The New Team In Washington Surveys West Asia Trump Leaves Behind

The New Team In Washington Surveys West Asia Trump Leaves Behind

                                                                                      Saeed Naqvi

For the new team being announced by the Biden administration any innovation can only follow repair work of the considerable wreckage that is being left behind by the outgoing team.

At this moment of transition, what construct does one place on the outgoing Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo’s participation in the cloak-and-dagger meeting with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman and Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu in the mega city of Neom being built on the Red Sea? The drama of this meeting was heightened by Netanyahu’s office denying the meeting in tones which seemed to suggest that the Israelis were not busting their guts to keep the meeting secret. A pretense of secrecy was essential because otherwise “MBS” would be in “trouble”.

Netanyahu’s Education Minister, Yoav Galant, could not contain his joy at the “amazing achievement” because the “Sunni world” was joining the Israel-US alliance to counter “Iranian Shiite extremism”.

This Shia-Sunni confrontation, real or simulated, has been the game ever since the Shah was toppled in Iran. Why then this secrecy now? Why is MBS so scared being seen in an embrace with Netanyahu on Saudi soil? Because his people will find out? Do his people matter? But it turns out that Human rights is an article of faith with the incoming Secretary of state, Antony Blinken. This may well be a source of anxiety not just for Saudi Arabia but all monarchies and authoritarian systems. Are there any in our vicinity?

A hint about MBS’s source of anxiety was available in the other crucial meeting the Saudi king had with President Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey. The Turkish strongman is part of a quadrangle which both, Washington (the incoming administration) and MBS, Netanyahu too, should by analyzing.

After the Soviet collapse in 1991, it was elementary that creating a distance between Moscow and Beijing would remain a US strategic goal. But George W Bush and his deluded neo-cons asked for the moon – full spectrum global dominance into the American century. The financial crisis of 2008 rapped them hard on the knuckles. American decline was well underway when Trump greased the downward slide even more effectively.

The evolving Biden team will contemplate at the menacing quadrangle I mentioned at the outset. To begin with, Moscow and Beijing have never been closer. The duet spotted the potential of Iran too, and included it in the club. After all, Washington is just about to dust up the Iranian nuclear file for a resumption of a conversation with Tehran.

No sooner had Trump lost the election, when Imran Khan was on his maiden trip to Kabul. This, when the US troop withdrawal from the Afghan capital had run into the sort of snags which US representative for Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad was trying to sort out. Was the Pakistan Prime Minister now effectively being positioned to handle the Afghan file? This became a very real anxiety in both Tehran and New Delhi. But Iran being re invited on the nuclear file, mollifies it somewhat. How happy New Delhi should be with its exertions in the Quad (US, Australia, Japan, India) only time can tell. The Japanese Foreign Minister has already clarified: our membership of the Quad is not directed against any country.

So, while the US was on the Trump rollercoaster and coping with the social mayhem and galloping Covid, other countries were moving increasingly in concert. There has been so much continuous chanting of the Shia-Sunni conflict that real and abiding antipathies have been lost sight of.

A convenient point of departure to explain this narrative are the two events in December, 1979, which rattled the Saudis, indeed the world – Ayatollah Khomeini’s return, signaling the Iranian revolution. Around the same date, an anti-monarchy, Sunni, an extreme version of the Muslim Brotherhood, Juhayman al-Otaybi, defied the Saudi state by occupying the holiest Muslim Mosque of Mecca.  

Unable to flush out Otaybi and his armed supporters, Saudis sought Western help. A situation emerged which to a non Muslim would read like a situation comedy. Since non Muslims are not allowed in Mecca, US and French soldiers had to be converted to Islam to enter the mosque and accomplish the holy task of killing Otaybi and his men. This “rebellion within” gives Saudis nightmares. But they feel more secure externalizing the threat. They have persistently targeted Iran and Shiaism as threats to themselves, Israel, indeed, the West. When did you last hear of the 15 days siege of the Mecca Mosque?

