25 minute read
Waging Peace
security adviser in the Barack Obama administration. “Anybody who pretends like AIPAC isn’t hugely responsible for the positions that are taken by Congress is just sticking their head in the ground,” Rhodes declares.
He recalled the multi-million dollar campaign against the Iran nuclear deal and the effort to embarrass Obama by orchestrating Netanyahu’s appearance before a joint session of Congress in 2015. Obama ultimately prevailed in securing U.S. approval of the multilateral agreement—subsequently revoked by Trump. However, as Rhodes explains, “We spent so much political capital on the Iran deal that it foreclosed” efforts to revive peace talks with the Palestinians.
In addition to Rhodes and the former AIPAC insiders, the film draws on interviews with young American Jews who were cultivated by AIPAC when they were high school and college students, only to come to the realization that the lobby reflected reactionary anti-Palestinian and anti-peace positions that they did not actually support. After breaking with AIPAC, some of the students joined alternative groups such as IfNotNow. “God bless them,” Dine declares in the film.
“The Kings of Capitol Hill” also highlights the growing alliance between AIPAC and Christians United for Israel, with Vice President Mike Pence presiding over the union with American Evangelicals. The film suggests that the apocalyptic views of CUFI’s John Hagee, which entail the destruction of Jews to usher in the “end times,” are alienating Jews and empowering liberal alternative groups such as IfNotNow and J Street.
But the film concludes with a defiant Kohr declaring, “Our detractors think we are vulnerable; that we will fold when we are pushed. But they don’t know what we are made of.”
The former AIPAC insiders do know, however, precisely what AIPAC is made of, though they are now anxious to disassociate themselves from the Frankenstein that they helped create. Their hypocrisy notwithstanding, “The Kings of Capitol Hill” makes an important contribution to the growing movement that is exposing AIPAC for the repressive and monolithic monster that it is. —Walter L. Hixson “Gaza Fights for Freedom” Sheds Light on Great March of Return
On Nov. 23, the Palestine Foundation held a virtual film screening of “Gaza Fights for Freedom,” as well as a conversation with the film’s producer Michael Prysner and its director/narrator Abby Martin.
The documentary was filmed in 2018 during the height of the Great March of Return. For two years, protesters gathered along the Israel-Gaza border demanding their right to return to the homes they were forcefully removed from as a result of Israel’s creation.
First released in May of 2019, Prysner and Martin withdrew the film for further editing a few months later. When the new release was ready at the beginning of 2020, the outbreak of the coronavirus severely limited opportunities to screen the film. However, it was well received where it was able to be seen, such as in Los Angeles and San Diego. The film is now available online, at <gazafightsforfreedom.com>.
When Prysner and Martin tried to enter Gaza in 2018, the Israelis denied them entry. They thus had to hire Gazan film professionals to do all the filming. “Making this film wasn’t an easy task since both of us weren’t on the ground,” Prysner said.
The film focuses on the life and death of a young Gazan woman, Razan al-Najjar, a volunteer medic who was shot dead by an Israeli sniper on June 1, 2018 while assisting injured demonstrators near the fence separating Gaza from Israel. Despite her humanitarian role in the march, Israel attempted to portray al-Najjar as an enemy combatant and launched a propaganda campaign targeting the dead medic.
Prysner and Martin hope the film’s footage and narrative will help both neophytes and long-time followers of the conflict to better understand the sordid reality on the ground in Gaza and the rest of Palestine. —Samir Twair
Palestine Urged to Present Biden With a New, Unified Vision The Washington, DC-based Palestine Center held its annual conference virtually on Nov. 7. Titled “The Future of Palestine,” the event offered thoughts on how Palestinians ought to respond to the election of Joe Biden as U.S. president.
Speakers repeatedly stressed the importance of Palestinians not embracing a revival of the fruitless decades-old “peace process.” Rather, they called on Palestinians to unify and articulate to the U.S. and the world a clear vision for their future.
Mustafa Barghouti, the secretary general of the Palestinian National Initiative and a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, said Biden is likely to take some steps favorable to Palestinians,
such as reinstituting aid to Palestinian refugees and allowing the PLO to reopen its diplomatic mission in Washington.
However, he thinks it’s unlikely the incoming administration will repudiate Trump administration policies that sought to change the facts on the ground, such as acknowledging Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. “That’s why I think what we will face is very risky and will not be less dangerous than what we faced with Trump,” Barghouti explained.
