Poll: Arabs support Trump on Iran, but not on Jerusalem embassy move

The survey showed opinion in the Arab world overall is divided on the regional impact of the killing of Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani. AFP WASHINGTON, DC - September 29: President Trump, en route to Cleveland for the first televised debate with opponent Joe Biden, gestures to reporters as he departs the White House, in Washington, DC on September 29. (Photo by Bill O’Leary/The Washington Post via Getty Images)
Short Url
Updated 30 December 2020
Follow

Poll: Arabs support Trump on Iran, but not on Jerusalem embassy move

  • Arab News/YouGov pan-Arab survey finds Trump much better known in the Arab region than rival Biden
  • Analysts say praises for Trump’s strong Iran stance drowned out by backlash against Jerusalem embassy move

BEIRUT: Regardless of the outcome of the Nov. 3 presidential election, US President Donald Trump does not have to worry about one thing: being accused of leaving the Middle East in a worse condition than he inherited it. Judging by the Arab News/YouGov pan-Arab survey’s findings, that dubious honor goes to his predecessor, Barak Obama, whose vice president Joe Biden is now Trump’s main challenger.
In a nutshell, the study shows that Arabs broadly support Trump’s iron-fist approach towards the Iranian regime, although they oppose his decision in 2018 to transfer the US embassy in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. And even though he is seen as not better for the Arab region than his Democratic opponent, far more respondents were aware of him than Biden. Some of his policies were also viewed favorably in specific parts of the Arab world.


While gone are the days when a White House occupant could run for a second term on their foreign-policy achievements, there is no denying that the US remains a global power whose decisions affect the lives of people from Central America to the Middle East. As such, the importance of understanding what the Arab world is anticipating from a future US administration cannot be overstated.
Covered extensively by the Arab news media, the first big news story of 2020 was the elimination of Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani, head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ (IRGC) extraterritorial Quds Force. Soleimani was on his way to meet the Iraqi prime minister when he was killed in a US drone strike near Baghdad airport on Jan. 3.
According to the survey, opinion in the Arab world overall is divided on the regional impact of the killing.
Respondents in Yemen were very supportive of the action, with 71 percent approving it as a positive move, as were many residents of Saudi Arabia (68 percent) and Iraqi (57 percent). In contrast, some 59 percent of respondents in Lebanon and 62 percent in Qatar said it was a negative move for the region.

“The poll accurately assesses the interests of Arab states,” said Dr. John Hulsman, president and managing partner of John C. Hulsman Enterprises, a prominent global political risk consultancy.
“For people who knew Soleimani in Iraq, he was part of the problem … as a satrap (viceroy) of Iran. They are delighted in Iraq now they have a vaguely reformist prime minister who is vaguely tolerated by Iran and the US. And that couldn’t have happened with Soleimani there.”

On the other hand, Hulsman said, “If you live somewhere where there is an American base in the region (such as Qatar), then Soleimani’s killing might mean that you are next, because no one thinks the Iranians are going to forget that Soleimani died.”

Under the circumstances, why did 40 percent of the Arab News/YouGov survey’s respondents say Biden would be better for the Middle East, as opposed to the 12 percent who said the same thing about Trump?
For one thing, analysts point out, an even larger number, 49 percent, felt neither candidate would be better for the region.
For another thing, they note that just a little more than half of the respondents (53 percent) said they were aware of Biden compared to a massive 90 percent who were aware of Trump. Besides, they say, the points scored by Trump by taking a hard line on the Iranian problem are outweighed by the consequences of the Jerusalem embassy transfer decision, which was opposed by 89 percent of the respondents.


