Author: Hatem Sadek

Opinion| US shifts away from Middle East in favour of China

Over the years, the United States has changed its strategy in the Middle East.

In 2020, the United States announced a plan for a gradual withdrawal from Afghanistan by September 2021. In August 2021, a major withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan took place, within the framework of the agreement between the United States and the Taliban. Indeed, a large and rapid withdrawal of American and allied forces took place.

As for the rest of the Middle East, there are no strong indications of a complete US withdrawal from the region. Washington still has strategic and economic interests in the Middle East, such as regional security, political stability, and energy.

Hatem Sadiq

The US foreign policy changes based on new challenges and priorities, and may also be affected by political and security developments in the region. For example, when the agreement between Iran and Saudi Arabia was announced, which was mediated by China, in March 2023, a crisis occurred within the current US administration. This is because this agreement marked Beijing’s entry into the arena of power politics in the Middle East.

Although the Biden administration denied the role of Chinese mediation in concluding the agreement that revived diplomatic relations between Riyadh and Tehran, this denial is evidence of a decline in American influence. This is as Washington’s actions since then confirm its concern about the growing Chinese influence in the Middle East.

Over the past few months, the United States has deployed additional military elements to the region and increased joint patrols and exercises around the Strait of Hormuz. The United States has also warned that it will enhance arms deals with regional partners such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates and confirmed that it will expand training operations with Egypt, Kuwait, and others. All of this is in a clear effort to reassure Arab partners of its commitment to the security of the Middle East.

But these moves are unlikely to enhance American influence. This is because the turn of the Arab powers towards Beijing is not the result of the weakness of the US military presence in the region. Those countries are well aware of the size of US military investments in the Middle East, but they are skeptical about the US will to use these capabilities to serve the interests of Arab countries. So, they cooperate with China in areas such as infrastructure and technology when it seems to them that the United States is less able or willing to help them.

In fact, these countries prefer China to the United States because they seek to acquire some military systems, such as advanced drones, a weapon that the United States has kept out of their reach. Chinese foreign policy also tends to be friendlier to its counterpart regimes. That’s because Beijing works to keep its distance from rival powers in the region, presenting itself as an unbiased mediator.

In light of this new direction, the United States needs a new approach to the region. It must accept the more positive aspects of China’s growing presence in the Middle East, and encourage Beijing’s contributions to regional development and stability, rather than containing them. At the same time, Washington must respond to Chinese actions that harm US interests with precise measures.

Also, Washington should not insist on its outdated strategy that emphasizes security, and do its best to create defense blocs loyal to the United States with the aim of creating a force to counter Chinese encroachments.

Contrary to this policy, the United States should include its political tools and investments in the region in areas in which it excels, such as human capital development, education, green technology, and digital platforms.

Over the past decade, the foreign policies of many countries in the Middle East have shifted towards a multiplicity of alliances. Traditional U.S. partners, such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, have reservations about Washington’s attempts to establish exclusive loyalties in their leadership. So they are seeking partnerships with multiple powers, including China, India, Russia, and the United States.

The United Arab Emirates is an example. Although Abu Dhabi is still a close security and economic partner of the United States, it has strengthened its relations with Beijing through trade, technology exchange, and new arms deals, and maintained its diplomatic and economic relations with Russia, despite Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The UAE is also investing, In trade and technology initiatives with India, under the ratification of the new Comprehensive Economic Partnership in 2022.

Thus, given that other Middle Eastern countries are also seeking similar diverse partnerships, the trend towards multiple alliances is likely to result in the renewal of US influence policies in the region.

Although the Middle East is multi-alliance, it is not multi-polar. The United States remains the primary security sponsor for the Middle East, and it seems unlikely that this position will be exposed to any danger in the foreseeable future. Although the total number of US forces has decreased from its peak, it still exceeds 30,000. Almost as it was before the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.

But dominance does not mean exclusivity. Despite China’s modest security role in the region, it may guarantee its partners’ defence and economic opportunities that the United States does not provide. For example, Beijing has only one military base, located in Djibouti, but it has invested in the ports of the entire region, and they can be used for both civilian and military activities.

This strategy helped China expand its military reach and boost its trade with Middle Eastern countries at the same time. The United Arab Emirates allowed China, as a US intelligence report noted in December 2022, to resume construction on a military logistics facility at one of these ports. This measure is not intended to replace the major military role of the United States in the country, but rather to enable China to expand its military presence there.

