Trump Effect Archives - Politics Today https://politicstoday.org/tag/trump-effect/ Wed, 06 Sep 2023 13:30:03 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.8 Can A Third Political Party Bring Change in US Foreign Policy? https://politicstoday.org/can-a-third-political-party-bring-change-in-us-foreign-policy/ Tue, 23 Feb 2021 12:21:31 +0000 https://politicstoday.org/can-a-third-political-party-bring-change-in-us-foreign-policy/

The dissatisfaction with the two establishment parties is substantial, and is hardly a new phenomena. But the establishment of a third political party has not reached a tipping point for several reasons.

The post Can A Third Political Party Bring Change in US Foreign Policy? appeared first on Politics Today.

]]>

A widely-covered Gallup poll in mid-February found support for a third party at a highpoint. This was apparently fueled in substantial part by talk of a “civil war” within the Republican Party following Donald Trump’s second impeachment.

The dissatisfaction with the two establishment parties is substantial, and is hardly a new phenomena, Theodore Lowi wrote The End of the Republican Era in 1995. But it has not reached a tipping point for several reasons, particularly because any typical move toward a third party will be seen as helping one or another of the current establishment parties and is thus resisted. The Democratic and Republican parties get most of their electoral backing because people hate or fear the other.

This has been a regular theme in US politics. When Ralph Nader ran in 2000, for example, he tapped into a great deal of popular sentiment. But his campaign was widely derided as threatening to help get George W. Bush elected. And, among other factors, it may well have helped that eventuality the way his campaign was conducted. This dynamic has continued to be a major factor in hindering the prospect of any party emerging beyond the low single digits from either the left or the right and will in all probability remain so.

VIDEO: How the Republican Party went from Lincoln to Trump

A solution I have put forward — never adopted by any candidate — is outlined at VotePact.org: An independent candidate can break out of this “spoiler” dynamic by drawing on support equally from disenchanted Democrats and disenchanted Republicans.

This is not as far fetched as it might first seem, evident in the realm of foreign policy, among others.

Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008 with a great deal of media generated excitement largely based on his stated opposition to the invasion of Iraq, overtly backed by Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and Joe Biden.

Of course, Obama himself gained national prominence by giving the Keynote address at the DNC convention in 2004 which nominated Kerry. He nominated Hillary Clinton as his secretary of state, kept Bush’s secretary of defense, Robert Gates, and escalated interventionist policies such as drone killings, war in Libya and more intervention in Syria and elsewhere.

Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008 with a great deal of media generated excitement largely based on his stated opposition to the invasion of Iraq, overtly backed by Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and Joe Biden.

Similarly, Trump won the presidency in 2016 largely because of massive establishment media coverage. During his campaign he generated excitement by deriding the invasion of Iraq, mocking Jeb Bush and his entire family, promising an “America First” approach and appealing to isolationist sentiments that clearly resonated with many USians. He also had parallel pseudo populist rhetoric, such as taxing hedge funds.

But when he became president, Trump’s major foreign policy accomplishments furthered the goals of the US establishment, often in ways that a more conventional president never could have.

In fairness, as with Obama, there were some shifts in foreign policy with Trump. Chris Woods of airwars.org acknowledged — the day Biden was inaugurated — that Trump had significantly reduced some aspects of US interventionism, noting that Biden would be “inheriting US military actions at a post-9/11 low. The US declared around 1,000 strikes last year across four theatres – down from 13,000 under Obama in 2016.”

Read: Capitol Hill Attack Is the Logical Endgame of Trumpism

But, in toto, Trump can in fact be regarded as the opposable thumb of the Empire: He appears to be opposed to it, but just helps it grab more. For example, Trump derided NATO as antiquated, echoing a sentiment of many more authentic anti-interventionists, but the net result of his “crit” was to compel European states to actually pony up more money to NATO, effectively strengthening — not weakening — the military alliance.

Trump of course brought in hyper interventionists like John Bolton, Mike Pompeo and Elliott Abrams. While he did not start a new war — a novelty for recent presidents — he facilitated the US as Empire in numerous ways.

Trump escalated devastating sanctions against Iran and Venezuela. His moves regarding Israel and Saudi Arabia, breaking various arms control treaties, making the Space Force a full military “service”, got the US establishment things it clearly wanted but decorum wouldn’t allow.

