[ad_1]
Relations between states are not based on questions of love and hate, but on the calculation of interests. At the center of the public interest in politics is stability. Therefore, the more stable and influential the world powers are in the situation, the easier it will be for them to negotiate or organize disagreements with them. This fact applies to equations, regional conflicts and internal conflicts.
In this context, nothing in politics is worse than chaos. And I think that any country in the world, whatever the directions of its government, finds it easier to adapt to clear policies, even if they are imperfect, than it can in the face of a vacuum or confusion that it is impossible to produce sober approaches that allow interested governments build meaningful approaches.
From here, whatever the observer’s position on the United States as a superpower, as a state and political institutions, it is in the interests of the countries of the world to remain stable. I affirm that despite the sharp political divide confirmed by the recent US elections, there are mechanisms, laws, regulations, and higher interest networks within the United States … that are sufficient to curb the current divisive crime.
In fact, before the official announcement of the electoral results, the countries of the world, especially the main western democracies, took the initiative to congratulate the president-elect, recognizing the validity of the elections on the one hand and their trust in the American political system on the one hand. the other. In fact, even China, America’s biggest rival today on the international stage, preferred not to wait long before sending the congratulations. So what caught your eye was the delay in the Russian congratulations, and here is the “bottom line”.
There is no need for the 2016 elections, and the charges brought against Moscow of cyber interference and hacking which required the establishment of a special investigative committee (2017-2019) headed by judicial authority Robert Mueller. As we know, the commission came out with a lengthy report full of techniques, concluding that it was not possible to obtain conclusive evidence of the systematic and deliberate Russian interference that affected the election results. We also know that for some time now, a number of democratic politicians in Washington, as well as European politicians, have accused the Russian leadership of trying to influence Western domestic politics, manipulate their elections, and support fringe nationalist and isolationist groups within Western countries. to sow chaos in them causing actions and reactions. One of the forces of extremism, right and left.
In fact, Moscow achieved important tactical victories globally despite its severe economic crises, taking advantage of the withdrawal of its Western competitors and its concern about its internal problems. At the top of these problems are the immigration crises, racism and terrorism, “Brexit”, the interruption of European cooperation, the diversion of the classic “hostility” of Washington from Moscow towards China, the adoption of a policy economic and economic protectionist that is hasty and has strained its close relations across the Atlantic.
Then, the “Covid-19” pandemic came to reinforce this trend since the beginning of 2020 in Washington, when President Donald Trump described the virus as a “Chinese virus” on the pretext of its discovery in the Chinese city of Wuhan and the authorities from Beijing hid it. Then, the president of the United States took advantage of the confusion of the World Health Organization about the speed of spread of the pandemic to go further in his isolationist policies against the UN institutions, cutting off Washington’s relations with “the organization under the pretext of its deficiencies and its collusion with China. “
This is with respect to Russian-American calculations within the United States, and whether Moscow deliberately sowed chaos and turmoil within American society and hit its unity and political institutions. However, the second part of Moscow’s interests benefited and continues to benefit as much as possible from Washington’s withdrawal or absence from certain strategic areas. Among these regions, the Middle East and North Africa.
Arabs, of course, tell people about how the previous Democratic administration of Barack Obama dealt with the problems of the Middle East. They are fully aware that had it not been for the disastrous way in which the Obama administration handled the Iranian dossier, the Arab region would not have reached the dire situation it is in today. As a reminder, that administration committed three fatal approaches before the “Arab Spring” in early 2011:
First, tacit approval, then public approval, and then the “push”, to bring down regimes loyal to them and hostile to the so-called forces of “political Islam” without guaranteeing an alternative with which Washington really wants to coexist. Rather, “Washington Obama” took advantage of the excesses of extremist fractures emerging from the traditional cloak of “political Islam” as a pretext to justify his subsequent alliance with the rulers of Iran on the pretext that “his Islam is not suicide. “.
Second, during the “Arab Spring” uprisings, the Obama administration tried to sideline the role of pro-Arab regimes when it kept its nuclear negotiations with Iran secret, even from its closest Arab allies, despite the fact that Tehran’s expansionist ambitions concern it and threaten the interests of its people.
Third, the Obama administration focused its negotiations with the Iranians solely on the technical aspect of the nuclear file, ignoring its geopolitical dimensions. Thus, the negotiations became an “understanding” that allows Tehran to achieve its regional political objectives thanks to its traditional “arsenal” without the need, at this stage, to deploy its nuclear muscles. Since then, we have been hearing provocative and repeated statements of the type: “Today we control 4 Arab capitals.”
These approaches shaped the tragic scene in Syria and strengthened Iran’s influence in Lebanon, Yemen, and much of Iraq. That is why a large part of Arab public opinion supported Donald Trump when he took office in 2016, and some of it is still with him, especially after his withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal … and this despite the complete identification of the Trump administration with Likud policies in Israel.
Now the scene is different and needs discreet treatments. Four years have passed since the Arab region and much has changed in it, despite the fact that names are circulating nominated to enter the administration of President-elect Joe Biden that are not trusted by Arabs, because they have been affiliated with the “lobby of Tehran “.
On the other hand, political and diplomatic lines of communication exist and must be exploited, and dialogue with democratic leaders is less dogmatic than Obama and more willing to realize the dangerous strategic implications of betting on a “theocratic militia” system. that sponsors sectarian violence and counter-sectarian violence.
Dialogue is always necessary. Rather, in the case of Washington, it is necessary, especially after having seen who benefits from its regional absence.
Source: “Middle East”