On the other hand, the regional powers appreciate the Chinese offer as a complement to the US weapons systems that those countries continue to buy and prefer due to their high quality, and they do not dispense with them. China has also provided Arab governments with assistance in the field of internal security, including training in law enforcement, and mastering advanced surveillance technologies. Therefore, from now on, Washington should not insist on its outdated security-focused strategy.

In order to avoid being marginalised, the United States should realise that the main threats facing the Middle East are social and economic problems, not power conflicts.

Dr. Hatem Sadek: Professor at Helwan University

August 16, 2023
Opinion| IMF sounds alarm about grain crisis

Once again, a grain crisis hit the world as Russia refused to extend the Ukrainian grain agreement because the involved parties did not adhere to the quotas of poor and needy countries. European countries seem to have obtained more than 80% of the total quantities of grain that Russia sold to Ukraine.

The crisis, in fact, has two sides. The first is related to the Russian-Ukrainian war, as they are the main source of grain at competitive prices in the world. In addition, the war threatens the Ukrainian grain export infrastructure, especially after the Russian attack on ports in the Odessa region, and in the Danube River in Ukraine, which pushed wheat prices up dramatically.

The other aspect is related to the unprecedented climate changes in the last 10 years, which prompted India a few days ago to take a decision to ban the export of rice, in light of the escalating fears associated with the “El Niño” phenomenon on agricultural supplies, which is a global climate phenomenon. This is where the temperature change in one ocean affects the atmosphere in another distant region. This also moved rice prices towards its highest level in 10 years.

The Indian decision put the world in front of limited, difficult options, including the speedy diversification of rice sources, which would affect the prices and futures contracts in one way or another.

It prompted the International Monetary Fund to sound the alarm that the grain prices are likely to rise by 10-15% after the collapse of the grain agreement.

The weapon of economic sanctions has strong economic and social effects, which may affect civilians, destabilize the targeted economy, and affect people’s lives. However, they are sometimes used as a means of influencing the policy of the target country and achieving changes in political behavior or human rights violations.

Historically, countries such as America, Britain, and Russia have used grain as a weapon to attract countries or exert pressure on others, with the aim of attracting loyalists or bringing opponents to their knees. For example, Soviet leader Joseph Stalin exploited wheat in the 1930s to force Ukrainian farmers to work on collective farms. This is where wheat stocks were confiscated, and this caused the deaths of about 4.5 million people. As for America, it threatened to use a weapon for grain against the Arabs, who used the oil weapon during the 1973 war during solidarity with Egypt against Israel, and at that time Washington bargained, saying that “every drop of oil is for a grain of wheat.”

Winston Churchill, the British Prime Minister, also used the grain weapon in 1943, to control the Indian state of Bengal, which resisted the occupation, and took advantage of the drought to subdue the state’s population in exchange for allowing the British merchant fleet to deliver wheat and rice.

The same weapon was also employed in the plan to subdue Iraq prior to its occupation, under the name of “oil for food”, which killed more than 1.5 million Iraqi children.

The Russian-Ukrainian grain agreement guaranteed the export of Ukrainian grain to the world through a humanitarian corridor in the Black Sea, in exchange for Russia’s assistance in transporting its exports of food and fertilizers to global markets. The agreement has been renewed several times before, but Russia has repeatedly threatened to withdraw, noting that its demands to improve its grain and fertilizer exports have not been met. According to United Nations data, this agreement helped export 33 million tonnes of Ukrainian wheat from its implementation in early August 2022 until this month. The agreement helped reduce global grain prices by 20%.

Now the bread of the world is in danger at the mercy of the extension of the grain agreement. This is in addition to the Indian rice crisis, which put more than two-thirds of the world’s population in front of a major economic shock.

Food security for countries is an essential pillar of national security, and therefore the cost of obtaining food affects their budget deficits and poverty levels. This is in addition to the occurrence of negative consequences for those countries, which reflects the consequences of the collapse of the grain agreement on the markets, as well as the consequences of India’s ban on exporting rice.

The real problem is that the proposed solutions to the grain crisis are mostly long-term solutions. Examples of these solutions include the expansion of wheat cultivation, securing landlines to transport grain from Ukraine via Europe, opening ways of trade exchange, and importing wheat from other alternative countries. This is just as Egypt decided, for example, to cooperate with France and Romania as an alternative to supplying wheat. But in fact, all of these solutions are useless.

However, the bare fact confirms that there is a wide danger facing the world in light of its silence in the face of the use of economic sanctions as one of the tools of conflict. That is why there must be a binding international law that prohibits economic sanctions on countries, no matter what, because the peoples who have nothing to do with the conflict pay the price.