READ: The methodology behind the Arab News/YouGov Pan-Arab Survey


According to David Romano, Thomas G. Strong professor of Middle East Politics at Missouri State University, Iran remains the key issue in understanding the Arab world’s bad aftertaste from the Obama administration. “When it comes to the Arab states, Biden is a lot like Obama,” he told Arab News. “They are not sure if he’s the kind of president who will throw them under the bus like many feel Obama did to (former Egyptian President) Hosni Mubarak.”
Trump, by comparison, might represent stability for the Middle East. “Trump has come through on his word. He sent more troops to Saudi Arabia and he’s been harder on Iran,” Romano said.

Presumably, by the same token, about one fifth of GCC residents believe Trump’s withdrawal from the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), better known as the Iran nuclear deal, has boosted safety in the region (led particularly by 49 percent of Saudi nationals).

Furthermore, residents of countries intimately tied without a choice to Iran said they want a combative stance from the next US president, including toughened sanctions and a war posture. These included: Iraq (53 percent), Yemen (54 percent) and Saudi Arabia (49 percent).
“The Trump team came in and decided that Obama’s efforts, particularly with the JCPOA, were a disaster because it bankrolled a whole list of people who want America out of the region and who don’t want stability in the region. They want to dominate the region,” Hulsman said.

The fear among many is that Biden may abandon Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign on Iran. “From the point of view of the Middle East, this is one of those moments that looks like whiplash. If you are living in the region, this is zig-zag diplomacy,” Hulsman said.
It is not just analysts who are deeply skeptical about Biden’s stance on Iran, fearing a return to the perceived weak-kneed and irresolute approach of Obama.
Agop K, a Lebanese-Armenian-American attorney who lives in Beirut but practices law in the US, said “we need an iron fist here in the Middle East, unfortunately. And Trump represents that.”
Speaking to Arab News, he said: “As long as the pressure is on Iran and Iran is being sanctioned and cut off from financing, this is what might help us down the line in Lebanon. If I wanted to vote for Trump, this is one of the biggest reasons I would do so.”

Twitter: @rebeccaaproctor


MPs, parties welcome Lebanon’s decision to ban Hezbollah’s military wing

Updated 8 sec ago
Follow

MPs, parties welcome Lebanon’s decision to ban Hezbollah’s military wing

  • Lebanese judiciary issues arrest warrants to pursue those who fired rockets at Haifa
  • Bilal Al-Houshaymi: It (Lebanon) is either a fully sovereign state with a single decision-making authority, or it will continue its downward slide into greater danger and collapse

BEIRUT: Lebanon’s Cabinet decisions were described by political parties and parliamentarians as the boldest measures taken against Hezbollah to date, with ministers from the Amal Movement, the group’s key ally, joining in a show of government solidarity.

In an unprecedented move, Lebanon’s Cabinet on Monday declared Hezbollah’s military activities illegal and demanded the immediate handover of its weapons, following Israeli strikes that killed more than 40 people and wounded dozens across Beirut’s southern suburbs, southern Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley.

The Israeli strikes came after rockets and drones were fired from Lebanese territory toward northern Israel — an assault Hezbollah said was carried out in retaliation for the killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Among those killed were several Hezbollah officials.

Independent MP Ibrahim Mneimneh affirmed his support for the government’s decisions “at this sensitive stage” as he said they consolidate the sovereignty of the state and the confinement of security and military decision-making to its legitimate institutions.

“The protection of Lebanon requires the firm application of the law, without making any exceptions, and providing support for the army and security forces in carrying out their duties in order to safeguard stability and civil peace,” he added.

Beqaa MP Bilal Al-Houshaymi said Lebanon cannot withstand new experiments or further adventures. “It is either a fully sovereign state with a single decision-making authority, or it will continue its downward slide into greater danger and collapse.”

Lebanese Forces party leader Samir Geagea said in a statement that the cabinet had taken an additional step toward the establishment of a functioning state.

“The ball is now in the court of the Lebanese Armed Forces, the Internal Security Forces, General Security, State Security and the competent judicial authorities. It is their chance to begin implementing the government’s decision seriously and decisively as of this moment,” he added.