“That’s why we need to have a clear and very determined strategy,” he continued. “What we need is a unified alternative strategy that could change the balance of power on the ground. I do not think anybody will come and help us unless we, the Palestinians, help ourselves.”
Putting an end to internal divisions, most notably the Hamas-Fatah divide, is a prerequisite for the emergence of such a plan, he insisted. “We have to adopt a strategy that concentrates on us being unified in our national liberation movement, rather than continuing to have internal division,” he said.
Barghouti said the Palestinian leadership must also diversify itself by inviting a wide range of viewpoints into the decisionmaking process. In particular, he stressed that young voices need to be elevated. “Most well-known Palestinian leaders [such as Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas] became leaders while they were young people,” he noted. “Why should it be now that somebody has to be at the age of 60 or 70 before being able to assume any leadership position?”
Nour Odeh, the founder of Connect Consulting, Palestine’s first strategic communications consultancy firm, said Palestine’s many defenders across the world are eager and ready to support a new Palestinian-devised vision for peace and justice.
“Palestine is a progressive universal cause, and we do have friends and we do have allies,” she said. “To continue to pretend that if we play by the playbook of the big boys we’re going to get something different from the sour deal we’ve gotten for the past 30 years is simply not smart.”
ALEX GAKOS/SHUTTERSTOCK.COM Then-Vice President Joe Biden shakes hands with Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem, on March 9, 2016. Israeli historian Ilan Pappe believes the incoming Biden administration will be a “dishonest broker when it comes to the Palestinian issue.”
Palestinian author Ghada Karmi argued that the new Palestinian approach ought to be centered around demanding equal rights for Jews and Arabs living on land controlled by the Israeli state.
“I think the de facto one-state reality Israel has created can be used against Israel, if we have the guts, if we can organize…and the rest of the world will support us,” she said. There must be, Karmi continued, “a strong campaign started by the Palestinians inside Mandate Palestine and supported by all those who wish Palestinians well, wherever they might be, for equal rights, a campaign that says to Israel… ‘either you give us equal rights with the rest of the people you’re ruling, or you get out of the territories.’”
Ilan Pappe, a professor of history at the University of Exeter, said his fellow panelists are correct to worry that history is about to repeat itself. Israel’s leadership “[doesn’t] think that something fundamental will change” under Biden, he explained. “Maybe the talk will change, but not the walk of the American administration—it will continue to be a dishonest broker when it comes to the Palestinian issue.” —Dale Sprusansky
The Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington (AGSIW) held a virtual event on Nov. 5 to analyze the current diplomatic friction between Palestine and the Arab Gulf states. Tensions rose earlier this fall after Bahrain and the UAE normalized relations with Israel, signalizing Arab Gulf abandonment of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, which promised official relations with Israel only if the country ended its occupation of Palestinian land.
“The official Gulf-Palestinian relationship is at its lowest point ever…and I think it is going to get even worse as we continue with this process,” said Emirati political scientist Abdulkhaleq Abdulla. “Officials on both sides are not talking to each other,” he noted, while rancorous fighting has broken out on social media between Palestinians and Gulf citizens.
Abdulla maintained that the Gulf countries remain committed to the Palestinian cause, but have deep frustrations with Palestinian leadership. Gulf leaders, he said, are tired of internal Palestinian divisions, displeased that Palestinians have formed partnerships with Turkey and Iran,
believe Palestinians have taken Arab support for granted, and maintain that Palestinian leaders have mismanaged the Palestinian cause by making geostrategic blunders.
University of Maryland Professor Shibley Telhami said these frustrations do exist, but do not explain the pivot to normalization. “These grievances are not the reason why these strategic decisions were made,” he said. “They’re now being used in order to rationalize an agreement which was done for strategic reasons.” These strategic reasons for normalization include greater economic opportunities, better relations with the U.S., regional security considerations and better access to weapons, Telhami said.
Despite their frustrations, Telhami cautioned that Palestine cannot afford to sever relations with the Arab Gulf states, as doing so would likely have global repercussions. “The importance of the [Palestinian] issue to the rest of the world is probably predicated on its importance to the Arab world,” he said. In particular, Telhami said Palestinians ought to reach out to Arab Gulf heavyweight Saudi Arabia to discuss ways to move forward.