Dr. Hatem Sadek: Professor at Helwan University

August 10, 2023
Opinion| Russia wins the race against China over influence in Africa

The Russian-African Summit 2023 comes in a special time as the world moves towards a multipolar system.

Indeed, the second Russian-African summit constitutes one of the episodes of the international and regional race over influence in the black continent. This is either by seeking to preserve its areas of influence, as is the case between Beijing, Moscow, and Washington, or by expanding to achieve new gains in the African continent, which enjoys many natural resources and youthful forces.

Russia won the bet as most African countries participated in the second summit, although Western countries warned those countries to stop cooperation with Russia. All of this is taking place in light of the escalation of competition and the increase in international conflicts between the great powers looking for a foothold or maintaining their influence and controlling the tools of conflict in what is known as the “new cold war”, which was produced by the Russian-Ukrainian crisis. This is in addition to other conflicts fueled by international competition between the superpowers, which exacerbates disputes and conflicts and exacerbates the crises of African countries that are witnessing security and political repercussions so that international summits come as a space to employ these relations and codify them more clearly.

Russia believes that the current geopolitical situation requires an inevitable correction of the interaction mechanisms. This is like converting payment methods into national currencies to reduce the cost of trade between countries.

On the other hand, African countries realize that Russia’s role cannot be dispensed with, especially with its control over donors and international relations. This is because African countries appreciate the form of historical ties with Russia and their support for liberation movements from colonialism, which increased Russia’s influence in a large number of African countries. However, this does not negate the principle of exchanging interests with the rest of the powers, in light of the realization of the intersections and tensions between all the competing international poles on the continent.

It seems that the African orientation toward dealing with the Russians reveals the phenomenon of the African orientation toward the Eastern camp. This is evident through bilateral summits between a number of African countries and China on the one hand, and African countries and Russia on the other hand, through tours to most African countries, through bilateral summits aimed primarily at strengthening relations with Russia and China. This certainly paves the way for creating a balance between the Western and Eastern camps in international relations. This explains the tours of African presidents from South Africa, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Algeria, and others, all of which are tours of African countries towards the East instead of the West.

The summit is an opportunity to enhance bilateral cooperation between Russia and African countries in various fields, including economic, political, security, cultural, and developmental. The summit can also help determine the course of relations between Russia and African countries in a multipolar world, by focusing on bilateral cooperation that enhances stability, security, and development in the region.

Russia seeks to strengthen its role in the Middle East and North Africa, and the summit may represent an opportunity to expand the scope of cooperation between Russia and African countries in this region, by focusing on issues of mutual interest, such as security, development, and investment.

Most importantly, the summit helps to strengthen South-South cooperation between Russia and African countries, through the exchange of experiences, knowledge, and technology, and the strengthening of bilateral relations between African countries as well.

On the other hand, there are several potential challenges that the Russian-African Summit 2023 could face, and among these challenges is security. This is especially in light of the terrorist threats facing some African countries, and these challenges may require securing borders and helping to enhance security and stability in the region. There is also another challenge, which is the difference in language, as cultures and languages differ between the two sides, and this may require additional efforts to facilitate communication and resolve any misunderstandings.

Among the challenges is the global economic situation, which could affect the ability of African countries to invest and cooperate. Politically, the summit may face some geopolitical challenges, such as conflicts between major countries, which could affect the ability of African countries to achieve their interests at the summit.

In light of the decline of American interest in the issues of the region and Africa in general, Russia’s opportunity to enhance trade exchange with African countries seems good and at its best, especially with the increasing Russian and Chinese influence at the expense of American investments. This is done by strengthening economic and trade relations and increasing the volume of trade exchange between the two sides. Currently, Russia is working to enhance cooperation with African countries in the fields of energy, such as oil, gas, nuclear energy, and renewable energy. Russia also encourages investment in African countries and provides support for Russian companies to participate in infrastructure and development projects in African countries. Russia also seeks to enhance cultural and educational cooperation with African countries, through the exchange of experiences and knowledge in various fields, such as culture, education, science, and sports culture. Moreover, Russian cooperation with African countries extends to the field of health, by providing support and assistance in combating infectious diseases and improving health care in African countries.

Of course, these challenges are not on the table exclusively, and the summit may face other challenges, but these challenges can be overcome through effective cooperation between Russia and African countries, ensuring the success of the summit and achieving its goals.

As the world is moving towards multipolarity and increasing bilateral cooperation between countries, the Russia-Africa Summit 2023 represents an important opportunity to enhance cooperation between Russia and African countries in this changing context and to achieve stability and development in the region. But the most important message of the summit is African discontent with Western policies towards the brown continent, so Africans found their way to the East, represented by China and Russia, in exchange for Western policies that no longer convince Africans.