The party’s two ministers remained alone in their defense of what they called the “resistance.” This stance was articulated by Health Minister Rakan Nassereddine, whom Hezbollah named to represent it in the government, as he said after the session that “no one holds their resistance accountable as we have held ours accountable.” He questioned whether “the Israelis can be trusted.”

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun held those who launched the rockets responsible for their actions, noting that the Lebanese people should not bear responsibility “for a reckless operation.”

Aoun said Hezbollah’s morning strike was “not a defense of Lebanon nor a protection of the Lebanese; it is not acceptable in any way whatsoever, and it gives Israel a pretext to destroy what is left.”

The cabinet asked the Lebanese Army Command to immediately and firmly begin implementing the plan to restrict weapons north of the Litani River, announcing that Lebanon is ready to resume negotiations with Israel.

The cabinet decisions, read out by Prime Minister Nawaf Salam in an address, announced that the government had formally rejected any military or security operations carried out from Lebanese territory outside the authority of the state, reaffirming that the decision of war and peace rests solely with the government.

The measures include an immediate ban on all Hezbollah military and security activities deemed unlawful, a requirement that the group hand over its weapons to the state, and a restriction of its role to political activity within constitutional and legal frameworks — a step aimed at ensuring the monopoly of arms remains exclusively with the state and reinforcing full sovereignty over Lebanese territory.

Salam said that the government does not seek confrontation with Hezbollah. “But we cannot in any way accept the launching of rockets from Lebanon nor the threat of civil war.”

In parallel with the political move, the Lebanese judiciary moved to pursue those who fired rockets at Haifa from Lebanese territory. The military judiciary issued warrants to arrest all those responsible for launching rockets at the Israeli city.

Government Commissioner to the Military Court Claude Ghanem requested that the security agencies identify those who took part in directing the rockets, arrest them immediately and refer them to the military public prosecution.

A judicial source confirmed that the security agencies verified that the rocket-launching operation took place from an area of valleys and forests located north of the Litani River.

A statement bearing the signature of Hezbollah’s Military Media had been issued at dawn claiming responsibility for the operation of bombarding the Mishmar site south of the city of Haifa with a salvo of rockets and drones, as “revenge for the blood of the Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.”

While Hezbollah has not issued any official statement tallying its human losses as a result of direct Israeli strikes, Lebanese and Israeli field reports cited the assassination of Mohammad Raad, head of Hezbollah’s parliamentary bloc, who in recent months had coordinated between the state and the party on the issue of restricting weapons; Sheikh Ali Daamoush, the head of Hezbollah’s Executive Council; and Hussein Moukalled, the head of Hezbollah’s intelligence services in the southern suburb.

The reports also mentioned the killing of Mohammad Rida Fadlallah, brother of the late scholar Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah, along with his wife; and Sheikh Abdullah Shaito, a Ja‘fari Sharia judge, with his son and daughter.

Amid the strikes, citizens evacuated Beirut’s southern suburb, more than 53 southern villages and dozens of villages in the Beqaa region.

Many fled at night, remaining in their cars or along the roadsides in Beirut, amid successive warnings issued by the Israeli army urging civilians to leave their villages and homes ahead of strikes on Hezbollah targets, according to its claims.

As hotels reached full capacity, many turned to furnished apartments. Although the state opened a number of public schools to shelter the displaced, the hastily opened and prepared facilities were insufficient to accommodate tens of thousands of people.

Meanwhile, a military source suggested that the evacuation of the villages could be a prelude to a ground invasion.

Israel announced the mobilization of about 100,000 reservists along the border with Lebanon in preparation for expanding the war. Israeli army spokesperson Avichay Adraee posted on social media that “all options are on the table,” adding that “Hezbollah chose to launch this campaign, and will pay a heavy price for it.”

Israeli Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir warned of “many days of fighting ahead,” while Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said that “Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem is now a ‘target for elimination,’ and Hezbollah will pay a heavy price for launching missiles toward Israel.”