Thus, Obama, posing from the left, funneled voters toward the establishment while Trump did much the same from the right.

This became apparent at current Secretary of State Anthony Blinken’s confirmation hearing. Blinken credited the Trump administration’s “Abraham accords” which strengthened the ties between Israel and various Arab monarchies and delighted in using the Trump administration’s pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal as leverage over the Islamic Republic. Meanwhile, Biden seems set to follow all other recent administrations in refusing to acknowledge Israel’s nuclear capacity, ignore the pleadings of Archbishop Desmond Tutu to acknowledge Israel’s nuclear weapons and use US law to halt funding it

Recommended

The role of presumably progressive sectors in the Democratic Party are likely to be marginal. Biden’s re-entering the Paris accords and tepid stepping away from the most brazen aspects of the Saudi attack on Yemen are likely to be high points of accomplishment these factions can claim some credit for — and such moves may well have multiple motives.

The two-party system has effectively portioned out Samuel Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” world view, with much of the Republican party, at least selectively, treating Latinos and Muslims as a menace while the Democratic party has gone to great lengths to demonize Russia/Orthodoxy in recent years. Both effectively cast China as a menace.

Sen. Tom Cotton is well positioned with respect to the critical issue of our time: The origin of the pandemic. Much of establishment liberal, and indeed so-called “left wing” opinion has dismissed the possibility of lab origin of the pandemic as a “conspiracy theory” and thus ceded the issue to the xenophobic rightwing. This may well have disastrous consequences in the coming years and decades.

There seem two possible avenues to substantial change in terms of US foreign policy. One is the rise of global movements, perhaps modeled on the Feb. 15, 2003 quasi global protests shortly before the invasion of Iraq.

Read: The Insurrection and Its Discontents: American Exceptionalism Revisited

The other likely challenge to the current paradigm of US establishment global dominance is a re-alignment within the US. If authentic sectors from the left and right can cooperate in a manner that is not delusional — doesn’t pretend that they agree on everything — then there are possibilities for meaningful change.

The left and right often have different reasoning and even language, but largely agree on non-interventionism, lessening the power of corporate trade deals such as NAFTA, civil liberties, the power of transnational corporations as opposed to more “Main Street” businesses. If a steady stream of analysis coming from left and rightwing figures can manifest such agreements it could have several beneficial outcomes.

At minimum, it can help focus on actual policy that affects people’s lives rather than the personality driven media obsession with political personalities. At maximum, it could pave the way for a winning political movement that draws from the left and right and backs candidates representing their shared interests — and politically activates millions who have, with cause, given up on politics accomplishing anything real.

Even the threat of such a possibility would give the electoral bases that the Democratic and Republican parties claim to represent increased leverage against the establishment interests that have helped ensure that US government policy served their ends for so long.

The post Can A Third Political Party Bring Change in US Foreign Policy? appeared first on Politics Today.

]]> Conspiracy Theories: Why Do They Appeal to Some People? https://politicstoday.org/conspiracy-theories-why-do-they-appeal-to-some-people/ Wed, 10 Feb 2021 09:00:06 +0000 https://politicstoday.org/conspiracy-theories-why-do-they-appeal-to-some-people/

It is a mixture of frustrated psychological needs coupled with a cognitively biased understanding of world that sparks a person’s initial attraction to conspiracy theories.

The post Conspiracy Theories: Why Do They Appeal to Some People? appeared first on Politics Today.

]]>

People are facing an ever-increasing number of existential threats (i.e., Coronavirus, global warming, economic instability). These threats, which tend to invoke feelings of anxiety or threaten people’s livelihood, appear to be readily accompanied by conspiracy theories that offer alternative explanations for official narratives.

For instance, the current Coronavirus pandemic, Donald Trump’s loss of the U.S. presidency, and even the installation of new 5G technology infrastructure, have all been riddled with numerous—and at times connected—conspiracy theories.

Further compounding these threats, conspiracy entrepreneurs such as Alex Jones and David Icke regularly contribute to the growing stream of conspiracy theories in circulation. In the same vein, the world has also beared witness to Donald Trump’s attempted utilization of conspiracy theories for political gain.

