Connect with us

Middle East

Court rejects Red Sea islands transfer from Egypt to Saudi Arabia

Published

on

In a surprising setback for President General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Egypt’s State Council, an administrative court on June 22 annulled a maritime border accord with Saudi Arabia that would have seen Egypt lose control of two Red Sea islands. The Egyptian court has in effect nullified an agreement that would transfer control of two islands in the Red Sea to Saudi Arabia.

Egyptian judge has quashed a government decision to hand control of two Red Sea islands to Saudi Arabia. Judge Yehia al-Dakroury’s ruling that Egyptian sovereignty over the islands, which are located at the mouth of the Gulf of Aqaba, couldn’t be amended in favor of another state, came as somewhat of a surprise.

The conflict over the dry, uninhabited Tiran and Sanafir islands had gripped Egypt for months, since Sisi announced the transfer during a visit by Saudi King cum premier Salman in April. The Egyptian president portrayed the transfer of the islands as a return to Saudi Arabia for the first time since 1950, when the Saudis placed them under Egyptian control following fears that Israel could seize them. The land transfer came amid a variety of economic agreements Sisi signed with the Saudi government, including a development deal in the Sinai Peninsula.

Uninhabited Tiran and Sanafir lie between Saudi Arabia and Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula at the narrow entrance to the Gulf of Aqaba, a strategic part of the Red Sea bordered by Israel, Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Egyptian troops have been stationed there since 1950 at Riyadh’s request. Saudi and Egyptian officials say they belong to the kingdom and were only under Egyptian control because Saudi Arabia asked Egypt in 1950 to protect them.

The anti-land deal protesters rooted the conflict in a deeper sense that the islands were Egyptian, while critiquing Sisi’s leadership in the years since he led the military ouster of Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammed Morsi, Egypt’s first democratically elected president, in 2013. The maritime demarcation accord, announced in April, caused public uproar and prompted rare protests in Egypt where many people say they were taught at school that Tiran and Sanafir were Egyptian.

The timing of the announcement, during a visit to Cairo by the Saudi king that coincided with the signing of aid deals, created the impression among many that the islands were sold. “By nature the Egyptian people are attached to their land, and historically most Egyptians worked in agriculture,” said political activist Ahmed Abdullah in April. “Land for Egyptians is a matter of honor.” Crowds in Cairo have shouted, likening Sisi to the protagonist of a folktale about a man who brought shame to his family by giving up his family farm. The protests prompted a police crackdown.

More than 200 people were arrested in connection with protests over the islands. At least 85 have since been acquitted but more than 150 have been handed jail sentences or fines, judicial sources said, while lawyers are pushing for their release.

As anger rose, Sisi made an impromptu speech denying the islands were sold and urging Egyptians to end the debate. But a group of lawyers, including former presidential candidate Khaled Ali, challenged the agreement in court. Ali argued that according to a 1906 maritime treaty between Egypt and the Ottoman Empire, the islands are Egyptian. The treaty precedes the founding of Saudi Arabia in 1932.

The demarcation agreement was also due to be discussed by parliament in the coming weeks. Two parliamentarians said the debate would go ahead and take into account the verdict. It was not clear whether the government could activate the accord if parliament approved it but the higher administrative court did not.

The government said it would appeal the verdict. “The government is studying the reasons for the ruling and will … challenge it at the higher administrative court of the State Council and request that … it be canceled,” Magdy al-Agaty, minister of legal and parliamentary affairs, said.

Saudi Arabia and other wealthy Gulf Arab states have showered Egypt with billions of dollars in aid since Sisi toppled President Mohamed Mursi of the Muslim Brotherhood in 2013 following mass protests against his rule. But a sharp drop in oil prices and differences over foreign policy issues such as the war in Yemen have raised questions over whether strong Gulf Arab support can be sustained.

While Sisi is overseeing a crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood, his government has also increased prosecutions of people accused of blasphemy. Now, the judge’s ruling against the land deal with Saudi Arabia could potentially set some senior Egyptian officials up for prosecution themselves.

Under Egyptian law, officials who negotiate a deal with foreign government that harms national interests can face a life sentence, though legal experts are divided on whether this could be the case with the land deal.

The verdict stated that the two islands would “remain under Egyptian sovereignty”. The lawyers who filed the case called the decision a victory. The judge’s decision demonstrates the courts “are fair and only care about the interests of the country,” Essam el-Eslamboly, one of the Egyptian lawyers who challenged the transfer said.

If it is approved by the country’s High Administrative Court it will become legally binding. However, the State Lawsuits Authority, which represents the Egyptian state in lawsuits, said on Tuesday evening that it would challenge the ruling, state television reported.

