US Midterm elections could determine US foreign policies in Middle East

1 / 4
2 / 4
Democratic US congressional candidate Rashida Tlaib (C) attends a midterm campaign rally with Democratic nominee for Governor Gretchen Whitmer (L) and US Congresswoman Brenda Lawrence in Detroit, Michigan, US November 4, 2018. (REUTERS)
3 / 4
Democratic congressional candidate the Midterm elections, Ilhan Omar, speaks to a group of supporters at University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on November 2, 2018. (AFP)
4 / 4
Palestinian-American Rashida Tlaib is running unopposed in the Detroit area.
Updated 06 November 2018
Follow

US Midterm elections could determine US foreign policies in Middle East

  • Republican losses could affect foreign policy, particularly towards Iran
  • Democrats will likely see the first Muslim women elected in the House

DUBAI: Regional observers will watch the midterm elections in the US on Tuesday with added interest because of two separate, but pivotal, issues: Republican losses could alter the country’s hard-line foreign policy, especially toward Iran, while two Democratic candidates are expected to make history as the first female Muslims elected to Congress.
The midterm elections mark two years since Donald Trump took power, the midpoint in the US president’s four-year term. Republicans currently control the House of Representatives and the Senate, the two chambers that make up the US Congress.
“The question is, of course, how well the Democrats do, if they succeed in taking the House and less likely the Senate,” said Dr. Charles Freilich, a senior fellow at the Belfer Center of the Harvard Kennedy School and adjunct associate professor of political science at the Middle East Institute at Columbia University in New York.
“If the Republicans do well, this will merely reinforce the hard-line foreign policy, especially toward Iran. If the Democrats do well, they will push for a somewhat more moderate approach toward Iran, though the nuclear deal has already been abrogated.
“Another question is whether Trump intends to try to push his peace plan forward, in which case he will also have to provide the Palestinians with some inducements to get them to re-engage, whether bilateral US-Palestinian, or pressure on Israel, to change some of its policies,” Freilich said. “Midterm elections tend to have a limited impact on policy, unless there is a dramatic change.”
Some are predicting that the Democrats could gain control of the House of Representatives, while Republicans will retain control of the Senate. Among the Democrats in the House, it is expected there will be two Muslim-American newcomers: Palestinian-American Rashida Tlaib, who is running unopposed in her Detroit-area riding; and Somali-American Ilhan Omar, a former refugee who won the Democratic primary in her Minnesota district.
“These women being elected could be the start of a trend,” said Mark Katz, professor of government and politics at the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University. “There are places in the US where there are significant Muslim-American populations and they’re voting. I have a feeling these won’t be the only two women that, in future, we’ll see more of.”
Katz said that US support for Israel has been partly a function of domestic politics, but there are growing constituencies that favor the Palestinian side. “I don’t see the US ever turning against Israel, but what I do see — and I think many in Israel fear, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — is that the changes in US demographics are going to mean that it won’t be unconditional American support, and that is already one big step.”
The women are viewed as being able to raise Palestinian and Muslim issues to a high level. “No more will pro-Israeli representatives and Islamophobes have the House floor to themselves,” said Dr. Albadr Alshateri, politics professor at the National Defense College in Abu Dhabi. “Both women are fighters, and very fierce at that.”
However, beyond the halls of Congress, he said, the newly minted representatives will have little impact. “Freshman congresspersons are not known to carry huge sway in legislation. They tend to feel their way in the contours of power. Seniority is very important, and the new members have to find mentors to guide and support them.”
In this midterm election, there are 435 seats available in the House of Representatives and 35 Senate seats up for election, including two special elections in Minnesota and Mississippi. In these elections, the incumbent president is on the ballot as much as the individual candidate.
“Trump is a controversial figure, and maybe a radioactive one in these elections,” Alshateri said. “It looks like the Democrats have a very good chance to capture the House of the Representatives. All the same, the Senate map election looks like an uphill battle. The Democrats have to defend almost twice the number of seats in the Senate as the Republicans, and the Democrats need to keep their seats and pick up only two Senate seats to win back the upper house, but it is not going to be smooth sailing.”
Should the expectation hold on Tuesday, he said, we can expect a divided government in a highly polarized society.
“I do not expect much to be done in terms of new legislation,” he said. “The new Congress starting in January 2019 will start investigating Trump for a motley of legal violations, and he will be a lame duck president until the 2020 presidential elections. In that case, Trump will be fighting for his political life and will have precious little time for dueling with the Iranian ayatollahs or searching for an Israeli-Palestinian peace.”


Trump weighs Iran strikes to inspire renewed protests, sources say

Updated 58 min 41 sec ago
Follow

Trump weighs Iran strikes to inspire renewed protests, sources say

  • Trump’s options include targeting leaders and security forces, US sources say
  • Iran prepares for military confrontation, seeks diplomatic channels, Iranian official says