Dr. Hatem Sadek: Professor at Helwan University

August 2, 2023
Opinion| After the failures of France and the withdrawal of peacekeeping forces, ISIS controls Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso

A terrifying report, or to be more precise, very dangerous, was published by a famous blog called “Teneri News” in Mali. This report was written by a specialized press team about the expansion of the terrorist organization “ISIS” in that African country.

The report, re-published by Sky News Arabia, confirmed that the extremist organization has become a major player in the region, and began to impose its agenda and subjugate its opponents after it had already controlled large areas in northern Mali, and after its massive invasion of most of the out-of-power areas in Burkina Faso.

The report also confirmed that ISIS Sahel fighters were deployed in the border areas between Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso. The organization is also active intensively in Burkina Faso, in which hundreds of soldiers and thousands of civilians have been killed.

The most dangerous evidence is what Mali did in what is described as a deal to release ISIS leaders at the same time when the government called for 12,000 United Nations peacekeepers to leave, after 10 years of presence to fight Islamic terrorist groups, including ISIS.

Of course, the release of ISIS leaders, regardless of its terms, is a major political victory for ISIS, which will be keen to use this achievement to expand its recruitment efforts.

Currently, large groups of ISIS control the coast in most of the districts of Menka State, especially in the areas of “Tamelt”, “Inchananen”, “Adarnbukar”, “Enker” and others. The group expanded until it reached the “Intadayne” area, which is 207 km from the Algerian border, on 25 April 2023.

For example, on the control of ISIS over the region, on June 27, ISIS attacked the village of “Buya” and killed 13 people, due to the killing of a terrorist in the region, and ISIS accuses the residents of that region of complicity with the Malian army. More than that, the latest published information confirmed that the organization issued a warning to the residents of the Boya region to leave it towards “Gawa” or “Ansingo” in the north.

ISIS is spreading heavily in several areas in Ansingo district, including Boya, Jabro, Lahwi, Tissi and other areas of Azawad. Security observers and activists in Azawad confirmed that the organization considers the state of “Menica” and its surroundings as its own sphere of influence. This is after the organization subdued the leaders of its main tribes, to the point of forcing some of them to declare their allegiance and affiliation to it, and even fund its operations. In other words, the organization’s strategy has become clear on the ground through forced displacement, slaughter and seizure of funds, in exchange for the complete inability of the tribal leaders that have long controlled the region.

It is not surprising what happens in this type of context because the security situation is critical, as ISIS in the Greater Sahara is now a major player in the region. No one could actually contain it. This is where the escalation of ISIS and other jihadist groups leads to internal destabilization at the political, social, economic and institutional levels.

The overthrow of the UN peacekeepers and the agreement to release ISIS leaders in this context represent an admission of loss by the Malian government and efforts to reintegrate the Islamists into the social and political fabric by making these concessions. This also fuels anti-Western sentiment and a post-colonial mentality. This is in addition to the obvious failures of the French, who were the most important figure in that equation and others over time, to achieve decisive gains against the Islamists or to put an end to the spread of extremist ideologies.

Dr. Hatem Sadek: Professor at Helwan University

July 26, 2023
Opinion| Social media terrorism

Despite international efforts, terrorism and violent extremism continue to grow in many countries worldwide. For example, groups affiliated with organizations like “Al Qaeda” and “ISIS” have made significant progress in areas such as the Gulf of Guinea coast, causing countries like France to withdraw and leaving the situation to deteriorate further.

Terrorism and extremism are no longer solely represented in religious tendencies; neo-Nazi and white supremacy movements have become major threats to the internal security of many first-world countries. The latest United Nations report on the growth of this phenomenon indicates that terrorism is feeding on the multiple crises facing the world, such as the food and energy crises and the “blazing inferno” of climate change, including poverty, discrimination, frustration, deficiencies in infrastructure and institutions, and gross violations of human rights.

Hatem Sadiq

The report also highlights a new phenomenon: the spread of hate on the internet through social networks that work around the clock to spread intellectual poisons and extremist opinions, attracting young people who represent the largest segment of users on these networks. Social media, through many applications, has become the main base for intellectually recruiting young people by spreading extremist poisons, defining goals, drawing policies, and communicating between terrorist cells.

These applications have become a safe haven for spreading terrorism and extremism. This is due to the main advantages they provide, including strong encryption, making correspondence more secure, and making it difficult to penetrate by security services. Additionally, these applications allow for accurate identification of the target audience.