Ambassador Marcelle Wahba, president emeritus of AGSIW and former U.S. ambassador to the UAE, said it’s likely Saudi Arabia will eventually join its neighbors in normalizing relations with Israel. “They’re going to wait for the right time… and will want something concrete they can point to for their regional standing and for their own domestic standing,” she said. “The UAE used annexation, and I think the Saudis will want something equal, if not larger, than that.”
Abdulla echoed many Arab Gulf leaders in calling on Palestine to re-launch negotiations with Israel, claiming that the UAE stands ready to use its new diplomatic channel with Israel to push for an equitable agreement. He also repeated the popular Israeli claim that Palestinians have a history of being rejectionists. “They just sit there and reject everything that there is,” he said.
Telhami, meanwhile, noted that Israel’s right-wing government has shown no in-
KARIM SAHIB/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES A member of an Israeli tech delegation meets with his Emirati counterpart in Dubai, on Oct. 27, 2020. The UAE has welcomed numerous Israeli delegations in recent weeks, including a group of businessmen from illegal West Bank settlements.
terest in negotiations, but rather has publicly expressed its desire to continue appropriating Palestinian land. This, coupled with the power imbalance between Israel and Palestine, makes it highly unlikely that a fair peace deal can be reached, regardless of what Abu Dhabi insists, Telhami said. —Dale Sprusansky Students Overcome Adversity to Advocate for Palestine
As part of their 13th annual convention, American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) held a virtual discussion featuring students who have successfully advanced the Palestinian cause on college campuses. The title of the Nov. 27 panel was, “The Youth Front for Palestine: Student Success Stories.”
Ahmad Awad, currently a J.D. student at Rutgers Law School, reflected on his efforts as an undergrad to launch a chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) at Fordham University. Shortly after the student government approved the organization in 2016, the school’s dean vetoed
SCREENSHOT VIA YOUTUBE (Clockwise) Zarefah Baroud, Tal Frieden, moderator Malak Shalabi and Ahmad Awad share campus advocacy success stories.
the formation of the group, citing concerns that SJP would be too polarizing and make some students feel uncomfortable.
Awad and his counterparts quickly contacted Palestine Legal and the Center for Constitutional Rights. “We filed the first lawsuit in the country challenging institutional censorship of students advocating for justice in Palestine,” he noted. Two-plus years later, long after Awad had graduated, a court decision annulled the dean’s veto, allowing SJP to officially form in the fall of 2019.
However, in January 2020, Fordham appealed the legal decision and the matter is again moving through the courts.
Despite all the rancor, Awad said he has no regrets engaging in this fight. “When you’re advocating for something as basic as human rights, it’s a no-brainier to continue to push forward even through the adversity,” he said.
Tal Frieden, a founding member of Jewish Voice for Peace at Brown University and a member of the campus’ SJP group, discussed the successful 2019 campaign to get Brown to divest from companies complicit in Israel’s occupation of Palestine.
After students voted in favor of a referendum supporting divestment, the school’s committee on ethical investment practices was charged with making a recommendation to the board of trustees on how to proceed. Frieden noted that it took an all-out effort to persuade the committee to issue a favorable opinion on the matter.
“This committee was established after divestment from South African apartheid, basically with the goal of stifling student movements for divestment,” Frieden explained. “Over the course of the 30 or 40 years that this committee has been around, they’ve only divested from a couple of issues, one of them being genocide in Sudan, another being the Hilton Hotel group, which was violating workers’ rights.”
“We really focused on those prior examples of divestment as an example to show that Brown could in fact divest, and there was precedent for doing so,” Frieden said.
The pro-divestment coalition also engaged in a lot of personal lobbying with members of the committee. “That type of back room lobbying is something that the other side does frequently and very well, and it was a concerted effort on our part to make sure we were having conversations at every step of the way to provide as much information as possible for the members of that committee,” Frieden noted.
The investment committee sided with Frieden’s coalition in the fall of 2019, making it the first such body in the U.S. to officially recommend divestment from the occupation. The matter is now currently in the hands of the university’s trustees.
Zarefah Baroud, a Palestinian-American filmmaker and AMP’s digital media associate, began her career as an activist at the University of Washington.
She first appreciated how divisive this issue is on campus when she helped organize an event featuring speakers from the Rachel Corrie Foundation. (Corrie was a young American peace activist killed in 2003 by an Israeli bulldozer while she was trying to save a family’s home from being demolished in Gaza.) Baroud recalled the event attracting negative attention from the school’s administration. “They were honestly upset that the event was happening on campus,” she said.