To point fingers at the Muslim Brotherhood (Akhwan ul Muslimeen) as the enemy would isolate most of the GCC Sheikhdoms from the larger Muslim “Umma”. They would then be perceived as only the “Wahabi” sect of the Sunni world.

Incalculable Saudi wealth, particularly after the quadrupling of oil prices following the 1973 Yom Kippur war, had the Western Military Industrial Complex salivating on Arab petro dollars. The oil rich Sheikhs are, by formal agreements, dependent on Western arms. Their wealth plus their links to Israel give them considerable control on Western media which has quite shockingly harped only on the Shia-Sunni conflict.

When the Arab Spring dethroned Hosni Mubarak, Muslim Brotherhood’s, Mohamed Morsi became Egypt’s Prime Minister. Coming to power of a Brother in Egypt caused the Saudis to load their camels with their billions and turn up in Cairo to stabilize Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi’s coup in Cairo. Brothers in power in Egypt was anathema to the Israelis too because the Hamas in Gaza would now have help from all sides. Brother in Turkey, Qatar and Egypt. They were ideologically coherent with Hamas.

At the Shia end, the Hezbullah in Lebanon, Iran, the Alawi elements in the Syrian Army, the Shia majority in Iraq, war tried Houthis of Yemen are all supporting the Palestinian cause to the hilt.

No, it is not the Shia Sunni divide which is bothering MBS and Netanyahu. What worries them deeply is the Shia-Sunni combine zeroing in on the Israelis and the Wahabis in unlikely comradeship.

#          #          #          #

After Bihar, The Enigma Of Asad Owaisi Deserves To Be Understood

 After Bihar, The Enigma Of Asad Owaisi Deserves To Be Understood

                                                                                       Saeed Naqvi

The enigma of Asaduddin Owaisi on the rise in recent years has, after he won five seats in the Seemanchal area of Bihar, acquired a new salience.

Speculation now centres on how he might fare in West Bengal where the Muslim population is estimated to be 30 percent which is the backbone of Mamata’s support. Since the Muslim is presumed to be Owaisi’s hunting ground too, will the Muslim vote be confused? If Amit Shah had not made it his life’s mission to oust or substantially diminish Trinamool and “Didi”, Muslims may well have risked a breach in their absolute support for Mamata. In current circumstances, any bid by Owaisi to fish for a small catch, just enough to open an account in West Bengal, will expose him to the slur that he is a “vote katua”, a vote divider which is what parties, particularly the Congress, like to cast him as. This allegation of communalism against Owaisi, helps the Congress sustain the delusion that it is still with the secular line up. The Congress does not like the refrain: Congress and the BJP, tweedledum and tweedledee. It must ofcourse be admitted that there are differences between the two ruling class, corporate supported parties. Former Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh Digvijay Singh may, admittedly, drink a liter of cow’s urine everyday but his drinking habits do not come into conflict with the secularism a handful of Congressmen swore by in the days of yore.

It is an article of faith with connoisseurs that the non dairy yield from a jet black cow is comparable to “Amrit” or nectar. Congress leader Randeep Surjewala, who declared Rahul Gandhi a “janeudhari” Brahmin during the Gujarat Assembly elections, would have had the electronic media riveted on the cow shed in Rahul’s bungalow had he gifted him with two black cows. Surjewala held the gift back presumably because he may have had the foresight that Rahul would eventually have to move to Wayanad in Kerala where the cow is otherwise contemplated.

To fast forward the narrative, there were no cow vigilantes, no lynchings in the name of the cow, no bar on Love Jihad. The Congress can never be blamed for inaugurating such trends. The charge against them is different: extreme cowardice. When these shameful events happen, the Congress instead of going for the opposition jugular, just shuts up – in case taking sides results in a loss of Hindu vote. Little wonder, the “B Team of the BJP” is a label which has stuck on the Congress.

Take the latest fusillade Amit Shah has directed at the “Gupkar gang” for international conspiracy. The tepid response by Surjewala says nothing. Why does the Congress not come out with a clear stand on article 370?

