal diseases shows that this country has disappeared from the eyes of the world at least for now.

More importantly, ignoring the bad situation of the Afghan media indicates the lack of importance of the country’s crisis in the eyes of the world.

Recently, the media has been subjected to repression and censorship more than before. According to some sources, TVs will be blocked or turned into radios. So far, no serious voice has been raised in support of the media from Western institutions and countries against this decision of the Taliban. 

Only the “Afghanistan Journalists Support Organization” and some other organizations raise their voices, but that would bear no result.

The US presidential elections, which were a source of hope for many, cannot be hoped for too much now because if Democratic Party’s nominee, Kamala Harris wins, she will follow the footstep of Joe Biden regarding policies with Afghanistan. And if Republican Party’s candidate Donald Trump wins, assuming he intends to end the war, and will prioritize the crisis in Ukraine, Gaza, Lebanon and Iran, not Afghanistan under Taliban rule. In this case, it still takes a lot of time to resolve the crisis in Afghanistan.

Middle East

US waives human rights terms on $320m military aid to Egypt

Published

on

The US State Department stated that it has waived human rights conditions on more than $300 million in military aid to Egypt.

The statement emphasised that this decision was taken in consideration of Cairo’s “helpful role” since the outbreak of the war against Iran.

Egypt began receiving substantial support from the US after signing a peace treaty with Israel in 1979.

Since the late 1980s, the country has received approximately $1.3 billion annually in US military assistance.

A portion of this aid is subject to conditions related to human rights and democracy, which can be waived on national security grounds.

Withholding funds, including during the administration of former US President Joe Biden, has caused tension between Cairo and Washington in the past.

A letter dated 21 September and addressed to various congressional committees, obtained by Reuters, stated that Secretary of State Marco Rubio “decided to waive the certification requirement under the fiscal year 2025 Foreign Military Financing programme for Egypt of $320 million.”

This waiver was subsequently confirmed by the State Department.

An accompanying memorandum justifying the decision stated that this portion of military aid was “essential for counterterrorism, border security, or non-proliferation programmes, or otherwise important to the national security interests of the United States.”

The memorandum, dated 4 September and bearing Rubio’s signature, stated: “Exercising this waiver authority is critical to the US-Egypt relationship and to US national security priorities, particularly given the helpful role Egypt has played in the aftermath of Operation Epic Fury.”

“Operation Epic Fury” is the designation used by the US military for the campaign launched jointly with Israel against Iran in late February.

The State Department memorandum, whose authenticity was confirmed by two sources in Washington familiar with the letter, did not provide detailed information regarding what was termed Egypt’s “helpful role”.

The State Department’s annual decision on military aid to Egypt typically covers funds allocated for the preceding fiscal year, which ends on 30 September.

A State Department spokesperson stated that Rubio waived the certification in the interest of US national security and that the US continues to cooperate with the Egyptian government across a range of issues.

In an emailed statement, the spokesperson said: “This waiver recognizes the importance of maintaining security cooperation with Egypt at a time of significant security challenges in the region.”

The Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not immediately comment on the matter.

The spillover effects of the Iran war have imposed a heavy toll on US security partners, including Egypt.

Owing to rising fuel prices and other disruptions, the Egyptian economy is passing through a difficult period.

Under the Biden administration, the US withheld portions of the annual military allocation on multiple occasions over Egypt’s human rights record.

In 2024, following the Hamas-led 7 October attack on Israel and the subsequent war in Gaza, the Biden administration set aside human rights conditions, disbursing the entire $1.3 billion allocation to Egypt for the first time in its tenure.

Human rights organisations have long accused Egypt, under the administration of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, of widespread human rights abuses, including torture and enforced disappearances.

This week, Egyptian police detained six journalists from a fact-checking and investigative media outlet, accusing them of spreading false information on behalf of the banned Muslim Brotherhood.

Egyptian authorities state that they have taken steps to address human rights issues. Sisi said stability is paramount and that the government supports human rights by working to provide for basic needs.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Britain expands curbs on arms exports to Israel over Gaza risks

Published

on

Britain has significantly broadened its military export restrictions targeting Israel, suspending or rejecting more than 80 licences for items the IDF could use in Gaza.

This figure is nearly triple the number affected when the policy was first introduced in September 2024.