Baroud’s real breakthrough, however, came later in her undergraduate career when her capstone film about her family’s experience in Gaza won an award for being the best documentary on campus. The film went viral, and even led to AMP offering her a job.
She recalled being moved by the impact the film had on individuals uneducated about the Palestine issue. In particular, she shared how one student in her class became emotional after seeing the film and was in utter disbelief about the reality on the ground in Gaza.
In an era when so many campus officials, including professors, are afraid to discuss Palestine out of fear of being attacked, Baroud said it is important for students to fearlessly raise the issue and pave the way toward a better tomorrow. “You have to crawl so that the students after you can run,” she said. —Dale Sprusansky Biden Likely to Re-Engage Iran on Nuclear Deal
A plethora of foreign policy issues await President-elect Joe Biden when he moves into the White House on Jan. 20, including Washington’s tattered relationship with Tehran. With this in mind, several think thanks convened webinars in November to discuss how the president-elect plans to approach U.S.-Iran relations.
LEONHARD FOEGER/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES Then-Secretary of State John Kerry (l) and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif (r) attend a bilateral meeting in Vienna, Austria, on May 17, 2016. With Joe Biden’s electoral victory, there is hope that the U.S. will rejoin the 2015 multilateral nuclear agreement.
Hannah Kaviani, a journalist in Prague for Radio Farda, noted Iranians were closely following the U.S. presidential elections. “In my time as a journalist covering Iran I never saw this amount of anticipation and excitement and curiosity about what happens in the U.S.,” she told attendees of the Middle East Institute’s virtual Nov. 17 event.
Jon Alterman, head of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), believes Biden will seek to reinitiate the multilateral approach toward Iran that Donald Trump abandoned by unilaterally exiting the 2015 nuclear agreement. “It’s clear that Biden thinks one of the biggest mistakes that the Trump administration has made in foreign policy is not working with allies,” he stated.
Biden has indicated he is interested in re-engaging Iran on the nuclear deal, Alterman noted. As a starting point, he recommended the Biden administration lift the travel ban against Iranians and help the country obtain access to medical supplies and food, especially in the midst of COVID-19, which has devastated Iran. Alterman added that to re-engage Iran on the nuclear issue, “Biden will have to work with Europe...which wants a diplomatic approach.”
Europe’s role in mending U.S.-Iran relations was the focus of a Nov. 18 event held by the Atlantic Council.
Federica Mogherini, the former top European Union diplomat who played a key role in negotiating the 2015 nuclear deal, expressed relief that the agreement remains alive, albeit on life support, following Trump’s four years of hostility toward Iran. She credited the European Union for playing a critical role in safeguarding the agreement. “The Europeans have done their homework, saving the agreement and preserving it for better times,” she said.
With Biden coming into office, Mogherini said Europe will again assume the role of bridge builder between the U.S. and Iran, so as to “recreate an environment conducive to results.”
While there is commentary that the Biden administration ought to negotiate a new deal rather than rejoin the old one, Mogherini said Iran views this as a nonstarter. From Tehran’s perspective, she explained, Washington must prove its good faith by recommitting to its side of the original deal before any additional negotiations can take place. “There is no way in which any Iranian leadership can engage in a new negotiation, a new agreement, unless the JCPOA [the nuclear deal] is first fully implemented on both sides,” she said.
In order to again comply with the deal, the Biden administration would need to lift all nuclear-related sanctions imposed by Trump. Barbara Slavin, director of the Future of Iran Initiative at the Atlantic Council, said most of these sanctions should be easily reversible since they were implemented via executive order.
While not all of Trump’s sanctions targeted Iran’s nuclear program, she said the context in which they were implemented ties them back to the nuclear deal—meaning Tehran will likely want them lifted. “All of these sanctions that have been dumped on Iran over the past couple of years, even the ones that have been categorized as related to terrorism or other issues, could be considered nuclear-related because they all came in the context of the United States quitting the JCPOA unilaterally when Iran was in compliance,” she said.
Meanwhile, Mogherini said the steps Iran has taken away from the deal in response to the U.S. withdrawal, such as growing its stockpile of low-enriched uranium, are easily reversible. She anticipates Tehran coming back into compliance with the deal if the U.S. resumes its compliance. —Elaine Pasquini and Dale Sprusansky Can Arab Gulf Leaders Help Move the Region Toward Peace?