Sheikh bhi khush rahey

Shaitaan bhi naraaz na ho

(Keep the agents of God and of Satan equally happy.)

How can the Congress point fingers at Owaisi’s “pro BJP stand” when it reduced senior leader Ghulam Nabi Azad to tears during the 2019 elections. “Even district committees of the Congress do not invite me to address rallies.”

This is the pincer in which Owaisi holds the Congress. He taunts the Muslims: “Your consistent support to the Congress has brought you down to the level described in the 2005 Sachar Committee report.” Since then “your condition has become worse.”

The thrust of Owaisi’s argument is that Muslims have been tricked into supporting “pseudo secular” parties like the Congress, and caste parties in UP, Bihar etcetera.

The Muslims have been frightened into supporting these parties. The ogre they have been frightened by is, obviously, the RSS-BJP. Owaisi’s argument is that the so called secular parties seek Muslim support not to defeat the BJP (they are separately incapable of defeating it), but to enlarge their power base, a delusion at best, and end up doing nothing for the Muslims.

With a population of 200 million or 14% of the total population there are 27 Muslims in a Parliament of 543. The ratio in the state assemblies is even more embarrassing. Owaisi’s argument is simple: seven seats in Telangana, two in Maharashtra and now five in Bihar adds upto fourteen seats. Supposing Muslims pick up an average of even one seat in 28 states and 8 union territories, the figure 36 will not look so negligible.

The electoral weakness of Indian Muslims is precisely this: though substantial in an overall sense, they are scattered all over. Quite ironically Covid 19, by linking schools, colleges, businesses, international conferences by the magic of virtual reality will come into play: Members of Assemblies can be in instantaneous contact.

The danger, ofcourse, is that the growth of a Muslim entity will help accelerate Hindu consolidation. How does one obviate that emergency? By allowing the Muslim vote to habitually occupy frayed mattresses in parties like the Congress which are in fatal decline?

The durability of Owaisi in public life denotes the failure of all political parties to paint him in lurid, communal colours, much as they tried. Such a moment did offer itself in 2013 when his younger, much more fire brand brother, Akbaruddin Owaisi made a provocative reference to police support for the violence against Muslims. “Remove the police for 15 minutes and let’s see.” The speech smacked of a sort of Muslim macho, causing the media to go into convulsions.

Since then Akbaruddin has clearly been kept on a short leash. Asaduddin, a barrister, a restrained and skilful speaker, once a medium pacer for the South zone cricket team, and one who anchors his political stance unerringly to the Constitution is an uncommon phenomenon in public life. For right, left and centre, Asaduddin is the exasperating opponent who does not deviate from good manners, logic, the Constitution and, woe of woes, happens to be a Muslim. Well, if he has such qualities of heart and mind, why will sensible non Muslims not turn to him some day?

#          #          #          #

American Democracy Loses When Most Popular Candidate Kept From Race Twice

American Democracy Loses When Most Popular Candidate Kept From Race Twice

                                                                                         Saeed Naqvi

It was nice to receive mails from friends who had assembled at Lucknow boy Nusrat Durrani’s Dumbo apartment under the Brooklyn Bridge on 3 November 2016, election night, armed with champagne bottles to be uncorked as soon as Hillary Clinton pipped the post.

In the event, the champagne bottles stood in one straight line on the dining table like a row of brooding bishops. Trump had shocked all the guests. A submarine sandwich hurled as a missile by a despairing guest knocked the lamp over.

I have repeated the above story because that is what history is supposed to be – a continuous repetition of facts. So indelibly etched on my mind is that party in Brooklyn that every US election will bring alive that episode.

There is another reason for that episode to be so etched on my mind. I did not wish to be the only one out of synch with the general mood that evening, but I was in a minority of one who expected Hillary to lose. Having arrived in New York a fortnight ago for a discussion in the various campuses of my book, “Being the Other: The Muslim in India”, kept me away from a 24X7 bombardment of punditry on elections.