Over the past four years, the Global Center for Combating Extremist Ideology “Etidal” has cooperated with the popular application “Telegram” to review extremist content published in Arabic on the internet. This partnership resulted in the removal of 7,207,810 million extremist content and the closure of 1,554 extremist channels during the second quarter of this year.

The “Etidal” team also monitored digital propaganda activity published in Arabic on the “Telegram” platform, belonging to three terrorist organizations: “Al-Qaeda,” “Haya Tahrir Al-Sham,” and “ISIS.” The removed extremist content of the terrorist “Al-Qaeda” organization topped with 3,511,979 million extremist content in 535 extremist channels, followed by “Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham” with 1,951.52 million content in 403 channels, while the “ISIS” organization broadcasted 1,744,304 extremist content on 616 extremist channels.

The report notes that these groups became active during Ramadan, broadcasting extremist content, creating 81 channels, and reaching 615,506 content. The monitoring team in “Etidal” noticed the intensity of the activity of the terrorist organization “Al-Qaeda” in broadcasting its extremist content for the first time since February 2022 until now, broadcasting 3.511.979 million extremist content and disseminating it through 535 channels.

Some believe that geopolitical conditions and events in Syria have led some to adopt extremist ideas and join “ISIS.” Some directed their innate feelings of hatred toward colonialism and injustice to support the “oppressed” in Syria, imagining that “ISIS” and other warring groups are seeking to support the oppressed. A socio-political point of view is spreading among academic and research political circles, which believe that the extinction of leftist and liberation movements worldwide has left a political and ideological vacuum filled or partly filled by extremist groups.

Despite all efforts, the extremist idea remains unique in its attractiveness, distinct in its charm, and striking in its diversity. However, it always needs a way to target its followers. For several decades, mosques, religious seminars, and summer centers were the primary means of convincing young people to adopt the ideology of extremist groups and to attract new members. This stage ended with the advent of a new element, represented by social media, which is now more influential.

The crisis of content censorship within all internet networks and applications must be reformulated by a global consensus on what terrorism is. No matter how much governments intensify their unilateral efforts to combat terrorism, this cannot be achieved without a consensus on the concept of terrorism. Therefore, the first and most crucial step is to find a specific and binding definition of terrorism. What the East sees as terrorism may be seen by the West as a matter of freedom, and this is illogical. The new definition must also be included in the United Nations Charter to enable further measures to be taken with social media companies to address the problem of extremist and violent content and the exploitation of these platforms by terrorist militias.

Dr Hatem Sadek is a Professor at Helwan University

July 19, 2023
Opinion| Has the malicious scheme to annex the West Bank actually begun?

The Israeli coalition government, which has the largest number of right-wingers in Israel’s history, is under widespread criticism for proposing reforms that would weaken the judiciary and abolish internal oversight mechanisms. This political situation sparked the largest protests Israel has ever witnessed. Actually, the current government is moving in a more dangerous direction, which is a bureaucratic change that has not attracted any attention so far.

When the extreme right-wing parties in Israel won the parliamentary majority last November, they amended some laws, which are considered more like a constitution in general, in a way that allows them to appoint a new special minister within the Ministry of Defense to take over some civil authorities regulating aspects of life in the West Bank. Previously, this was an exclusive area for the army.

This administrative change is seen as Israel’s declaration of sovereignty over the West Bank, in violation of the United Nations Charter’s prohibition of invading and annexing territories. Three leading Israeli organizations in the field of civil rights and human rights assert that this bureaucratic change is the legalization of the annexation of the West Bank.

This transfer of powers dispels the illusion that the occupation of the West Bank is temporary. It also further entrenches a dual and unequal legal system for Israelis and Palestinians and consolidates permanent Israeli control over the West Bank.

In fact, the extension of Israeli influence and Tel Aviv’s seizure of the reins of power there is the culmination of decades of policies that have strengthened Israel’s control over the Palestinian territories. But the current government has now crossed the line representing such a massive change that Israel no longer has any need to formally announce the annexation of the West Bank.

There is no doubt that changing the occupation authority will affect the daily life of Palestinians and Israeli settlers in the West Bank. According to this change, the civilian minister will head a “settlement authority” to manage the affairs of the Jews, while the Palestinians will remain subject to military authority. This step consolidates the settlers’ superiority in the West Bank. For example, the army will continue to determine the amount of water allocated to the Palestinians while the new civil authority controls the amount of water allocated to the Jews, facilitating an unfair distribution of water to both sides. It would strengthen civilian authority and allow settlement and infrastructure for Jewish settlers, in fundamental violation of international law that prohibits the establishment of civilian rule over occupied lands. After Israel violates the basic international embargo, these new powers will disregard all restrictions imposed by international law. The new minister will also have the authority to allocate lands, and will control energy and communications. He will also have the power to decide who can build new homes, schools, and public buildings, and which communities will be demolished in the future – a formula designed to expand Jewish settlements and suppress Palestinian lives.