With conspiracy theories seemingly taking the spotlight in public discourse, it would be prudent for interested people or policy makers to take stock of what we know so far about: Why people are drawn to conspiracy theory explanations in the first place; whether they are on the rise; the potential harms they may bring to society; and—importantly—what can be done to combat these potentially harmful beliefs.

Read: Trump Lost But Trumpism Thrives

Why are conspiracy theories appealing to some people?

Many political and social psychologists agree that people may be drawn to conspiracy theories in an attempt to satisfy important and seemingly unmet psychological needs.

We all have the need to feel secure and in control of our lives, and belief in conspiracy theories appear to be born out of a frustration of this need. For example, threatening events, economic vulnerability, feelings of powerlessness, anxiety, and stress have all been demonstrated to be catalysts for conspiracy beliefs. Conspiracy theories are said to offer a means to alleviate negative feelings, by providing an explanation for people’s disadvantaged positions.

Everyone can feel anxious and powerless at times, and the current pandemic is a threat to everyone in some way or another, but not everyone is drawn to conspiracy theories. Why?

We also have a need to understand our environment. However, we do not all perceive the environment we share in the same way to one another. There are many biases in our thinking styles that can make us perceive our environment in a skewed fashion, which can make conspiracy theories seem appealing.

For example, people who tend to see patterns where they do not exist have a higher propensity to believe in conspiracy theories. Another study demonstrated that the relationship between these types of thinking styles and conspiracy belief was most evident in people with lower levels of educational attainment. This suggests that conspiracy theories may offer easy-to-digest and less cognitively-taxing explanations for people prone to these thinking styles.

Taken together, people appear to be drawn to conspiracy theories for many different reasons, but at the heart of them is the need to satisfy important and seemingly frustrated psychological needs.

Restaurant owners take part in a protest in front of the Council of Ministers building in Sofia, Bulgaria, 27 January 2021. A few hundred people owning or working in bars, restaurants, cafes, or night clubs gathered to request immediate lifting of all the COVID-19 measures regarding their businesses or threatened that they will follow the so-called Italian Model and will open their establishments despite the financial fines they may receive of their actions. Photo by Borislav Troshev. Anadolu Agency.

Are more people believing in conspiracy theories than ever before?

On prominent social media platforms, misinformation and conspiracy theories were found to spread at a much faster rate than the truth. It is no wonder, then, why it can seem that there are more and more conspiracy theories in our midst.

In fact, research has shown—at least for the U.S.—that conspiracy theories have ebbed a flowed throughout most of modern history.

The number of conspiracy theory explanations for threatening events do seem to be increasing, but this is probably more a product of the ever-increasing existential threats that we face, as opposed to a rise in people believing in them.

In fact, research has shown—at least for the U.S.—that conspiracy theories have ebbed a flowed throughout most of modern history. So perhaps more people are entertaining conspiracy theories as a way to explain recent significant global events (particularly Coronavirus), but this uptick will likely decrease as the pandemic subsides.

Recommended

Are conspiracy theories harmful?

Until now, conspiracy theories were probably perceived by the public as relatively harmless. In some cases, this is probably true. For instance—as far as I am aware—no direct harm has ever come from the belief that the U.S. moon landings were faked. They may make people trust governments a bit less, but when has a government ever had the full trust of its people anyway?

In light of recent events, however, people are now all too aware of the dangers that some conspiracy theories can bring to society. People who believe in conspiracy theories regarding Coronavirus, such that it is a manmade virus and/or a mechanism to control the population, are less likely to take preventative action to stop the spread of the virus. This poses a serious threat to the global effort of fighting off the pandemic.

Conspiracy theories also evidently pose a threat to democracy itself. For weeks Donald Trump riled up his followers with countless baseless conspiracy theories regarding his loss of the U.S. presidency. Then, on January 6, 2021—in part driven by QAnon conspiracy theorists—democracy in the U.S. was temporarily stopped in its tracks as insurrectionists stormed Capitol Hill. This event shocked many people around the world, and provided further evidence of the harm that conspiracy theories can bring to society.

Read: A Clash with Silicon Valley is Inevitable

How can we reduce these harmful beliefs in the public?