Sisi has cracked down on all dissent since leading the military’s overthrow of President Mohammed Morsi in 2013. Since then, more than 1,000 people have been killed and 40,000 are believed to have been jailed, most of them supporters of Mr Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood.

Tiran sits at the mouth of the Gulf of Aqaba, on a strategically important stretch of water called the Strait of Tiran, used by Israel to access the Red Sea. The islands are uninhabited, apart from Egyptian military personnel and multi-national peacekeepers, since 1982. Egyptian troops have been stationed on the islands since 1950 at the request of Saudi Arabia. Israel captured the islands in 1956 and 1967, subsequently returning them to Egypt both times. Egyptian President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi was criticised for “selling” Egyptian territory after deciding in April 2016 to hand the islands to Saudi Arabia

Egyptians are eager for economic revival after years of political upheaval. But the islands issue hurt national pride, prompting thousands of protesters to take to the streets in April chanting “people want the fall of the regime”, a slogan from the Arab Spring uprisings of 2011.

One is not very sure if there is a new conspiracy in Middle East, which is in a state of deadly crises and destabilization, to obstruct the ongoing effort by Riyadh and Cairo to bury the differences and resume better relations because Israel-US duo does not want any peace in the region. Saudi-Egypt effort for reconciliations could lead to more such realignments, leading to Pan Arabism that would strengthen the cause of Palestine and oppose Israeli dominance in the region.

How can Israel or USA allow that to happen?

Continue Reading
Comments

Middle East

Has Assad succeeded in overcoming the Syrian crisis?

Mohamad Zreik

Published

on

A series of revolutions swept through the Arab region. The first torch was from Tunisia when protester Mohamed Bouazizi burned himself in opposition to the regime of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. This wave of revolts led to the overthrow of many Arab regimes and leaders in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and other Arab countries. There has been a state of destruction, displacement and economic collapse in the countries affected by the revolutions, a lot of killing, torture and political division, as well as the penetration of terrorist groups in the Arab world.

The revolution began in the form of peaceful protests, but soon developed using violence between the Syrian army and opposition groups. Over time, the Syrian opposition was divided into a peaceful opposition aimed at overthrowing the Assad regime through diplomatic means and the armed opposition, which was divided into several factions: the Free Syrian Army, Jabhat al-Nusra and ISIS, as well as other armed factions.

This difficult situation brought the Syrian regime into a stage of internal popular and military pressure, which led to a request for military assistance from Russia. Russia responded to Assad’s request and defended the Syrian regime in earnest. Russia, which had good relations with the Libyan regime, did not veto the UN Security Council in favor of the Gaddafi regime. In the Syrian crisis, however, Russia and China have vetoed the UN Security Council in favor of the Assad regime, and they defended the Syrian regime in international forums.

Russia, which has historical ties with the Syrian regime, regards Syria as an extension of its strategic interests in the Middle East. Evidence of this is the presence of Russia’s military base in Syria, which is Russia’s only military base in the Middle East. Iran also stood by the Syrian regime in its war, and there was constant coordination between the Syrian and Iranian leaderships. On the other hand, the United States, Saudi Arabia and Turkey demanded that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad step down and replace the existing regime with a new regime. The United States has repeatedly threatened military intervention to strike the Syrian regime, but the American threat has always been matched by a Russian willingness to retaliate, creating a balance of power on the Syrian battlefield.

Russia’s active support of the Syrian regime and its allies’ support led to Assad’s steadfastness, despite widespread international dissatisfaction with this outcome. Syria’s political position has not yet changed, but the Syrian-Russian-Chinese-Iranian alliance has been strengthened. Many military analysts believe that what happened in Syria cannot be repeated with other countries. The most important reason is Syria’s strategic geographic position and the need for a regime like Assad to govern Syria for the time being.

The Assad regime has not collapsed, but there has been an internal and international resentment that did not exist in the past. This is expected to happen because of the nature of the Syrian regime’s alliances and the division of the region between an eastern and a Western axis. But the Assad regime has been able to withstand and maintain its position in the face of the severe crisis in Syria.

The Syrian regime must work hard to involve the Syrian opposition in government and form a government that includes all strata of Syrian society so as not to feel a large segment of the Syrian people injustice, and must increase the margin of freedom in the country. These steps should change the perception that prevailed towards the Syrian regime, and lead to its acceptance internally and internationally in the next stage.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Landing in Riyadh: Geopolitics work in Putin’s favour

Dr. James M. Dorsey

Published

on

When Russian President Vladimir Putin lands in Riyadh this week for the second time in 12 years, his call for endorsement of his proposal to replace the US defense umbrella in the Gulf with a multilateral security architecture is likely to rank high on his agenda.