A cluttering of detail tends to push out of focus the simple, plausible outline conditioning of electoral behaviour. Experience from most electoral theatres had taught me a simple lesson: people were tired of two parties, one indistinguishable from the other.

This was happening at local levels too, even in India. The Aam Aadmi Party’s record 67 out of 70 seats in 2015 was one such wave, smothered by the media which is controlled by the Corporates whose key projects in New Delhi were threatened by the untried party. It did not have the ideological spine to withstand the assault from the main political parties and the corporate media. Therefore, the bubble burst. AAP is now an ordinary party circling around power.

There are comparisons between Joe Biden scraping through and Hillary Clinton losing in 2016: neither were popular candidates. They were candidates that the Democratic Party “maneuvered” as front runners because on both occasions Bernie Sanders was the most popular candidate, but his democratic socialism was anathema to the establishment.

As soon as it became clear that Sanders was leading the field, the establishment came out, all guns blazing. Thomas Friedman, whom the New York Times values as its star columnist, forgot all decencies of independent journalism and wrote two full columns rooting for former New York Mayor, Michael Bloomberg and a billionaire several times over, as one of the Democratic front runners. There was no hope in hell that Bloomberg would win (buy) the nomination but, by spending a billion on TV, he would disrupt the game sufficiently for Sanders to advance. “This is a capitalist country” thundered Bloomberg. To protect his credibility, Friedman admitted in his column, that his wife worked for one of Bloomberg’s charities. This is just one of the umpteen tricks employed to obstruct Sanders.

There was a straightforward reason why Clinton was the wrong candidate. The velocity given to globalization after the Soviet collapse gave a fillip to rampaging capitalism. Inequalities broke all barriers. It did not require Thomas Piketty to enlighten as that even in India barely one percent of the rich had cornered 51.53% of the wealth. The picture in the US was worse. Occupy Wall Street became a popular movement. It invited a capitalist riposte – the Tea Party. People were disgusted with Washington, which symbolized the US establishment. A quest began for an anti establishment candidate. Just one such candidate appeared to be Bernie Sanders. People were looking for social welfare, universal health care, education exactly what the Bloombergs of the US thought would kill the initiative which made America great. Quite unabashedly, the Democratic Party gave the impression that it was preferable to lose the White House than lose corporate support.

One hoped the shock reversal of 2016 would have taught the Democrats a lesson. Across the Atlantic, Jeremy Corbyn was being likewise thwarted by New Labour. One of their leading lights, Lord Peter Mandelson, had sworn to “undermine” Corbyn. The other day they suspended him. Corbyn was to Mandelson what Sanders was to Bloomberg. This in June 2017 when the latest opinion polls projected Corbyn as the possible Prime Minister. Another example that the establishment trumps the popular will. Whither democracy, then?

At this very time, another reality was allowed to go unnoticed. A Fox News poll showed that Sanders has a +28 rating above politicians on both sides of the political spectrum. At that time, the Guardian’s Trevor Timm wrote “One would think with numbers like that, Democratic politicians would be falling over themselves to be associated with Sanders, especially considering the Party as a whole is more unpopular than the Republicans and even Donald Trump right now. Yet instead of embracing his message, the establishment of the party continues to resist him at almost every turn, and they seem insistent they don’t have to change their ways to gain back the support of huge swathes of the country.”

Sanders popularity is now recognized, but after he spelt out the scenario on October 23 in a talk show on how the drama will unfold when votes are counted in these elections, he is well on his way to being prophetic.

“In states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and elsewhere, Republicans are likely to go to the polling booths to cast their votes. Democrats, are likely to mail in their votes. When counting begins, the votes counted first will be Republican votes for that reason. So by 10 pm on counting day, Trump will thank his voters and announce victory. But next morning when millions of mails will be counted, the trend will change. That is when Trump will scream murder: I told you they’ll cheat.” Mayor Rudi Giuliani has already elaborated the case in Philadelphia.

#          #          #          #