What exacerbated the repercussions of this change were the beliefs of the civilian minister who was chosen for this position. The man who received this task is Bezalel Smotrich, who also occupies the position of Israeli Finance Minister and leads the country’s most fanatical party, which believes in the supremacy of the Jews openly. This man paved the way for his political career based on his anti-Arab racism.

Indeed, some political and partisan parties in Israel want to annex the West Bank, but the current Israeli government has not officially announced any official plan to annex the West Bank. The government is still clinging to the previous Oslo Accords, which stipulate a two-state solution and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state alongside the State of Israel.

However, the Israeli government has already implemented some measures that include the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and the construction of the separation wall, and this raises the concerns of the Palestinians and the international community about the possibility of annexing part or all of the West Bank in the very near future.

It is important to note that the complete and illegal annexation of the West Bank will have a significant impact on the political and security situation in the region, and is strongly opposed by the Palestinians and the international community. Instead, international efforts should focus on achieving a just and comprehensive peace in the region through negotiation and dialogue between the Palestinian and Israeli sides.

Dr. Hatem Sadek: Professor at Helwan University

July 10, 2023
Opinion| US-Chinese relations between Blinken’s efforts and Biden’s provocations

US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken ended his visit to Beijing a few days ago without making progress regarding the long list of differences between the United States and China.

Blinken is the highest-ranking US official to visit China since 2018. His visit was originally scheduled for last February but was canceled after a Chinese balloon flew over US territory. Before the visit, Blinken announced that one of the goals of his upcoming visit to China is to “avoid miscalculations” with Beijing while seeking spaces of understanding.

But how can this be at a time when US President Joe Biden insists on deviating from what was written for him in advance, and described in a press conference the Chinese president as a dictator? This description brought Blinken’s attempts back to square one. It is true that Biden reiterated that he hopes to meet his Chinese counterpart, but Beijing had taken steps toward refusal.

Blinken’s visit to China was supposed to aim at opening direct lines of communication so that the two countries could manage their relationship to the way it was before the Ukraine and Taiwan crisis. This is in order for the world to avoid wrong results or calculations that could lead to an unjustified nuclear clash.

Beijing rejected the most important request that Blinken carried, which is to find a hotline between the military leaderships of the two countries. This request was supposed to reduce the risks of any possible clash in light of Washington and Beijing’s insistence on escalation, whether with regard to the China Sea file, which the latter sees within its territorial waters, or Taiwan, which it considers merely an autonomous island.

Relations between the two countries are deteriorating in various fields, which has raised fears that the rivalry between them will turn into a conflict over Taiwan, which China considers its territory. The two countries are also at odds on issues such as trade, microchips, and human rights.

Nevertheless, what worries China’s neighbors is its reluctance to allow regular military talks with Washington, despite repeated US attempts in this regard.

Anyone who follows the development of relations between the two countries will notice that America is the one who beat the drums of confrontation with China and Russia in advance. This is where the National Security Strategy of President Joe Biden’s administration sees China as the only strategic competitor to the United States that has the intent and ability to increasingly reshape the global order. Likewise, Russia poses serious threats to America’s vital national interests, and the growth of their partnership poses even more serious challenges. Therefore, China and Russia had no choice but to “deepen the strategic partnership” between them during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Russia.

It is noteworthy that arrogance is the same for all major powers. The arrogance of American power has been blatant since World War II. We have seen it in Vietnam, Cuba, and finally in Iraq. Russia exercised the arrogance of power in Chechnya, Georgia, Crimea, and the Syrian war, and is currently exercising it in the Ukraine war. As for the newcomer, China has actually moved from humility to positioning itself in all continents of the world, and this positioning began politically, then economically, and now militarily. America justified the invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of its regime by claiming that it would get rid of “weapons of mass destruction” and “reshape the Middle East”. Russia justifies the invasion of Ukraine by claiming the elimination of “neo-Nazis”, “disarmament” and “prevention of joining NATO”. And China justifies the partnership by saying that “China and Russia are establishing a new model for relations between the great powers and building them on the principles of non-alignment, non-confrontation, and the United Nations Charter.” Therefore, the fierce competition currently taking place requires permanent diplomacy to ensure that competition does not turn into confrontation or conflict. However, concerns remain about the possibility of miscalculations that may lead to bad consequences.