So is Mr. Putin’s push for Saudi Arabia to finalize the acquisition of Russia’s S-400 anti-missile defense system in the wake of the failure of US weaponry to intercept drones and missiles that last month struck key Saudi oil installations.

“We are ready to help Saudi Arabia protect their people. They need to make clever decisions…by deciding to buy the most advanced S-400 air-defence systems. These kinds of systems are capable of defending any kind of infrastructure in Saudi Arabia from any kind of attack,” Mr. Putin said immediately after the attacks.

Mr Putin’s push for a multilateral security approach is helped by changing realities in the Gulf as a result of President Donald J. Trump’s repeated recent demonstrations of his unreliability as an ally.

Doubts about Mr. Trump have been fuelled by his reluctance to respond more forcefully to perceived Iranian provocations, including the downing of a US drone in June and the September attacks on the Saudi facilities as well as his distancing himself from Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu following last month’s elections, and most recently, the president’s leaving the Kurds to their own devices as they confront a Turkish invasion in Syria.

Framed in transactional terms in which Saudi Arabia pays for a service, Mr. Trump’s decision this week to send up to 3,000 troops and additional air defences to the kingdom is likely to do little to enhance confidence in his reliability.

By comparison, Mr. Putin, with the backing of Chinese president Xi Jinping, seems a much more reliable partner even if Riyadh differs with Moscow and Beijing on key issues, including Iran, Syria and Turkey.

“While Russia is a reliable ally, the US is not. Many in the Middle East may not approve of Moscow supporting Bashar al-Assad’s regime, but they respect Vladimir Putin for sticking by Russia’s beleaguered ally in Syria,” said Middle East scholar and commentator Mark N. Katz.

In a twist of irony, Mr. Trump’s unreliability coupled with an Iran’s strategy of gradual escalation in response to the president’s imposition of harsh economic sanctions in a bid to force the Islamic republic to the negotiating table appear to have moderated what was perceived as a largely disastrous assertive and robust go-it alone Saudi foreign and defense policy posture in recent years.

While everyone would benefit from a dialling down of tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran, Mr. Trump’s overall performance as the guarantor of security in the Gulf could in the longer term pave the way for a more multilateral approach to the region’s security architecture.

In the latest sign of Saudi willingness to step back from the brink, Saudi Arabia is holding back channel talks for the first time in two years with Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen. The talks began after both sides declared partial ceasefires in the more than four year-long Yemeni war.

The talks potentially open the door to a broader Russian-sponsored deal in the context of some understanding about non-aggression between the kingdom and Iran, in which Saudi Arabia would re-establish diplomatic relations with Syria in exchange for the Islamic republic dropping its support for the Houthis.

Restoring diplomatic relations and reversing the Arab League’s suspension of Syrian membership because of the civil war would constitute a victory for Mr. Al-Assad’s main backers, Russia and Iran. It would grant greater legitimacy to a leader viewed by significant segments of the international community as a pariah.

A Saudi-Iranian swap of Syria for Yemen could also facilitate Saudi financial contributions to the reconstruction of war-ravaged Syria. Saudi Arabia was conspicuously absent at last month’s Rebuild Syria Expo in Damascus.

Mr. Putin is likely to further leverage his enhanced credibility as well as Saudi-Russian cooperation in curtailing oil production to boost prices to persuade Saudi Arabia to follow through on promises to invest in Russia.

Saudi Arabia had agreed to take a stake in Russia’s Novatek Arctic-2 liquefied natural gas complex, acquire Sibur, Russia’s largest petrochemical facility, and invest an additional US$6 billion in future projects.

Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak predicted that “about 30 agreements and contracts will be signed during President Putin’s visit to Saudi Arabia. We are working on it. These are investment projects, and the sum in question is billions of dollars.”

In anticipation of Mr. Putin’s visit, Russia’s sovereign wealth fund, the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), said it was opening its first overseas office in Riyadh.

RDIF and the kingdom’s counterpart, the Public Investment Fund (PIF), are believed to be looking at some US$2.5 billion in investment in technology, medicine, infrastructure, transport and industrial production.

The Russian fund is also discussing with Aramco, the Saudi state-owned oil company, US$3 billion in investments in oil services and oil and gas conversion projects.

Saudi interest in economic cooperation with Russia goes beyond economics. Ensuring that world powers have an increasing stake in the kingdom’s security is one pillar of a more multilateral regional approach

Said Russian Middle East expert Alexey Khlebnikov: “Clearly, the recent attacks on Saudi Arabia’s oil facilities have changed many security calculations throughout the region.”

