Us and the Bickering in Washington
This question deserves serious reflection if we overcome highly costly illusions.
There is no doubt that the Trump-Musk dispute has dangerous implications, regardless of who is right or wrong. It reflects two 'problems' that many Arab apologists refuse to acknowledge:
The first problem is that Trump is a dealmaker with little regard for institutions. He shows no concern for the norms of engaging with allies and opponents, and he has no qualms about ruling through executive orders, even if this comes at the expense of consensus and collective responsibility, which statesmen are expected to prioritize over partisan loyalties... to say nothing about loyalty is to a circle of friends, cronies, donors, and fixers.
Accordingly, the political costs of the 'tactical alliance' between the president and an unruly businessman, who mocks politicians, the government, and even the public to deliver results and secure a quick knockout win, have quickly become apparent.
Even their shared view of what constitutes government waste and how to curb it evaporated as soon as the high social and economic costs came to light. In fact, these costs had only been temporarily masked by the MAGA bases' penchant for contradictory populist slogans. It's worth remembering that Musk did not obtain his temporary job by winning an election. He was appointed by Trump, meaning that Trump bears direct responsibility for the current dysfunction and for any future fallout.
The second problem is that many of Trump's second-term appointees could easily meet the same fate as Musk. Rumors are swirling about members of Trump's cabinet, his advisors, and his aides. While one of them, Mike Waltz, has already been removed from his position as National Security Advisor, a number of the Trump team composed of circles of friends, Fox News alumni, golf buddies, lobbies, and major donors are not on stable ground. The key reason, in my view, is that most of them are 'political operatives,' not statesmen. They have no real grasp of strategic US interests.
This vulnerability has become increasingly apparent in the administration's ad-hoc approach to Western Europe, Russia, and China. In the Middle East, the picture is more muddled than ever. Arab, Israeli, and Iranian dynamics are more confused than at any time since the Camp David Accords.
While it used to be taken for granted that Washington and Tel Aviv would adopt nearly indistinguishable positions under certain Republican and Democratic administrations, very serious questions are now being raised. Chief among them is whether Washington still holds the final say on Israel's regional decisions or if the Likud-led far-right now sets its own agenda, with the US happy to merely placate Israel through a UN veto here or a meaningless arms deal there.
Furthermore, does Washington truly wish to 'correct the mistake' of the Sykes-Picot Agreement, averting further fragmentation in the Middle East, as one of its diplomats recently claimed? Or has it effectively endorsed, or at least acquiesced to, the extreme Israeli right's project of division, disintegration, and displacement?
How does Washington see the region's ethnic, religious, and sectarian minorities as it engages with mosaic societies that have overwhelming Arab and Muslim majorities, while navigating its relations with three non-Arab powers? Each of these powers has its own interests and ways to manipulate its affiliates and exploit their entanglements.
Iran has made no secret of intention to export Khomeini's revolution. Until the regional priorities of both Washington and Tel Aviv become clear, Iran will remain an influential player in three countries, though it has effectively lost control over Syria.
As for Türkiye, which is now widely seen as aligned with the new leadership in Damascus and enjoys significant popular and sectarian support in Syria, it is proceeding cautiously. Ankara understands the need to remain mindful of Israeli, American, and Russian considerations. In fact, the questions around who 'holds the cards' in Syria between the Israelis and Americans, could delay solutions for the country's political and its economic reconstruction after 14 years of war and 54 years of dictatorship.
And now we come to Israel or 'the tail that wags the lion'!
The recent Israeli strike on Beirut, along with its insistence on displacing Gaza's population, confirm that Tel Aviv's priorities have not meaningfully changed. While Washington offers the Lebanese soft words about supporting their new president and its envoy Ambassador Tom Barrack (of Lebanese origin) flirts with the Syrians and stresses Trump administration's commitment to 'Syria's unity,' Israel's military and intelligence machine continues to operate in Lebanon, Syria, and what remains of Palestine.