Dr. Hatem Sadek: Professor at Helwan University

July 7, 2023
Opinion| US supports India to counter China in Indo-Pacific

In the past few years, India has become one of the world’s top economic powers, and the Indian economy maintains its rapid growth rate, which is the highest among emerging economies.

According to estimates by the International Monetary Fund, in parallel with this economic growth, India, whose population exceeds 1.3 billion people, is seeking to expand its political and military influence regionally and internationally and has become one of the most important players in South Asia.

This is what aroused the interest of the American decision-makers for rapprochement with this emerging country and benefiting from its capabilities in a number of files of importance to the United States.

Recently, Indian-American relations witnessed close cooperation and partnership in various fields. These ties are expected to continue to develop and strengthen in the future.

  In recent years, the United States has increasingly focused on India as a strategic partner in Asia. This focus is expected to continue in the future, especially with the increasing economic and strategic importance of India in the region. Areas of cooperation between India and the US include regional security and counterterrorism, technology and innovation, trade and investment, energy, education, and culture.

  Indo-US relations are strongly supported by the political leaders of the two countries, and this should help in strengthening the relations in the future. It is also expected that India will continue to work to strengthen relations with the United States, by enhancing bilateral cooperation in various fields and promoting dialogue and mutual understanding between the two countries.

  In general, the future of Indo-US relations looks promising, and it is expected that relations will continue to develop and strengthen in the coming years.

  As for the real reason for the US bet on India, it is certainly escalating conflict with China. India also has a large number of active and reserve armies and nuclear capabilities, which makes it an important military force in the region. India represents the substantive equivalent of China, especially in terms of population, so it was not surprising that the United States tried to rapprochement with it.

  Of course, the United States has strategic interests in reducing China’s influence in Asia and expanding its influence in the region. By supporting India and encouraging it to play a greater role in the region, the United States can better achieve this goal.

  This may be the case since former US President Barack Obama announced the rebalancing project in Asia. The project, which some Chinese see as besieging China; Because, in their view, this project means the rise of India, Japan, and some other countries against China.

  Based on the recent agreement between the United States of America and India, relations in trade, military and other fields will be strengthened. This is where US-Indian relations entered a new stage, especially after the signing of the Logistics Exchange Memorandum Agreement (LEOMA) between the United States of America and India. According to the agreement, both countries can use the air, land, and sea of the other country when needed. New Delhi and Washington share strategic goals, whether that includes fighting terrorism, keeping sea lanes open, or countering the rise of China.

  In fact, India is adopting a more assertive policy towards China, and this will give an opportunity for US officials to deal with it closely. Washington, then, does not want to lose positions in the war of influence against Beijing in the region and sees India as a “strong agent” that can help it increase its military and political influence at the expense of China in the Indian and Pacific Oceans.

  The attempt to surround China is not the only importance of the American rapprochement with India, as there are many other files. The Afghan file is present strongly, as Afghanistan is a country where an Indian proxy war against Pakistan is taking place, and Indian and American interests converge in Afghanistan against Pakistan. This is where the United States seeks to include India in its new strategy on Afghanistan, which is tangible evidence of the growing alliance between them.

  It is true in political science that there is no permanent enemy or permanent friend, but there are permanent interests, and this is what made America take historic steps to regain leadership in the Indian and Pacific regions. In the past year, the United States has refreshed longstanding alliances, fostered emerging partnerships, and forged innovative bonds with each other to address pressing challenges, from competition with China to climate change to the pandemic. And it has done so at a time when allies and partners around the world are increasingly stepping up their engagement in the Indo-Pacific region. Certainly, the Indo-Pacific region is the most vibrant in the world, and its future affects people everywhere.

  This reality is the basis of US strategy. This strategy outlines President Biden’s vision of firmly embedding the United States in the Indo-Pacific region and strengthening the region in the process.

Dr Hatem Sadek is a Professor at Helwan University.

June 14, 2023
Opinion| The suspension of Russia’s participation in the START Treaty portends an imminent nuclear war

The world is living in a very tense atmosphere on more than one front. An unintended breach in any of them could lead to the outbreak of a nuclear war, the extent of which cannot be predicted. Only a few minutes is the time needed to implement the decision of either the US or Russian presidents to use nuclear weapons. These concerns have returned to the fore after Russia suspended its participation in the new START treaty to limit nuclear weapons.