Continue Reading

Middle East

No peace for Kurds: Rojava still under attack

Silvia Fornaroli

Published

on

The Amazon is still on fire. The “lungs of the Earth” are hardly breathing while the flames are threatening people and nature reserves. As long as we do not see with our own eyes the burnt trees, the endangered species and the indigenous tribes fighting to save their dying forest, we seem incapable to understand the actual consequences.

Thousands of miles away from this environmental catastrophe, a different kind of tragedy is waiting to happen. Rojava-Northern Syria Federation — the self-declared autonomous region that Kurdish people managed to carve out in northeastern Syria during the Civil war — is burning again.

On September 24, Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan made a controversial speech to the United Nations General Assembly and proposed to create a “safe zone” in the north of Syria, in order to resettle up to 2 million Syrian refugees. He is hoping to establish a peace corridor with a depth of 32 kilometers and a length of 480 kilometers, which would easily turn the area into the world’s largest refugee camp. Despite the seemingly humanitarian purposes, this might represent the umpteenth attempt to destroy the Kurdish dream of an independent democratic enclave.

It is undeniably clear, in fact, how Turkey could take advantage of the situation: Erdoğan’s spokesman Ibrahim Kalin has already claimed that Ankara’s aim is also to clear the borders from “terrorist elements.”

The People’s Protection Units and the Women’s Protection Units (YPG/YPJ), which — along with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) — played a key role in the fought against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), are the official army of Rojava but currently designated as terrorist organizations. These armed groups, in fact, are considered as an extension of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), the far-left militant and political organization founded in 1978 by Abdullah Öcalan and  often involved in armed clashes with Turkish security forces.

Kurdish people are about to be left alone once again and the recent decisions of the White House trigger alarm in the whole Middle East.

On October 7, president Donald Trump announced that the United States  — so far the main financer, trainer and supporter of Kurds — would start pulling troops out of those territories, although it would not constitute a full withdrawal.

Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said that “The Department of Defense made clear to Turkey — as did the president — that we do not endorse a Turkish operation in Northern Syria,” and that “The US Armed Forces will not support, or be involved in any such operation.”

Mazlum Kobanê, the commander in chief of the SDF, announced that they will protect Syrian’s borders and fight back against Ankara’s army. Since the majority of Kurdish cities are located in this area, it is not difficult to understand how potentially devasting this ongoing operation could be.

Turkish assault is going to begin from the city of Gire Spi/Tell Abyad, once controlled by the so-called Caliphate and captured in 2015 by the YPG during the Tell Abyad offensive. The cities of Qamishli, Derek/Al Malikiya, Tell Tamer and Kobanê/Ayn al Arab are next to become target of air strikes and artillery fire as well.

It is no coincidence that shortly after the siege of Kobanê, Kurdish forces directed their efforts towards Tell Abyad, being such a strategic site for ISIL militias. The city, in fact, was better known in the West as the “Jihadi Highway”, a de-facto corridor for foreign fighters. In the chaos caused by the fighting, jihadists would surely try to regain strength and Turkish move is serving the cause.

At the Al-Hol camp — a huge detention female camp near Al-Hasakah — numerous riots have occurred in the past few weeks, and the managers of the structure believe that the women held in the prison — former jihadi brides — might be the vehicle for renewed forms of radicalization.

In view of the fact that US officials confirmed that they will not intervene nor will they seize control of those prisons, Kurdish forces called Washington’s move “a stab in the back”. Meanwhile in Raqqa, ISIL militants are still carrying out suicide bombing attacks against SDF positions.

Shervan Derwish, official spokesman of the Mambij Military Council, has expressed his concern with a very touching message on Twitter.

The YPG and YPJhave fought in many historical battles and their solitary resistance during the last Turkish Afrin offensive in January 2018 became a symbol of their resilience.

On the other hand, Turkey’s army will be backed by their well-known rebel allies:  “The Turkish military, together with the Free Syrian Army (FSA), will cross the Turkish-Syrian border shortly, “wrote Fahrettin Altun — Turkey’s communications director — in a Washington Post column. Numerous military groups are active in the region and, although their nature is still debated, there are evidence of many connections with jihadi-inspired organizations.

Working in cooperation with the SDF, Rojava’s cantons are ready to resist and defend their independence, but Trump’s decision sounds like a betrayal.

If forests are burning, so will be democracy in Syria. The Rojava project is in imminent danger, and this time there will be no mountains for the Kurds to seek refuge in. Here in the West we are blessed not to directly witness the destruction of both tragedies, but it is still up to us whether to look those flames in the eye or remember them as the unique environments they actually were.

In loving memory of Mehmet Aksoy, who dedicated his life to the Kurdish cause.

Continue Reading

Latest

Trending

Copyright © 2019 Modern Diplomacy