The question exercising countless minds worldwide is how much of President Donald Trump’s policies will the forthcoming Biden administration uphold? At first glance the two men could not be further apart politically. Closer scrutiny of the issues reveals a rather different picture.
As far as the Middle
East is concerned, there is general agreement that US president-elect Joe Biden
will certainly endorse the Abraham Accords. On the other hand, most Washington
watchers do not expect him to maintain his predecessor’s aggressive stance
towards Iran. After all, as vice-president, Biden was key in selling to Congress
the Iran nuclear deal, still regarded by Barack Obama as the crowning
achievement of his presidency. Many
believe that Biden will seek to negotiate a US re-entry into the JCPOA (Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action), the multi-national agreement that sealed the
terms of the deal, and from which Trump withdrew in May 2018. If he does so, there is no consensus on what
he might require, or what Iran might demand, as the price of his re-engagement.
Trump’s
policy of disengaging US armed forces from the conflicts of the Middle East is
a broad strategy likely to commend itself to his successor. The long-standing US military presence in
Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, and its involvement in Libya and Yemen, has often
exacerbated conflict as much as contain it.
The announced Trump troop withdrawals will doubtless be popular
domestically, but whether they will have a positive or a negative effect in the
countries concerned is less certain. Biden may find himself having to reassess
Trump’s decisions in some cases.
In one particular
instance, Biden may diverge completely from Trump’s withdrawal strategy. Back
in August 2014, with Obama as US president and Joe Biden his vice-president,
the US formed a coalition of fourteen countries to oppose Islamic State (IS)
military victories across Syria and Iraq.
Ever since, up in north-eastern Syria US troops had been supporting the
valiant Kurdish Peshmerga forces who had led the attack against IS on behalf of
the coalition. The Kurds were embedded
in the Syrian Democratic Forces (the SDF). which also contained militias from
around the world.
On 6 October 2019 the
Trump administration ordered US forces to withdraw from the region. On October 9 the Turkish army, together with
the Syrian National Army (the SNA), launched an attack on the SDF. Erdogan had designated it a terrorist
organization because of its ties to the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), the
Turkish party agitating for Kurdish independence. He maintained that the operation was intended
to expel them from the region. Amnesty International said it had evidence
of war crimes and human rights violations committed by Turkish and
Turkey-backed Syrian forces.
Trump's sudden pullout
of US forces in Syria was criticized by many, including former US military
personnel, as a "serious betrayal of the Kurds". Biden
may well reconsider that particular issue. At the time both Democrats and
Republicans in Congress opposed it. And Biden
is on record as saying “Turkey is the real problem,” and that he would tell
“Erdogan that he will pay a heavy price.”
Unlike his soon-to-be predecessor in office, Biden is no admirer of strong ruthless leaders. Erdogan’s recent posturings on the world stage are not calculated to impress him. The most provocative, perhaps, was Erdogan’s decision in 2017 to purchase the Russian S-400 anti-aircraft system, which is designed specifically to counter fighter aircraft like the US’s state-of-the-art multi-purpose F-35. In fact, and bizarrely, Erdogan was already attempting to acquire the F-35 itself. In short Turkey, a member of NATO, was proposing to let Russia in by the back door.
As a result the US ejected Turkey from the F-35 programme. Erdogan’s duplicity had proved a step too far even for Trump, and Biden is not likely to oppose his latest action on this issue. On December 14, 2020. Washington imposed sanctions against Turkey’s military acquisitions agency for having acquired the Russian S-400 system. The sanctions were also intended to hold Turkey to account for potentially allowing Russia to infiltrate Western defense technology.
Turkey’s refusal to back
away from its purchase of the Russian S-400 missile defense system left “us
with no choice, ultimately,” said Christopher Ford, the assistant secretary of
state for international security.
Biden is equally
unlikely to favour Erdogan’s recent military interventions in Libya or in the
Nagorno-Karabakh dispute, both pretty obviously regarded by him as
opportunities to extend Turkish influence in the Middle East. In both cases, in terms chillingly
reminiscent of Adolf Hitler justifying his military incursions in the 1930s, Erdogan
said his rationale was to protect people of Turco-Ottoman descent. Then in mid-August 2020 he sent an oil and gas
exploration vessel, escorted by warships, into what has always been regarded as
Greek territorial waters, accusing Greece of trying to grab an unfair share of
untapped resources. None of this is calculated to endear him to Biden or his
new administration.
Biden is a reasonable man. Unlike Trump himself, he will not reject his predecessor’s legacy lock, stock and barrel. As far as the Middle East is concerned, Biden will probably find himself endorsing a fair proportion of what he finds on his desk on 20 January 2021.
https://jewishbusinessnews.com/2020/12/25/how-far-will-biden-diverge-from-trump/
No comments:
Post a Comment