In light of events at Capitol Hill, social media companies in the U.S. have recently taken a hard-line stance against conspiracy theories and misinformation. This is long overdue considering what we now know about the implications of conspiracy theories.

Incidentally, Donald Trump and some of his allies no longer have a social media presence, and many QAnon accounts were also removed. A week after this action was taken, a staggering 73 per cent reduction in misinformation being spread on Twitter was reported.

These are obviously good first steps to take, however, although they may cut off the supply of some conspiracy theories, they will not stop the demand for them.

It is a mixture of frustrated psychological needs coupled with a cognitively biased understanding of world that can spark a person’s initial attraction to conspiracy theories. Perhaps, then, it might be more fruitful for governments to “cut the head off the snake”, as it were, and try to vanquish the temptation of conspiracy theories in the first place. Political psychologist, Dr. Aleksandra Cichocka, has recently argued for such an approach, stating that “it is better to stop misinformation taking root than to try and weed it out”.

Alleviating people’s existential concerns will likely help to reduce the temptation to resort to conspiracy theory explanations as a means to psychologically satisfy their predicament. For instance, in the U.K. and U.S. the economic wealth gap is only increasing, and peoples’ social safety nets in these countries are waning too. This can lead to more feelings of stress, anxiety, and powerlessness; feelings of which we know are catalysts for conspiracy beliefs.

Therefore, improving these areas of people’s lives may prevent conspiracy theories being endorsed as a means to alleviate negative feelings. That is to say, governments should look to assuage to people’s existential concerns, otherwise conspiracy theories may take on this role instead.

VIDEO: Inside COVID-19 conspiracy theories: from 5G towers to Bill Gates

The post Conspiracy Theories: Why Do They Appeal to Some People? appeared first on Politics Today.

]]> The Trump Effect on Turkey-Germany relations https://politicstoday.org/the-trump-effect-on-turkey-germany-relations/ Wed, 22 Aug 2018 08:12:25 +0000 https://politicstoday.org/the-trump-effect-on-turkey-germany-relations/

Even though Germany’s recent positive position regarding Turkey is based rather on economic interests and short-term goals, which are also based on President Trump's personal and similar negative attitudes against Germany, relations between Turkey and German might mutually benefit from this current situation.

The post The Trump Effect on Turkey-Germany relations appeared first on Politics Today.

]]>

It seems that the dispute over a detained U.S. pastor between Turkey and the U.S. has triggered new dynamics in Turkey’s relations with leading EU states, above all with Germany. As Burhanettin Duran recently addressed, “The Trump administration’s policy of economic selfishness … encourages the world’s leading economies to work more closely together. The U.S. decision to weaponize the dollar and customs compels them to form a common line of defense in international trade. … At the end of the day, the Russian, Chinese, German or French support for Turkey in the face of U.S. sanctions wasn’t just about the potential problems that they would face if the Turkish economy suffers a crisis.”

By looking at the last week, it wouldn’t be wrong to say that reactions from German officials were in compliance with these statements. For instance, members of Germany’s coalition government made some positive comments regarding Turkey-Germany relations in order to stress the country’s stance with regard to Trump’s irrational sanctioning steps against Turkey. In addition, Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel had a telephone call in which both leaders discussed the current developments as well as regional issues, such as the situation in Syria. While the Turkish and German leaders pledged their determination to strengthen relations between the two states, some details regarding President Erdogan’s planned visit to Berlin in September were also addressed.

Even before the phone call, Chancellor Merkel clearly stated that “Nobody has an interest in an economic destabilization in Turkey” while adding that “Germany would like to see an economically prosperous Turkey. This is in our interest.” It has also to be mentioned that Germany’s Economy Minister Peter Altmaier (CDU), who is one of the closest politicians to Chancellor Merkel, was one of the first European officials opposing Trump’s tariff policy on Turkey. Altmaier explained, “This trade war slows down and destroys economic growth and produces new uncertainties.” While Altmaier also emphasized that Germany is willing to keep good economic relations with Turkey he stated, “Turkey stands for security and reliability in Europe. We are working together well with Ankara in terms of migration.”