United Kingdom Minister of State for the Middle East Stephen Doughty said that as part of what he described as a “tighter system” for assessing exports to Israel, more than 50 further export applications have been refused since approximately 30 licences were initially suspended.

Under the initial decision taken in September 2024, 30 of roughly 350 licences were suspended after the British government concluded there was a “clear risk” that certain military exports could be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law in Gaza.

The affected equipment included components for military aircraft, drones, naval systems, and targeting gear.

Doughty said additional measures adopted this month established what he termed a “double safeguard” mechanism within the approvals process.

Export applications must now be assessed both against existing international humanitarian law criteria and in light of Britain’s position on the legality of Israel’s presence in the Palestinian territories.

“We have so far suspended or refused more than 80 licences,” Doughty said, adding that he had personally examined each licence.

Despite the wider restrictions, British-origin parts entering the international F-35 fighter jet supply chain continue to be largely exempt.

The UK government argues that preventing British-made components from entering the global F-35 pool could undermine the programme as a whole and have serious consequences for the security of the UK and its allies.

Direct exports of F-35 parts intended specifically for Israel remain suspended.

Doughty defended maintaining the supply of components via the international programme, arguing that halting it could have severe ramifications for the broader European and allied security architecture.

Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Emily Thornberry challenged this position, arguing that the issue was political rather than purely legal.

Thornberry suggested adopting an approach similar to the Dutch model, under which components entering the international supply chain could be flagged as “not intended for aircraft bound for Israel”.

The initial suspension was implemented in September 2024 by then Foreign Secretary David Lammy.

Lammy stressed at the time that the measure did not constitute an arms embargo and applied solely to items assessed as usable in military operations in Gaza.

Since then, the policy has been tightened further under Prime Minister Andy Burnham.

The expanded export restrictions follow the Burnham government’s adoption of a more confrontational policy toward the Israeli government.

Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband drew sustained applause at the Labour Party’s annual conference in Liverpool after delivering a sharp critique of the Netanyahu government’s policies and defending the decision to ban trade with Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

Accusing Israel of committing war crimes in Gaza, Miliband stated that the British government heard public outrage over the conflict, telling delegates: “We hear you. You were right.”

Continue Reading

Middle East

Netanyahu holds secret UAE talks with Saudi Arabia and Arab officials

Published

on

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with representatives of Gulf and Arab nations that lack diplomatic ties with Israel, including Saudi Arabia, during his weekend visit to the United Arab Emirates.

Sources close to the gathering told the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth on Monday that representatives from Morocco, Libya, Jordan, and Qatar also took part in the meeting.

Netanyahu made a unannounced visit to Abu Dhabi on Sunday, where he met with the country’s leader, Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

According to Israeli media, this marked the first time the United Arab Emirates officially confirmed a visit by Netanyahu.

The meeting was arranged by Mossad Director Roman Goffman “at the request of Saudi Arabia, which asked for Israel’s assistance against Houthi attacks in the Red Sea region,” according to Yedioth Ahronoth.

The discussions addressed Iran and the Houthi militia. The newspaper added that the Arab states heard from Israel that “Israel is prepared to assist countries in the region with air defence systems, just as it aided the UAE during the conflict with Iran.”

Conflict in Yemen intensified in September when Ansarullah militiamen launched a rapid offensive that seized Yemen’s entire Red Sea coastline, including the vital maritime corridor of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.

The Yemeni resistance also imposed a blockade on Saudi Arabia’s energy exports and staged multiple attacks against the kingdom.

Saudi Arabia reportedly sought military assistance from the US to counter Ansarullah.

Washington declined to attack the Houthis directly, but announced that it would provide intelligence and targeting support.

Reporting on the same visit, The Jerusalem Post said Netanyahu spent six hours in the UAE and that the principal subject of his discussions with MBZ was Iran.

Citing sources familiar with the matter, the newspaper added that the trip came “after Netanyahu exerted heavy pressure on the United Arab Emirates to arrange a meeting ahead of the Israeli elections on 27 October.”

Separately, the Associated Press, citing a person with direct knowledge of the meeting, reported that Netanyahu’s visit to the UAE was arranged in part to ask MBZ to deny reports that he had warned the Israeli prime minister of an impending Hamas threat prior to 7 October 2023.

According to Israeli media, Netanyahu’s office denied the AP report, issuing the following statement:

“Fake news. The visit focused solely on strengthening ties between the two countries and on regional issues.”

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey