Context

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev visited Syria and Turkey last week with a bevy of discussion topics on the agenda. From Iran to the Middle East Peace Process, Moscow is signaling to the Middle East, and the region at large, that it is serious about taking a leading role in the future of the region.

This Vantage Point Analysis takes a closer at the changing balance of power in Middle East and how the Russians envision their role in the region. This article also provides clues to understanding potential Russian engagement in other regions, for example the Af-Pak Theater.

Analysis

Syria played host to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev for the May 10, two day visit. While Russia and Syria were previously close allies and formed a very important partnership in the region, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and a period of retrenchment for both countries during the ’90s, the relationship diminished somewhat. In recent years the bilateral relationship has been regaining some of its polish, with the visit by Medvedev an important signal that the two countries are well on the way to a new, firm strategic partnership.

The visit comes just days after the US renewed its sanctions regime against Syria because of Syria’s alleged “continuing support for terrorist organizations and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and missile programs,[which]continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy and economy of the United States.” US President Obama said on the May 3 in a press conference about the sanctions.

The US and Israel are concerned that the Russian high-level visit is sending a tacit signal of approval to Syria, who will feel emboldened by the Russian show of support in the face of the recent sanctions. Israel is especially concerned about the Russian visit, and keen to know if there will be any more arms deals between the two countries. Israel has previously accused the Syrians of passing on weapons acquired in Russian arms deals to Hezbollah in Lebanon, a claim which Syria denies. This will likely dampen the possibility of renewed armament deals, especially as Israel has also accused Syria of intending to pass on weapons to Iran as well.

Russian sentiment during the visit is overwhelmingly that Russia is ‘a friend to all’. Medvedev met with exiled Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal during his visit, and at the same time promised to ‘send a message’ from Israel to Syrian President Bashar Al Assad to try and ease the tensions between the two states: whether he actually did or not is still unclear.

The Russian visit is also a signal that Russia is looking to boost its status as a moderator and mediator in the region, with Medvedev stating his concern that “Tensions in the Middle East threaten to lead to a new explosion or even a catastrophe.” Russia is perhaps trying to show itself as the ‘unbiased’ mediator, in contrast to the perceived Israel-bias of the US when it comes to the Middle East Peace Process.

The Russian President continued his overseas tour with a trip to Turkey, where business was on the agenda. Medvedev stated that “We can confidently say that Russian-Turkish relations have advanced to the level of a multidimensional strategic partnership,” which was actualized by the signing of a visa-free agreement between citizens of the two countries. The 2 million+ Russians who visit Turkey every year as tourists will be very pleased with that particular dimension of the multidimensional partnership.

Russia and Turkey share a mutual vision to some extent as far as their roles in the Middle East are concerned, with Turkey renewing overtures to moderate peace talks between Israel and Syria. The feeling is that Turkish-Russian relations are much more mutually beneficial, and less benefactor/beneficiary than those of Russia and Syria, despite how Syria would protest this statement.

Energy played a key role in the Turkish and Russian talks, with the proposed Blue Stream-2 and South Stream gas pipelines discussed, as well as the possibility of a Russian-built nuclear power plant on Turkish soil.

It is overwhelmingly clear that Russia is positioning herself as the ‘Great Friend’ in the Middle East neighborhood. Russia is doing a good job of being friends with everybody, even those who have unbridled antagonism towards one another, like Israel and Syria-how long Russia can continue pull this off is yet to be seen.

Russian statements also make it clear that Syria is considered a pivotal country in the success of the Middle East Peace Process. Russia’s playing down of weapons deals, and the keen interest in joint economic activity may be a ploy to pry Syria open economically, into the open-market economics that Russia has embraced. Economic openness is often a precursor to political openness and moderation, but then again, Russia is not overly concerned with the types of polities it does business with, so long as business is beneficial.

The relationship of both Syria and Russia with Iran was also under scrutiny during the visit. Many thought that Syria’s Assad would use the visit to try and convince Medvedev to block the planned fourth round of Iranian sanctions in the Security Council: sanctions which Russia as it is seems reluctant to endorse. This is perhaps due to the fact that a Russian-built nuclear power plant in Bushehr in Iran is set to be completed this year. While the power plant was endorsed by the US because it would mitigate the need for Iran to continue with uranium enrichment programs, this has not been the case in reality, so the sanctions are being tightened.

As Russia seems to want to take a leading role in the neighborhood of the Middle East, it is also positioning for a role in the Af-Pak region.

Russia and Pakistan have a rollercoaster relationship, with relations at their sourest during the Soviet war in Afghanistan, and the cozy bond that existed between India and the Soviet Union at this time. Irked by the American criticism, Karzai has recently made a number of overtures towards the Russians, a scene reminding the players of the cold war days. India also stands disillusioned by the new US Af-Pak strategy, which has caused it to strive for closer Indo-Russian ties once again.

Russia and Pakistan seem to skirt around their possibly strong bilateral relationships-on Pakistan’s end, perhaps this is in fear of upsetting allies in Washington. On Russia’s end perhaps they are biding their time until the US withdraws from Afghanistan. Then they can have free reign to play the ‘Great Friend’ and benefactor role in this region, as it is showing overtures to want to play in the Middle East. Russia, like China, has shown a keen interest in Iran-Pakistan Gas Pipeline Project.