As part of its 29th annual Arab-U.S. Policymakers Conference, the National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations (NCUSAR) held a discussion titled “Geo-Political Dynamics of Arabia and the Gulf” on Nov. 18.
Mohamed Al Hassan, Oman’s ambassador to the United Nations, began by outlining several ways he believes Arab leaders can move their region toward peace.
First, he stressed the importance of making decisions in accordance with international law and not relying on the use of force or coercive measures to resolve differences. “Investing in peace is better than investing in war and conflict,” he said.
The ambassador also encouraged countries to avoid approaching geopolitics with a zero-sum mindset. “Denying others’ rights to security, dignity, statehood and growth is a shortsighted view and will
FAYEZ NURELDINE/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES Members of the media gather on Nov. 21, 2020 in Riyadh to watch a broadcast of the G20 summit, which was hosted by Saudi Arabia. This year’s gathering of world leaders was held virtually due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
never take the Middle East toward a brighter future,” he cautioned. “Peace can be sustainable only through understanding and everyone having a stake in it. Someone’s security cannot be built on others’ insecurity.”
Looking forward, Al Hassan views ending the war in Yemen, better integrating Iran into the regional fabric and establishing an independent Palestinian state as crucial steps toward peace and stability.
Al Hassan spoke approvingly of the UAE and Bahrain normalizing ties with Israel, but also affirmed Muscat’s commitment to Palestinian statehood. “The recent normalization of relations between Israel and some of the Arab countries is a step forward toward peace, however it should not be viewed as a substitute for peace between Israel and the Palestinians,” he said. “Peace is incomplete without a resolution of the Palestinian question.”
Timothy Lenderking, the deputy assistant secretary for Arabian Gulf affairs at the State Department, said Washington is strongly pushing for an end to the yearslong fissure between Qatar and prominent Gulf Cooperation Council members. “It’s beyond time for the Gulf rift to be healed and for Qatar to be brought back into the fold,” he said. “The Gulf countries do not benefit, ultimately, from a rift within the Arab body politic.”
Lenderking posed a pointed question to Gulf leaders: “How is it that the Arab countries of the region can make peace with Israel more readily than they can resolve the Gulf rift with Qatar?”
Gulf leaders have offered conflicting comments about their willingness to reconcile with Qatar. Yousef Al Otaiba, the UAE’s ambassador to the U.S., recently said mending relations with Doha is “not on anyone’s priority list.” However, Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud said in November that Riyadh is “willing to engage with our Qatari brothers.”
Susan L. Ziadeh, the former United States ambassador to Qatar, noted that even if the brutal war in Yemen ends, the country still faces a number of existential questions. In particular, she noted it’s unclear the extent to which the various factions within the country, such as the rebel Houthis and secessionist Southern Transitional Council (STC), would be willing to work toward a unified country. The fact that the factions all have different outside benefactors—the Houthis being supported by Iran, the STC by the UAE, and the “official” government by Saudi Arabia—only muddles the possibilities of national unity, she cautioned.
Dr. John Duke Anthony, NCUSAR’s founding president and CEO, said the U.S. can help facilitate a climate of peace in the region by focusing less on military sales, and more on diplomacy and people-topeople relations. The fact that the U.S. spends trillions on defense while allotting “paltry budgetary sums” to diplomacy “is wrong-head, wrong-minded, and the results are not going to be the positive, lasting, enduring ones that each side, each peoples deserve,” he said. —Dale Sprusansky Did Trump Change or Perpetuate the Foreign Policy Status Quo?
The American Conservative held its annual foreign policy conference on Nov. 5 at the Ritz-Carlton in Tysons, VA. As always, the event called for an American foreign policy based on restraint and realism, and featured speakers both highly supportive and highly critical of President Donald Trump.
The conference’s final panel assessed President Trump’s foreign affairs legacy, especially as it pertains to his 2016 campaign pledge to undo the bipartisan foreign policy consensus.
Daniel McCarthy, editor of Modern Age, gave Trump high marks for not getting the U.S. bogged down in new and costly foreign quagmires. “I’m inclined to give Donald Trump an easy A, and this is because in contrast to George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama, we have not had new attempts at nation building, new attempts at exporting democracy by military force, and no new wars under Donald Trump—which is quite remarkable,” he said.
McCarthy did acknowledge that Trump had a penchant for hiring “swampy” foreign policy hawks such John Bolton, but nonetheless gave the president plaudits for not letting such individuals lead him into wars. “They did not translate into the kinds of overreaching policies that they would have under any other president, especially any other Republican,” he said.
