James discusses on Middle East Report recent Middle East developments, including Britain taking a stand against Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, escalation in the Strait of Hormuz, and Yemeni Houthi advances in controlling the strategic Bab al-Mandab waterway.
Transcript
[Anchor] Middle East Report with James M. Dorsey on Sabah al-Muslim. Well, Friday morning, round about now, just before 8 o’clock here in South Africa, time for the Middle East Report with James M. Dorsey.
You can follow James’ writing at the turbulent world of Middle East soccer. Good day to you, James. Thank you for joining us.
[James M. Dorsey] As always, a Friday morning and a pleasure to be with you.
[Anchor] And indeed, once again, an honour to talk to you, James. James, let’s get into matters coming out of the region, and what certainly has been topping headlines globally, certainly in Israel as well as in the United Kingdom, was the announcement of varied sanctions by the British government against the settler community out in the West Bank, and which will inevitably affect the entire state of Israel. British Prime Minister Andy Burnham and Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband weren’t just addressing Israel when this week they condemned Israeli policies and banned occupation-related business dealings.
They were also sending a message to U.S. President Donald Trump, weren’t they, James?
[James M. Dorsey] Indeed they were. Gone are the days when U.S. allies bend over backward to remain in Donald Trump’s good books, signalling that the president’s ability to intimidate, bully, and coerce others may have peaked. Even so, Burnham and Miliband chose the timing for their announced measures against Israel well, and ducked the bullet of the Trump administration taking punitive actions against Britain in solidarity with Israel.
Trump raised no objections when Burnham informed the president of Britain’s plans a day before Miliband announced them. Trump’s acquiescence signalled the president’s mounting frustration with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s West Bank policy. British diplomats insist that Burnham and Miliband were determined to go ahead, irrespective of whether Trump acquiesced or responded with threats of retaliatory measures of his own, such as additional tariffs on British imports.
Trump may be playing both sides against the middle, in the knowledge that British companies could run afoul of U.S. states that have enacted laws, executive orders, or resolutions designed to discourage or penalise boycotts of Israel.
[Anchor] James, the significance of the United Kingdom’s seemingly firm stand on Israeli settlement activity will obviously depend on implementation. One thing is to stand at a podium and to make the announcement and to face the applause or the repercussions thereof. But the implementation, that’s where the taste of the pudding will lie.
One litmus test will be whether Israeli bans will be sanctioned and how it will actually play out.
[James M. Dorsey] The devil will be in the details of how Britain implements its punitive measures amid questions about how far Britain is willing to go. Among those questions is whether Israeli banks, which routinely fund settlement and infrastructure construction in occupied territory and offer mortgages to settlers, would be subject to the measures. British diplomats say the scope of the measures would partially depend on the policies of the Israeli government that emerges from elections scheduled for October 27.
The question of the banks goes to the heart of critics’ assertions that Britain’s sanctions will only be effective if imposed on Israel as a whole rather than on occupied territory exports that account for only 5% of overall Israeli exports. How far Trump will go in remaining silent will be tested later this month. Burnham, together with French President Emmanuel Macron and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, and likely backed by much of the international community, pushes to call Israel to account at the United Nations General Assembly.
Netanyahu, if only to rub it in after New York Mayor Zohran Madani was forced to back away from arresting him if he came to New York, is expected to make a 24-hour whirlwind trip to the Big Apple to address the assembly. Netanyahu is likely in a rush because the assembly coincides with this month’s Jewish High Holidays and takes place a month before an election in which the prime minister is fighting for his political future.
[Anchor] Moving on to matters Iran-related, and the Straits of Hormuz in particular, Iran is signalling its gradual escalation of US or anti-US hostilities. This is what attacks on US warships rather than oil and commercial shipping in the Gulf and in the Straits of Hormuz.
[James M. Dorsey] The Iranian attacks are evidence that Iran is unlikely to settle for a prolonged period of no war, no peace that would allow increased US economic pressure to do its work. In fact, the greater the pressure on Iran, the more likely it is that Iran will escalate. Escalation could happen sooner than later.
If US Treasury Secretary Scott Besant’s calculations are correct, Besant asserts that there were only 30 million barrels of oil worth $2.25 billion at $75 a barrel beyond the reach of the US naval blockade of Iranian ports and available to China, Iran’s foremost buyer. Independent maritime monitor Kepler suggests that Besant could be correct. Kepler assesses that the blockade is working and that Iranian oil exports have significantly dwindled.
US warships have so far foiled Iranian attacks by intercepting the incoming projectiles. Even so, the attack moves the goalposts. There is no reason to assume that subsequent attacks will also fail.
A successful attack, particularly one that causes US casualties, would nullify efforts by the United States and Iran to calibrate escalation so that it does not spark a third round of all-out war.
[Anchor] Finally, moving attention to Yemen, James. The Houthis are leaving the Saudis with no good options as they captured the strategic Red Sea port of Al-Mukha. Now, the Saudis have had this experience with the Houthis before.
They’ve sent, you know, Saudi missiles and Saudi aircraft into the area with little to no success, you know, against the Houthis over the last who knows how many years. But in this case over here, the Saudis are seeing no good options, James.
[James M. Dorsey] The conquest expands the Houthis’ control over Bab al-Mandab, a key shipping route and the gateway to and from the Red Sea, and puts additional pressure on global energy prices. The Houthis captured both the city of Mukha and the port. After days of ground battles with Saudi-backed Yemeni government-aligned troops.
The seizure of the port by the Iranian-backed rebels is also a win for Iran in its broader battle with the United States over maritime routes in the region. If the Houthis manage to gain full control over the Bab al-Mandab, that would land Iran and its allies control of both the Arabian Peninsula’s key waterways. The conquest of Mukha also inhibits Saudi Arabia’s ability to provide material support to the government troops.
As a result, the Houthi advances push Yemen closer to the brink of all-out war and leave Saudi Arabia with no good options. Saudi Arabia has to respond, given that the Houthis are also targeting oil infrastructure in the kingdom. Rather than putting troops on the ground, Saudi Arabia is likely to use a combination of airstrikes and conflict management to prevent hostilities from spinning out of control.
At the same time, the Yemeni escalation is likely to constitute the first litmus test for the newly formed Saudi-Turkish-Pakistani defence pact that defines an attack on one as an attack on all. Turkey and Pakistan have so far limited themselves to condemnations of the Houthi attacks.
@James M. Dorsey From The Turbulent World With James M. Dorsey