A similar positive step came from the junior coalition partner, the Social Democrats. Besides Foreign Minister Heiko Maas (SPD), the party’s chairperson Andrea Nahles stated in an interview on Sunday that Germany could help Turkey should it become necessary. According to Nahles, despite the possibility whether her predictions became true or not, “A situation could arise in which Germany must help Turkey, regardless of the political discrepancies with President Erdogan.” While she also stressed that it is in everyone’s interest that Turkey remains economically stable and that currency turbulence is curtailed, it is also crucial for her to keep up dialogue on all levels with Turkey, which is a member of NATO and part of Europe.

Recommended

In addition, some publicly funded German media outlets, which are generally and unfortunately known for their biased broadcasting in the case of Turkey, published some news, in which a rather neutral –or even pro-Turkey– media language and stance has been observed — this was surprising but was also an understandable step due to the current political conjuncture. However, many German media outlets, commentators and columnists, on the other hand, still preferred nearly similar arguments, stating that the Turkish economy is in a very bad situation and accusing the country’s President. In most of these articles, a known language regarding Turkey has been preferred. Without going into detail, one might just mention, that those pieces generally include one-side criticisms while disregarding the U.S.’ role and the contextual impacts.

Nevertheless, it seems obvious that despite certain opposition politicians and known media representatives’ biased perspectives, the German government’s recent steps can be elaborated as rational ones in order to achieve some –in particular economic– objectives. This, with no doubt, aims an improvement of relations between Turkey and Germany – on both sides. Thus, under these circumstances it is also no surprise that, for instance, the German government’s Commissioner for Tourism and Parliamentary State Secretary, recently promoted travel to Turkey by stating that “there is no reason not to go on holiday” to Turkey.

It’s obvious that Germany’s federal government does not have any interest in supporting the U.S. President’s sanctions against Turkey. Even though Germany’s recent positive position regarding Turkey is based rather on economic interests and short-term goals, which are also based on President Trump’s personal and similar negative attitudes against Germany, relations between Turkey and German might mutually benefit from this current situation. Above all, in regard to the Turkish President’s planned visit on 28/29 September to Germany, some additional steps in order to intensify the mutual confidence might be advantageous for both countries – also in fields other than economics.

The post The Trump Effect on Turkey-Germany relations appeared first on Politics Today.

]]> What is behind the Crisis in the Gulf? https://politicstoday.org/what-is-behind-the-crisis-in-the-gulf/ Wed, 07 Jun 2017 06:31:26 +0000 https://politicstoday.org/what-is-behind-the-crisis-in-the-gulf/

Gulf states have been at the center of the world’s attention since the May 20 Riyadh Summit, where President Trump addressed Arab and Muslim leaders from more than 50 countries. The gathering of Arab and Muslim leaders in an already tense political atmosphere meant a lot to the observers of the Middle East, but the real story was Trump’s choice of Saudi Arabia for his first official visit as the US president.

The post What is behind the Crisis in the Gulf? appeared first on Politics Today.

]]>

Gulf states have been at the center of the world’s attention since the May 20 Riyadh Summit, where President Trump addressed Arab and Muslim leaders from more than 50 countries. The gathering of Arab and Muslim leaders in an already tense political atmosphere meant a lot to the observers of the Middle East, but the real story was Trump’s choice of Saudi Arabia for his first official visit as the US president. The world was discussing why Trump decided to first visit this Muslim state in the Middle East, despite his speeches and ideas on Islam. But the Trump effect in the Middle East and the implications for policy-making of his strategic visit lasted a short time, and the world found itself in a new a diplomatic crisis between Qatar and Bahrain, the UAE and Saudi Arabia.

Trump and his Saudi partners announced the opening of the Global Center for Combating Extremist Ideology, which aims to fight against radicalism and terror in the region, in addition to a $110 billion military and arms deal. Trump was not the only partner to the Saudis – the UAE and Saudi Arabia also decided to support Ivanka Trump’s promotion of the World Bank’s Women Entrepreneurs Fund with $100 million in financial aid. Hence, Trump was quite right when saying “That was a tremendous day. Tremendous investments in the United States… Hundreds of billions of dollars of investments into the United States and jobs, jobs, jobs”.