Soon after Medvedev’s visit to the region came the joint declaration yesterday by Iran, Turkey and Brazil on the signing of the Nuclear Swap Agreement. This development has caught everyone by surprise. PoliTact will be examining the ramifications of this development.

Tell Us What You Think
Feedback@politact.com

The post Russian Role in Middle East and South Asia appeared first on Politact.

Context

APEC and ASEAN are the two main bodies facilitating cooperation between nations of the Asia Pacific region. This article seeks to stipulate the main differences in the two organizations and also to analyze the cause of rising tensions over the future of APEC and how major stakeholders are seeking to influence its evolution. Pakistan’s outlook in the region will be looked at in the context of PoliTact’s previous article on India’s Looks East Policy.

Analysis

APEC

APEC is the Asia Pacific Economic Community, established in 1989 to help facilitate the growth and community of ‘member economies’. There are 21 member economies (countries) today, with the original 12 countries consisting of the US, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Japan, Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Thailand, the Philippines and the Republic of Korea. Since then, Chile, Peru, Mexico, China, Russia, Vietnam, Hong Kong, Papua New Guinea and Chinese Tai Pei have joined.

APEC’s basic goals are to work towards tariff reduction and reduction of other trade barriers between member economies in order to promote efficiency in domestic markets, and to increase exports of member economies. Less enthusiastically, APEC is also concerned with the free movement of people between member economies-however this is a bone of contention within the organization, given that it has such wealth disparities present between member economies.

Member economies of APEC account for over 50% of world GDP, and over 40% of the world’s population.

ASEAN

ASEAN is the Association of South East Asian Nations, created in 1967 with a much narrower charter than APEC, and only five founding members: Thailand, Indonesia, Singapore and the Philippines. Today there are 10 members of ASEAN, with Brunei, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and Myanmar joining at various stages between 1984 and 1999.

ASEAN is much more focused on regional stability and community with initiatives involving education, cultural exchanges, research and technological advancement. Economic interests are of course a part of ASEAN; however they are far less articulated than in APEC.

In 1997 ASEAN + 3 was formed, including the regional powerhouses of China, Japan and the Republic of Korea into the ASEAN fold. The +3 members are not considered full ASEAN members, but partake in similar activities as between the ASEAN members themselves. On top of the ASEAN+3 members, ASEAN as a regional body has dealings with other non-member states in the Asia Pacific region, these include the US, Russia, Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand and Pakistan. Inter-organizational relationships are also present between ASEAN and the EU and UNDP.

ASEAN and APEC both figure prominently in the region, however APEC is marked for being the organization which can, if any can, bring an Asia Pacific community into being. While comparisons with the EU are inevitable, they can never be more than passing comparisons because of the vastly different historical, cultural and economic make-ups of the two organizations. APEC is unique in that it seeks to make community where little common history and culture exists-the nations of Chile and Japan will never share the same kind of bond that countries of the EU share, simply because they have not be forged in a common historical furnace. APEC has found commonality in its member countries via economics.

The future of APEC is widely contended, even between member economies. For China, the current, non-binding and voluntary nature of the organization is perfectly suitable for its needs, and China has expressed a desire that the ‘APEC Approach’ continue in its current course. The benefits China has derived from being a member of APEC are manifold, and include the development of over 14 bilateral FTAs since becoming a member. Japan on the other hand, partly because of the Chinese economic domination in the region is pushing for a more institutionalized and enforceable set of governing principles for the organization. Prime Minister Hatoyama of Japan has expressly stated the APEC as an institutionalized regional economic body should be put ‘firmly into place’-an agenda that he will be pushing as the APEC host in 2010.

The US shares this view with Japan to a certain extent-APEC has the distinction of being the only regional economic organization of significant size the US is a member of-with 60% of the US’s export heading to APEC member economies, the US wants, nay needs APEC to become the primary regional body for the Asia Pacific, since it is excluded from the majority of other regional organizations. The US is in direct opposition to China, in that the so called ‘noodle bowl of agreements’ that has served China so well, is seen as an obstacle for US interests in the region. The US doesn’t necessarily share the vision of an all-encompassing community as hinted at by Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, or even Japan’s more integrated vision-the US desperately wants APEC to become a Free Trade Area, so that the more than 150 bilateral FTAs signed between APEC members and other regional nations (to the exclusion of the US) are subsumed under the overarching APEC Free Trade Area.

Pakistan is looking at being on the fringe of an increasingly integrated Asia Pacific-as discussed in a previous analysis of India’s Look East Policy, Pakistan is somewhat isolated from the member states of this region due to India’s industrious alliance building. That being said, China remains a friend to Pakistan, and the US is bound up in Pakistan with the ‘War on Terror’. Pakistan is in the duplicitous position of being comparatively smaller importance economically, but being of central importance to regional security and even global security matters.