Kelley Vlahos of the Quincy Institute of-
AYMAN HENNA/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES A member of the U.S. military surveys wreckage at the Ain al-Asad military airbase in Iraq, on Jan. 13, 2020. Iranian proxies launched a retaliatory strike on the base following the U.S. assassination of top Iranian general Qassim Soleimani. More than 100 U.S. troops suffered traumatic brain injuries as a result of the attack.
fered a much more critical take. She gave Trump credit for initiating a critical conversation about U.S. foreign policy, but lamented his failure to pivot U.S. policy in a new direction.
“I would probably give him an F under other circumstances, but I give him a C because I feel like he has ripped the varnish off the whole idea of the swamp,” she said. “We’re talking about it, he has an entire base of supporters who talk about it and want to see reforms in Washington….He’s at least started the conversation, and I’m happy for that.”
However, rhetoric aside, Trump “has not changed the real dynamics of what makes the [war] machinery go—the military-industrial complex,” she said. “If anything, he has been a best friend to the defense industry. He has come in and almost doubled the amount of arms sales, for example, to other countries.”
Trump’s embrace of the arms industry has perpetuated the U.S.’ military-first approach to foreign policy, she warned. “This is a major red flag, because as long as the top five defense companies in the U.S., which basically are the biggest arms dealers in the world, as long as they’re still finding reasons to pump out weapons and gear up for the next war, that keeps the swamp alive,” she said.
Gil Barndollar, a research fellow at the Catholic University of America, was also critical of the 45th president’s inability to change the trajectory of U.S. foreign policy. “I’d give Trump a C-minus, and that might be generous,” he said.
“The reality has not matched the rhetoric in any real way,” he argued. “You can hang your hat on no new wars, I guess, but ending endless wars has become just an applause line…there are more troops in the Middle East now than there were when Trump took office.” (Following the event, Trump announced plans to reduce U.S. troop levels in both Afghanistan and Iraq to 2,500 before he leaves office on Jan. 20.)
Barndollar also noted that Trump’s bombastic foreign policy nearly led the U.S. into war. “We came very close to two wars, both with North Korea and with Iran. So, if A Yemeni farmer harvests wheat in a field on the outskirts of Taez, on Nov. 2, 2020.
you’re going to be an arsonist and then stomp out your fire, I don’t give a lot of credit for that,” he said. —Dale Sprusansky Economic Trials Linger Ten Years After Arab Spring
Ten years after the Arab Spring protests erupted in North Africa and the Middle East, the social, economic, human rights and corruption issues that fomented mass discontent remain largely unresolved, leaving populations angry and frustrated.
On Oct. 29, the Middle East Institute (MEI) hosted a webinar to address the current situation and challenges ahead for several of these countries, namely Syria, Yemen, Egypt and Tunisia.
MEI senior fellow Charles Lister painted a grim picture of Syria, noting the root causes of the 2011 uprising remain, while new ones have arisen. “With 60 percent of Syria under its control, the regime, with its Russian and Iranian allies, is failing on almost every measure in terms of stabilizing—let alone governing—the country,” he said.
The economic situation is the most important crisis facing Syrians today, Lister claimed. The Syrian pound, which was roughly 500 pounds to one U.S. dollar a year ago, has now risen to 2,500. “Today 90 percent of Syrians...live under the poverty line,” he said. “There are ongoing fuel and wheat crises and enormous queues for subsidized bread.”
In addition, “corruption is increasing and there are more and more signs of elite level regime infighting,” he added.
Critics of U.S. policy have argued that several rounds of sanctions implemented this year by the Trump administration have served to indiscriminately worsen Syria’s economic situation. The economic meltdown of neighboring Lebanon and the COVID-19 pandemic are also widely cited as contributing reasons for Syria’s economic struggles.
Nonresident MEI scholar Nadwa alDawsari spoke on the Yemen war, prospects for a settlement and the country’s ongoing humanitarian crisis.
“The U.N. peace process does not address the role of…the Saudis and Emiratis...or their proxies,” al-Dawsari said. “Corruption remains rampant in Yemen because the Arab Spring was hijacked by the corrupt political elite, and that hijack was re-enforced by the intervention of the international community.”
The U.S. and the international community should focus on building stable local economies, she continued. “I think we should also break the cycle of relying on humanitarian aid. Yemenis cannot live on handouts.”