On May 23, Qatar faced a cyber-attack on the Qatar National News Agency (QNA) and news soon broke on a pro-Iran and pro-Israel speech by Emir Tamim, which was not welcomed in the Arab world. Although QNA was hacked and the released data was yet to be verified, the UAE and Saudi Arabia reacted harshly, as if the information was reflecting the reality. Qatari media, including Al Jazeera, was blocked in these two countries, sparking the current crisis.

By June 5, following the blockage of Qatari media outlets, the tension was visible but not overwhelming until recently. Saudi Arabia urged “all brotherly countries and companies to do the same” for Qatar. Thereafter Bahrain, the UAE, Yemen, the Maldives, Egypt, and the interim government of Libya suspended diplomatic relations and withdrew ambassadors. Qatar is familiar with this situation, because Bahrain, the UAE and Saudi Arabia withdraw their ambassadors from Doha in 2014 as well, after declaring their intolerance of Qatar’s relations with the Muslim Brotherhood.

However, this time things have changed.  Not only have diplomatic relations been suspended, but also the Qatari border is closed by land, and sea and air routes have been cut between the countries as well. Qatar has its only land border with Saudi Arabia, which means the Saudis will not let anything into Qatar, including food, and air traffic from other sources is the only option left. This could be disastrous for a country like Qatar, which does not even have enough food storage for one week. After this diplomatic crisis, Qatari citizens are also expected to leave those countries that have cut ties within two weeks.

This anti-Qatar coalition claims that Doha has connections with terrorist organizations and harbors “a multitude of terrorist and sectarian groups that aim to create instability in the region.” Qatar’s alleged relationship with terrorist groups was also emphasized by Trump in his tweet on June 6, which gives a clue to the US role behind the crisis. Trump tweeted “During my recent trip to the Middle East I stated that there can no longer be funding of Radical Ideology. Leaders pointed to Qatar – look!”.

How have Qatar and its supporters reacted?

Kuwait and Pakistan have not supported the anti-Qatar block, and Oman’s Foreign Minister Yusuf bin Alawi bin Abdullah visited Qatar. Although Omani officials state that the visit was a private one, and planned for before the latest developments, Oman has chosen to stand with Qatar rather than add to the tension.

When the tension first arose, eyes were on Turkey. However, the official explanation from Turkey given by Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu indicated Turkey’s role of mediator would be downplayed. Meanwhile, the Turkish public supported Qatar on social media with the hashtag #TurkeywithQatar and recalled the country’s support since the beginning of the Arab Spring. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan got involved in the case on June 5, and spoke on the phone with Qatari, Russian, Kuwaiti and Saudi leaders in an attempt at reducing tension. Increasing his tone the following day, Erdoğan commented that the move against Qatar is a grave mistake and also risky for the stability of the volatile region in the near future.

When it comes to the Qatari reaction, its diplomacy is, so far, a mix of caution and a harsh attitude. Qatari foreign policy has been representing a unique stance in the Middle East as a small state with its mediating role and active policy making in regional disputes. Qatar has recently been more visible in the political scene of the Middle East with its military and political involvement in the Arab Spring in Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Bahrain and Yemen.

Recommended

However, a vigorous state power construction started in 1995 with Sheikh Hamad’s accession to power, followed by Emir Tamim’s role. Although the Arab Spring sparked political differences among Qatar’s GCC partners, Doha’s domestic and external policies have been challenged due to its support for the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and its diplomatic relations with Iran and Israel. Thus, we can say that Qatar is familiar with being unwelcome by the other regional states. However, June 5 has brought about a tangible crisis with surprising speed and intensity with the Saudi-led block consisting of Bahrain, the UAE, Yemen, the Maldives, Egypt, and the interim government of Libya.

Foreign Minister Mohammed Bin Abdulrahman Al Thani’s statement on Al-Jazeera shows the shocking effect of the events in Qatar: “Regarding the reasons for this escalation, honestly, we don’t know if there were real reasons for this crisis,” he said. The minister also added that what is happening in the Gulf towards Qatar is unjustified and not based on facts. Experts working on the Gulf are describing the stand-off between Qatar and Saudi Arabia as an effort to re-shape the regime and political power in Qatar to resemble Bahrain, which is a close ally of Saudi Arabia. The statement by Foreign Minister Al Thani also refers to that, saying the imposition of “guardianship” over Qatar is “in itself is a violation of its sovereignty as a state which is categorically rejected.”