The most striking revelation came just last week in a report published by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz that sheds light on Tel Aviv's recruitment of rogue 'ISIS-affiliated' thugs to loot humanitarian aid convoys headed for Gaza. Israeli spokespeople then tell international media outlets that the looters are Hamas fighters themselves.
According to Haaretz, Netanyahu personally confirmed what the paper had reported months earlier: his government had armed, funded, and protected criminal gangs in southern Gaza, because 'anything that undermines the rule of Hamas benefits us'!
Thus, after years of creating proxy militias across borders and planting undercover agents disguised as Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza to commit crimes that deepen domestic schisms, Israel is now empowering 'starvation thugs', who are looting humanitarian aid in broad daylight.
Washington is lost in its own confusion, and the instability and chaos with the administration have clearly played a key role in fueling this situation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Arabiya
40 minutes ago
- Al Arabiya
BBC says Gaza documentary breached accuracy guidelines, but finds no bias
A BBC documentary about children's lives in Gaza narrated by the 13-year-old son of a Hamas official breached its editorial guidelines on accuracy, an internal review by the British public broadcaster said on Monday. The investigation, however, found there were no other breaches of the BBC's editorial guidelines, including on impartiality, and no evidence that outside interests 'inappropriately impacted on the program.' The BBC removed 'Gaza: How To Survive A War Zone' from its online platform in February, five days after it was broadcast, saying it had 'serious flaws.' The documentary was made by independent production company HOYO Films. A review found the program breached a guideline on accuracy that deals with misleading audiences. The background on the narrator's father — a minister in the Hamas-run government in Gaza — was 'critical information,' which was not shared with the BBC before broadcast, the review found. Gaza's health ministry says more than 58,000 people have been killed since the start of the war on Oct. 7 2023, when Hamas-led militants stormed into Israel, killing about 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages into Gaza. The BBC's coverage of the war has been heavily scrutinized throughout the conflict, with both supporters of Israel and its critics saying the broadcaster had failed to strike the right balance. 'Regardless of how the significance or otherwise of the Narrator's father's position was judged, the audience should have been informed about this,' said the report by Peter Johnston, BBC Director of Editorial Complaints and Reviews. BBC Director-General Tim Davie said the report identified a significant failing in relation to accuracy. 'We will now take action on two fronts – fair, clear and appropriate actions to ensure proper accountability and the immediate implementation of steps to prevent such errors being repeated,' Davie said in a statement.
Asharq Al-Awsat
41 minutes ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
US Sends Beirut ‘Warning' and ‘Incentive' Over Hezbollah Arms
US special envoy Tom Barrack delivered a dual message of 'incentive' and 'warning' to the Lebanese capital this week, urging swift action on the issue of Hezbollah's weapons. 'You have Israel on one side, you have Iran on the other, and now you have Syria manifesting itself so quickly that if Lebanon doesn't move, it's going to be Bilad Al Sham again,' he said, using the historical name for the Syria region. The remarks sparked alarm within Lebanon's political establishment, with some interpreting the comments as a blunt warning of 'existential danger.' Government sources told Asharq al-Awsat that Barrack, who also serves as Washington's ambassador to Türkiye and was previously tasked with Syria policy, appears to be approaching the Lebanon and Syria files through a unified lens. 'Barrack believes that Lebanon should follow the same diplomatic path as Syria,' one official said, referring to Damascus' recent re-engagement with regional and international actors. 'But he also understands Lebanon's complex political terrain.' Barrack's comments about Lebanon potentially 'returning to Bilad Al Sham' provoked criticism across the political spectrum, prompting him to clarify his position in a post on X, formerly Twitter. 'My comments yesterday praised Syria's impressive strides, not a threat to Lebanon,' wrote Barrack. 