DUBAI: US President Donald Trump is weighing options against Iran that include targeted strikes on security forces and leaders to inspire protesters, multiple sources said, even as Israeli and Arab officials said air power alone would not topple the clerical rulers. Two US sources familiar with the discussions said Trump wanted to create conditions for “regime change” after a crackdown crushed a nationwide protest movement earlier this month, killing thousands of people.
To do so, he was looking at options to hit commanders and institutions Washington holds responsible for the violence, to give protesters the confidence that they could overrun government and security buildings, they said.
One of the US sources said the options being discussed by Trump’s aides also included a much larger strike intended to have lasting impact, possibly against the ballistic missiles that can reach US allies in the Middle East or its nuclear enrichment programs.
The other US source said Trump has not yet made a final decision on a course of action including whether to take the military path. The arrival of a US aircraft carrier and supporting warships in the Middle East this week has expanded Trump’s capabilities to potentially take military action, after he repeatedly threatened intervention over Iran’s crackdown.
Four Arab officials, three Western diplomats and a senior Western source whose governments were briefed on the discussions said they were concerned that instead of bringing people onto the streets, such strikes could weaken a movement already in shock after the bloodiest repression by authorities since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
Alex Vatanka, director of the Iran Program at the Middle East Institute, said that without large-scale military defections Iran’s protests remained “heroic but outgunned.”
The sources in this story requested anonymity to talk about sensitive matters. Iran’s foreign office, the US Department of Defense and the White House did not respond to requests for comment. The Israeli Prime Minister’s office declined to comment. Trump urged Iran on Wednesday to ⁠come to the table and make a deal on nuclear weapons, warning that any future US attack would be more severe than a June bombing campaign against three nuclear sites. He described the ships in the region as an “armada” sailing to Iran.
A senior Iranian official said that Iran was “preparing itself for a military confrontation, while at the same time making use of diplomatic channels.” However, Washington was not showing openness to diplomacy, the official said.
Iran, which says its nuclear program is civilian, was ready for dialogue “based on mutual respect and interests” but would defend itself “like never before” if pushed, Iran’s mission to the United Nations said in a post on X on Wednesday.
Trump has not publicly detailed what he is looking for in any deal. His administration’s previous negotiating points have included banning Iran from independently enriching uranium and restrictions on long-range ballistic missiles and on Tehran’s network of armed proxies in the Middle East.
Limits of air power
A senior Israeli official with direct knowledge of planning between Israel and the United States said Israel does not believe airstrikes alone can topple the Islamic Republic, if that is Washington’s goal.
“If you’re going to topple the regime, you ⁠have to put boots on the ground,” he said, noting that even if the United States killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran would “have a new leader that will replace him.”
Only a combination of external pressure and an organized domestic opposition could shift Iran’s political trajectory, the official said.
The Israeli official said Iran’s leadership had been weakened by the unrest but remained firmly in control despite the ongoing deep economic crisis that sparked the protests. Multiple US intelligence reports reached a similar conclusion, that the conditions that led to the protests were still in place, weakening the government, but without major fractures, two people familiar with the matter said.
The Western source said they believed Trump’s goal appeared to be to engineer a change in leadership, rather than “topple the regime,” an outcome that would be similar to Venezuela, where US intervention replaced the president without a wholesale change of government.
Khamenei has publicly acknowledged several thousand deaths during the protests. He blamed the unrest on the United States, Israel and what he called “seditionists.”
US-based rights group HRANA has put the unrest-related death toll at 5,937, including 214 security personnel, while official figures put the death toll at 3,117. Reuters has been unable to independently verify the numbers.
Khamenei retains control but less visible
At 86, Khamenei has retreated from daily governance, reduced public appearances and is believed to be residing in secure locations after Israeli strikes last year decimated many of Iran’s senior military leaders, regional officials said.
Day-to-day management has shifted to figures aligned with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), including senior adviser Ali Larijani, they said. The powerful Guards dominate Iran’s security network and big parts of the economy. However, Khamenei retains final authority over war, succession and nuclear strategy — meaning political change is very difficult until he exits the scene, they said. Iran’s foreign ministry did not respond ⁠to questions about Khamenei.
In Washington and Jerusalem, some officials have argued that a transition in Iran could break the nuclear deadlock and eventually open the door to more cooperative ties with the West, two of the Western diplomats said.
But, they cautioned, there is no clear successor to Khamenei. In that vacuum, the Arab officials and diplomats said they believe the IRGC could take over, entrenching hardline rule, deepening the nuclear standoff and regional tensions.
Any successor seen as emerging under foreign pressure would be rejected and could strengthen, not weaken the IRGC, the official said.
Across the region, from the Gulf to Turkiye, officials say they favor containment over collapse — not out of sympathy for Tehran, but out of fear that turmoil inside a nation of 90 million, riven by sectarian and ethnic fault lines, could unleash instability far beyond Iran’s borders.
A fractured Iran could spiral into civil war as happened after the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, two of the Western diplomats warned, unleashing an influx of refugees, fueling Islamist militancy and disrupting oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz, a global energy chokepoint.
The gravest risk, analyst Vatanka warned, is fragmentation into “early-stage Syria,” with rival units and provinces fighting for territory and resources.
Regional blowback
Gulf states — long-time US allies and hosts to major American bases – fear they would be the first targets for Iranian retaliation that could include Iranian missiles or drone attacks from the Tehran-aligned Houthis in Yemen. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman and Egypt have lobbied Washington against a strike on Iran. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has told Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian that Riyadh will not allow its airspace or territory to be used for military actions against Tehran.
“The United States may pull the trigger,” one of the Arab sources said, “but it will not live with the consequences. We will.”
Mohannad Hajj-Ali of the Carnegie Middle East Center said the US deployments suggest planning has shifted from a single strike to something more sustained, driven by a belief in Washington and Jerusalem that Iran could rebuild its missile capabilities and eventually weaponize its enriched uranium.
The most likely outcome is a “grinding erosion — elite defections, economic paralysis, contested succession — that frays the system until it snaps,” analyst Vatanka said.