This picture has currently been circulating in social media, which is combination of Emir Tamim’s and Sheikh Hamad’s faces. It refers to the unity of Qatari society against any foreign threat with hashtag of #كلنا_تميم, meaning “We are all Tamim”.

Emir Tamim and Sheikh Hamad

This picture has currently been circulating in social media, which is combination of Emir Tamim’s and Sheikh Hamad’s faces. It refers to the unity of Qatari society against any foreign threat with hashtag of #كلنا_تميم, meaning “We are all Tamim”.

Especially after the announcement of the closure of borders, a general panic occurred in Qatar; however, according to my personal observation in Qatar, it was mostly the expat communities who were shocked and went to supermarkets to buy food, rather than locals who are able to reach local food resources and view the crisis more cautiously. However, officials released a statement assuring that food products will be available, and any shortages avoided by using air transportation, saying this border crisis will not affect the daily lives of citizens and of Qatar. Countries like Turkey can support Qatar especially in food security in this month of Ramadan.

Can the GCC stay united against Qatar, or side with it?

Initial reactions to the cyber-attack by the UAE and Saudi Arabia showed that it was only a beginning, and it has already escalated embedded disagreements among GCC states after the Arab Spring. Especially after hackers have released emails belonging to the UAE’s ambassador to the United States, Yousef al-Otaiba. Since 2014, the UAE’s anti-Qatar lobbying in the USA has become obvious. Hacked e-mails of al-Otaiba, a central figure in US security networks, released by Global Leaks indicated the UAE has been conducting a close relationship with a pro-Israel, neoconservative think-tank called the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) as a part of its backchannel policy.

Qatar airways license has been suspended in Saudi Arabia, which forces the airline to change their routes and use only Iranian air space. Social media and news outlets in these states have blocked feeds from Qatar as another tool in this self-made cold war in the Gulf. This tension is multi-dimensional and does not seem like it will be reduced unless Qatar agrees to the Saudi approach in regional politics and strikes a compromise. David Hearst, the Editor in Chief of the Middle East Eye, has defined this crisis as a planned operation rather than a reaction to the hacking of the QNA.

As pointed out by Dr. Mahjoob Zweiri of Qatar University in an interview with Al Jazeera, in addition to the short term influence of this crisis, it could have long term effects, like those that arose from the isolation of Hamas in 2006, which pushed the organization towards Iran. This is crucial because Iran already officially supported Qatar in the disagreement on cutting diplomatic relations but not solving problems through dialogue.

Kuwait and Oman supported their partners and did not back the Saudi-led campaign; however, if shuttle diplomacy between sides is not conducted via a committed regional power or regional coalition, Qatar could face more difficulties in tackling the crisis. It is important to mention that Qatar has strongly supported a variety of regional states and non-state actors in the last 20 years and its positive approach to the states’ sovereignty is already well-known. Hence, I assume that countries who have good relations with both sides have started conducting diplomacy behind the scenes. The opposite is not possible because we are discussing here substantial elements of the Middle East and global politics.

The post What is behind the Crisis in the Gulf? appeared first on Politics Today.

]]> The Trump Effect on the Global Energy Game and Turkey’s Role https://politicstoday.org/the-trump-effect-on-the-global-energy-game-and-turkeys-role/ Fri, 24 Feb 2017 08:41:25 +0000 https://politicstoday.org/the-trump-effect-on-the-global-energy-game-and-turkeys-role/

Although it is difficult to foresee the future energy policies of the new US administration, there are clear signals that the production of fossil fuels will be increased, oil pipeline projects cancelled by the Obama administration will be reactivated, and policies regarding environment and climate change will be revised.

The post The Trump Effect on the Global Energy Game and Turkey’s Role appeared first on Politics Today.

]]>

Donald J. Trump took office as the 45th president of the United States on January 20, 2017. He attracted much public attention with statements on the economy, foreign policy, security and energy, even in the election period. The Trump administration has aimed to start “a new energy revolution” especially in terms of energy policies. The Trump administration has promised to revitalize the oil and natural gas sectors by repealing some of the Obama administration’s restrictions, like the White House Climate Action Plan. In parallel with this, Trump has stated that the production of fossil fuels should be increased by reducing legal restrictions.