'I observed the reality that Syria is moving at light speed to seize the historic opportunity presented by President Donald Trump lifting of sanctions: investment from Türkiye and the Gulf, diplomatic outreach to neighboring countries, and a clear vision for the future,' he added. He said Syria's leadership is 'seeking coexistence and shared prosperity with Lebanon based on sovereign equality,' and stressed that the United States supports a bilateral relationship that promotes 'peace, prosperity, and mutual respect' between the two nations. 'I can assure that Syria's leaders only want co-existence and mutual prosperity with Lebanon, and the United States is committed to supporting that relationship between two equal and sovereign neighbors enjoying peace and prosperity,' said Barrack. Barrack, in the context of disarming Hezbollah, had stated that a successful approach requires a combination of "carrots and sticks". This means using both positive incentives (carrots) and negative consequences (sticks) to achieve the desired outcome. Barrack's recent warning to Lebanon reflects the 'stick' Washington is wielding, while his unprecedented acknowledgment of Hezbollah's dual structure signals the 'carrot' being offered. 'This is the first time a US official publicly distinguishes between Hezbollah's political and military wings,' one source told Asharq al-Awsat. 'It's a message of inducement aimed directly at Hezbollah, despite the fact that Washington has long treated both branches as inseparable and placed them under the same sanctions regime,' they explained. In remarks to the press, Barrack reiterated the US designation of Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, but added nuance rarely heard from senior American officials.
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
Closing Bell: Saudi main index closes in red at 11,213
RIYADH: Saudi Arabia's Tadawul All Share Index closed lower on Monday, falling 39.31 points, or 0.35 percent, to end the day at 11,213.59. The total trading turnover on the benchmark index reached SR4.54 billion ($1.21 billion), with 60 stocks advancing and 190 declining. The MSCI Tadawul 30 Index also retreated, shedding 5.46 points, or 0.38 percent, to close at 1,436.97. The Kingdom's parallel market Nomu declined by 80.73 points, or 0.29 percent, closing at 27,356.89. Of the listed stocks, 22 advanced while 56 retreated. The best-performing stock was Alistithmar AREIC Diversified REIT Fund, with its share price rising by 9.91 percent to SR9.43. Other top performers included Saudi Industrial Investment Group, which saw its share price rise by 4.56 percent to SR17.42, and Al Hassan Ghazi Ibrahim Shaker Co., which saw a 4.48 percent increase to SR29.40. On the downside, Emaar The Economic City posted the steepest drop of the day, falling 4.12 percent to SR13.73. Naseej International Trading Co. fell 4.03 percent to SR102.50, and MBC Group Co. dropped 3.79 percent to SR34.02. On the announcements front, Jarir Marketing Co. reported estimated net profits of SR197.2 million for the first half of 2025, marking a 15.2 percent increase from the same period last year. In a statement on Tadawul, the company attributed the estimated increase to a 4.5 percent rise in gross profit, driven by higher sales of after-sales services along with improved profit margins and an increase in other income. Jarir's shares gained 1.27 percent, closing at SR12.79. Advanced Petrochemical Co. also announced its estimated financial results for the same period. The firm's net profits were estimated to reach SR82 million, up by 95.2 percent from the same period last year. The company said that the increase was driven by an 8 percent rise in net revenues, lower propane and purchased propylene prices. Advanced Petrochemical Co. also announced the completion of construction and successful operational launch of its Propane Dehydrogenation plant, capable of producing 843,000 tonnes of propylene annually, along with two PolyPropylene plants operated by Advanced Polyolefins Industry Co. with a combined capacity of 800,000 tonnes per year. The facilities, located in Jubail Industrial City, mark a significant milestone in the company's expansion in the petrochemical sector, according to a statement. APOC, a joint venture between Advanced Global Investment Co. and SK Gas Petrochemical Pte., will begin contributing to Advanced Petrochemical Co.'s consolidated financial results starting in the third quarter of 2025. Advanced Petrochemical shares closed 0.32 percent higher at SR31.48.