Russia and the United States possess about 90% of the global nuclear arsenal, which includes 12,700 nuclear bombs. Russia has the largest stockpile of nuclear warheads, with an estimated 6,000 nuclear warheads. It is followed by the United States with more than 5,400 nuclear warheads. The Russian nuclear arsenal includes 1,588 warheads in the strategic launch mode and about 4,390 warheads in storage or retirement mode. On the other hand, the US nuclear arsenal is divided into 1,644 warheads in strategic launch mode, and about 3,665 warheads in storage or retirement mode.

Indeed, the past few days have been fraught with an exchange of accusations between Washington and Beijing that each of them is taking “provocative” steps toward the other. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin told reporters during a visit to Tokyo a few days ago that he “regretted” his Chinese counterpart Li Shangfu’s refusal to meet with him, expecting an incident that “could quickly get out of control.” This is after Chinese warplanes carried out, on Friday, what they described as “provocative interceptions” of a US military reconnaissance plane over the South China Sea.

For its part, Beijing said, through a spokeswoman on its behalf, that “the United States clearly knows the reason for the difficulties that currently exist in military communications.” Earlier, the Chinese Foreign Ministry denounced what it described as the US’s “provocative and dangerous maneuvers,” which Beijing considered “a source of problems for maritime security.” This is where the US military announced that “a Chinese pilot flying a J-16 fighter performed an unnecessary aggressive maneuver while intercepting a US Air Force RC-135” operating over the South China Sea. The army also added that “the Chinese pilot flew directly in front of the American plane, forcing it to fly into turbulence.”

On another level, US President Joe Biden’s administration responded to Russia’s suspension of the “New START” nuclear treaty by announcing the cancellation of visas for Russian nuclear inspectors, the rejection of pending applications for new monitors, and the cancellation of standard permits for Russian aircraft to enter US airspace.

The State Department said it was taking these and other steps in response to Russia’s “continued violations” of the New START treaty, the last remaining arms control treaty between the two countries, which are currently at loggerheads over Russia’s private military operation in Ukraine.

It is important to note that Russia’s suspension of the START Treaty does not necessarily mean that the world is approaching a nuclear war, but it does show the exacerbation of geopolitical tensions between the major powers.

With time, the risks and challenges related to nuclear weapons increase, and it is important for major countries to work to reduce these risks and limit the spread of nuclear weapons. These efforts include the nuclear states’ commitment to arms control treaties, limiting spending on nuclear weapons, and working to reduce the number of nuclear warheads.

Once countries begin to enhance their nuclear programs and increase the number of nuclear warheads they have or withdraw from related treaties, this increases the risks related to nuclear weapons and makes nuclear war more likely. Therefore, the major countries must work seriously to reduce tensions and reduce the risks related to nuclear weapons. The first of these tensions is the Ukrainian crisis, which is also witnessing European attempts to rein in the US administration, which wants to escalate.

Dr. Hatem Sadek: Professor at Helwan University

June 8, 2023
Opinion| The American debt crisis and the 2024 elections

There is a direct link between the 2024 elections and the government debt ceiling crisis. That is the government’s plans and economic directions are part of the US presidential election campaign between the Republican and Democratic parties.

Markets began to prepare for the possibility of a US faltering or government shutdowns pending an agreement. This is because there are only days before the first of June when voting in both houses of Congress and the Senate needs additional time. The two councils may also meet on an emergency basis during the “Memorial Day” holiday, which will last for a week.

Usually, presidential candidates try to win voters’ support by presenting their economic and financial plans, which may directly affect the country’s public debt and debt ceiling. For example, a presidential candidate proposing a plan to significantly reduce taxes without identifying alternative financing sources could greatly affect the country’s public debt. This is because a reduction in tax revenues can lead to an increase in the budget deficit and an increase in public debt.

In addition, the presidential and legislative elections may affect the ability of the US government to deal with the debt ceiling crisis. This is because if there are sharp differences between the political parties on how to deal with the crisis, this may lead to delays in taking the necessary decisions to avoid reaching the permissible maximum debt limits.

In this way, the US elections and the debt ceiling crisis are highly intertwined and require effective political and financial solutions to avoid their negative effects on the US and global economies. In general, politicians and fiscal officials must work together to determine the steps necessary to avoid reaching maximum debt limits and ensure the stability of the US and global economies.

The US debt ceiling crisis is dangerous because it can lead to slower economic growth and higher unemployment. That is if the government is allowed to reach the permissible maximum debt limits. The crisis could also cause a decline in the value of the US dollar and a negative impact on the global economy in general. The first repercussions of that crisis have already appeared when Fitch Ratings put the US economy under negative watch.

Dr. Hatem Sadek: Professor at Helwan University

May 31, 2023