President Trump has appointed former Texas Governor Rick Perry as the Secretary of Energy. It is thought that Mr. Perry will follow policies on climate change and global warming that may cause harm to the environment.

Immediately after the inauguration of Donald Trump, some statements were released on the White House’s official website regarding energy, foreign policy, economic growth, employment, and defense. These statements are a kind of confirmation that some legislation from the Obama presidency would be repealed by the new administration. One of the first subjects which the Trump administration has put on the agenda is energy. The announcement, called “An America First Energy Plan,” states that “harmful and unnecessary” policies like the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the US Rule have burned the American economy and they should be repealed. In addition, Trump has signaled that untapped energy resources on federal lands, like oil, shale and natural gas, should be utilized and their revenues should be spent on infrastructure projects. Moreover, the removal of the climate change page from the White House’s website proves that Trump will deal with this issue as soon as possible. Trump has regularly stated that climate change is not a scientific fact, even saying that it “was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.”

On the other hand, the desire of the US to control energy resources, especially in the Middle East, Caspian Sea and Eastern Mediterranean regions, will most probably spark a rivalry between Russia and the US. In the forthcoming period, the US, Russia and Turkey have been expected to confer, particularly about natural gas resources and pipeline routes. The Trump administration is expected to exert effort on transmitting natural gas in the Eastern Mediterranean region to Turkey, and then to the European Union via the Southern Gas Corridor. The feasibility studies on this project are still proceeding and when this project is implemented, Turkey will take another step to become an energy trade center. In this sense, the intimate relations between Turkey and the new US administration are extremely important.

Today, it is very difficult to forecast the dynamics of the global energy game with certainty, however, some signals have been given by the new US administration that it intends to change its policies on energy in the near future. These policy changes will not only affect the US energy system but also the global energy equation would be reconfigured. In this respect, especially in the Middle East, the US, Russia and Turkey should act in unison and bring peace to this region. By doing so, the energy reserves of this region can be utilized more effectively and Turkey can derive benefit from this situation. Therefore, in the process of bringing stability to the region, Turkey should do a very careful cost-benefit analysis and act in parallel with its national interests.

Recommended

What Turkey and the Region Can Expect Going Forward

In the new period, it seems that energy will be at the center of developments in Turkey and the region. The foreign policy of the US was slammed frequently by Trump in the electoral period. In this regard, the new administration’s thoughts about bilateral relations with Russia, NATO expenses and the military presence of the US in the Middle East have indicated that the balances in the region can be reshaped.

The critical role played by Turkey in the region is expected to increasingly continue. Along with the positive developments between Turkey and Russia in the recent period, Turkey, Russia and the US can together direct energy policy in the region. From this point of view, especially the developments in the Middle East, Syria and Iraq will greatly influence the variables of the energy equation.

There are many projects in the region waiting to be implemented. Specifically, the US is expected to be an important player in terms of drilling in the rich oil and gas reserves in the Eastern Mediterranean region and transmitting these resources via Turkey to global markets. In the new term, it is foreseen that the operations on security and energy coordination in the region will also continue. The main objectives are both gaining economic benefit and ending political tension. Thanks to these projects, Turkey will achieve its goal of being an energy trading center. In addition, it is expected that Turkey will play a crucial role in building new international partnerships in the region. Turkey aims to become a center of attraction in terms of energy. By doing so, Turkey wants to improve its economic and commercial relations with the US. In this way, not only Turkey but also the region will derive benefit.

Although it is quite difficult to predict the future energy policies of the new US administration, there are some important signals that have been given by President Trump. Accordingly, it is possible to say that the production of fossil fuels will be increased, oil pipeline projects cancelled by the Obama administration will be reactivated, and some policies related with environment and climate change will be radically changed in the new period. In light of this information, it appears that the US will try to be a fully independent country in terms of energy. On the other hand, it is clear that the new energy policies of the US will affect Turkey and the region. Owing to this reason, especially in accordance with its targets of becoming an energy trade center, Turkey should act in compliance with its national interests and contribute to bringing economic and political stability to the region once again.

The post The Trump Effect on the Global Energy Game and Turkey’s Role appeared first on Politics Today.

]]>