India has been denied membership to APEC, despite support for inclusion by the US, Japan and Australia-a primary reason being that it does not border the Pacific-a founding logic of the organization. Its hopes are better places within ASEAN, but both Indian scenarios paint a dim picture for Pakistan with the future of either organization. China’s vision of APEC is the one that will be most in Pakistan’s favor, as any solidifying of regional community will most likely be to the exclusion and detriment of Pakistani interests in the region.

Tell Us What You Think
Feedback@politact.com

The post APEC and ASEAN – Competing or Complimentary Organizations appeared first on Politact.

Director for USAID Egypt Jim Bever on Thursday flew back to Washington after less than 12 months on the job amid a dispute between the two allies over America’s financial support for pro-democracy parties. The departure comes just one day after Egypt’s leaders were rebuked by the Obama administration for stoking anti-US emotions during the country’s shaky transition to democracy. A statement from the US Embassy said Bever would be “returning to Washington to take on new responsibilities and prepare for his next deployment” but didn’t tell why his trip was cut short.

The post Director For USAID Egypt Quits Amid Funding Row appeared first on Politact.

The US says Al-Qaida has become weaker in Pakistan but is still capable of carrying out transnational terrorist assaults, with the help of allied militant organizations. In its yearly report on global terrorism published Thursday, the State Department identified improved resource-sharing between Al-Qaida and Afghanistan and Pakistan-based militants, including the Haqqani network and Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan. The report is for 2010, prior to the death of Al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. It reported over 11,500 terror assaults in 72 nations during 2010, leading to over 13,200 deaths.

The post US Report: Al-Qaida Weaker In Pakistan appeared first on Politact.

US President Obama led demands by Western countries for Syrian President Bashar Assad to step down, ending months of prevarication. In a statement issued on Thursday, Obama blamed Assad for “ferocious brutality” and announced fresh sanctions against the Syrian regime, including an asset freeze and a ban on business transactions by American citizens. In an apparently coordinated move to maximize diplomatic pressure, British Prime Minister David Cameron, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel issued simultaneous statements calling Assad to step down “in the best interests of Syria and the unity of its people”. An EU statement made a similar demand and said fresh sanctions were being prepared. However, Russia has demanded Syria be given more time to put reforms in place.

The post Obama Leads Western Demands For Assad’s Departure appeared first on Politact.

US Vice President Joe Biden is in China for talks expected to concentrate on the economy following the downgrade of US debt. Beijing is the largest foreign creditor to the US government, holding $1tn of debt, and has urged Washington to cut its budget deficit.

Officials said Biden would explain to China the finer aspects of a “very strong deficit reduction package” approved by Congress. He would also discuss “tremendous mutual interest” in international economic recovery.

The post Joe Biden In China For Financial Talks appeared first on Politact.

US Senator John McCain on Tuesday held a meeting “on various important issues” with Jammu and Kashmir Governor N.N. Vohra in Srinagar. A statement issued from the Indian government said that the chief of Indian army’s northern division, of which the Muslim-majority Kashmir is a vital part, and the army chief of Kashmir also attended the discussion. McCain later held a separate meeting with Chief Minister of Kashmir Omar Abdullah. Details of these consultations weren’t disclosed to the media.

The meetings could be meant to pressure Pakistan and extract more cooperation from the country in the war against terror. These contacts have taken place in the backdrop of the arrest of prominent Kashmir activist Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai in Washington DC. Dr. Fai was arrested on charges that he was operating under the instructions of Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) of Pakistan.

The post John McCain Holds Meetings With Officials Of Indian-Administered Kashmir appeared first on Politact.

US President Barack Obama on Tuesday said that the possibility of a “lone wolf” terrorist strike in America is greater than a coordinated assault such as the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Obama said his government continued to monitor and collect information regarding potential terrorist plots although Al-Qaeda’s strength has been degraded. The president’s remarks came during a television interview at a time when the Americans are preparing to mark the tenth anniversary of hijacked airplanes crashing in Washington, New York and the Pennsylvania countryside.

The post Obama: ‘Lone Wolf’ Terrorist Attack Biggest Worry For US appeared first on Politact.

The Obama administration on Tuesday declared a key militant leader in southeastern Afghanistan a terrorist, barring US nationals from making business deals with him and freezing any of his assets in America. According to the State Department, Mullah Sangeen Zadran is a commander of the Haqqani network and the shadow governor of the Afghan province of Paktika. The UN has also designated Zadran a terrorist, meaning he would be subject to asset freeze, arms embargo and international travel ban. The Haqqani network, which operates in the Pak-Afghan border area, has contacts with both the Taliban and Al-Qaeda and is said to be a major threat to peace in Afghanistan.

The post US Declares Commander Of Haqqani Network A Terrorist appeared first on Politact.

World Bank President Robert Zoellick has cautioned that markets have been pushed towards a new danger zone which policymakers need to take seriously. In his speech at the Asia Society’s annual dinner in Sydney on Monday, Zoellick said, “A convergence of some events in Europe and the United States has led many market participants to lose confidence in economic leadership of some of the key countries.” His remarks followed a tumultuous week on global markets prompted by fears over the fragile US economy and European debt crisis.

The post World Bank President Warns Of Future Dangers appeared first on Politact.