What happened?
On 15 September, the state of Israel, United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain signed a US-brokered normalization agreement. At the event, hosted by US President Donald Trump in the White House, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Bahrain’s Foreign Minister Abdullatif Al Zayani and Emirati Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan signed what is referred to as “the Abraham Accords”.
The New York Times (NYT) quoted Trump as saying, “After decades of division and conflict, we mark the dawn of a new Middle East.” According to the NYT report: “The texts of the agreements detail how the three countries will open embassies and establish other new diplomatic and economic ties, including tourism, technology and energy. Israel and the Emirates are beginning commercial air travel between their countries for the first time, and Bahrain has opened its airspace for those flights.” Meanwhile, Palestinians condemned the signing of accords as ‘a sad day’.
What does this mean?
For the Americans, it means a significant foreign policy success. Ahead of the upcoming elections, the Abraham Accords promises political mileage for Donald Trump. The latter perhaps even thinks he deserves a Nobel peace prize! It also sends a global diplomatic message that the US power in the region of the Middle East should not be doubted.
For the Palestinians, it is ‘a sad day’ indeed. The accords end the collective regional arrangement for peace – the exchange of normalization with Arab states for Palestinian statehood. The deal is a distinct departure from the traditional understanding of Arab-Israeli peace. For Israel, it means strengthening and solidifying its position in the Middle East and establishing itself as an unquestionable regional power. For Ntanyahu, it means garnering domestic political mileage to recapture complete control over Israel’s Prime Ministership.
Japan: New PM Yoshihide Suga has to address old challenges first
What happened?
On 16 September, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) members elected Yoshihide Suga as the successor of Shinzo Abe at the emergency presidential vote called by the governing LDP after beating Shigeru Ishiba and Fumio Kishida.
After taking office, Suga announced on his official Twitter handle a determination to tear down bureaucratic sectionalism, vested interests and the notorious habit of following precedents while promising to advance regulatory reforms and give birth to a cabinet that works for the people. He has highlighted that the top priority would be the management of COVID and Tokyo Olympics.
What does it mean?
Yoshihide Suga does not have the luxury of time that Shinzo Abe had with Abenomics. Quick wins over grand visions would be at the core of the new leadership. In this aspect, Suga cannot just be seen as a replacement that would not deviate from the policies of Shinzo Abe.
The new term has also ignited faction-based politics within the LDP, which would place an additional burden on the leadership to prove their abilities and prove quickly. The sense of urgency and the lack of his own power base within the party could become shortcomings of Suga; however, his record as the tough and loyal member of Shinzo Abe’s cabinet would garner him the support needed to complete his term.
TikTok: After months of uncertainty, a deal on the US horizon
What happened?
On 19 September, Trump gave his blessings to a concept deal on the use of TikToK in the US. He was quoted as saying, “I have given the deal my blessing, if they get it done that’s Ok too, if they don’t that’s fine too.” According to a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) note, President Trump agreed “in concept to a deal” under which the “Chinese-owned video-sharing app TikTok will partner with the Oracle in the US.” The New York Times quoted the President as saying, “It’ll be a brand-new company…It will have nothing to do with any outside land, any outside country.”
According to the WSJ report, it would become a US-based company, “capping negotiations that have stirred debate over national security and the future of the Internet.” The report also quoted the Chief of Oracle, “We are a hundred per cent confident in our ability to deliver a highly secure environment to TikTok and ensure data privacy to TikTok’s American users, and users throughout the world.”
Earlier, on 18 September, the US Commerce Department released a press note placing ‘prohibitions on transactions’ on ‘TikTok’ in the wake of an executive order released this August. The presidential executive order exclusively mentions the threat to ‘national security, foreign policy, and the economy of the United States,’ posed by the Chinese owned companies. It alleges ‘data collection’ by these companies and the perceived threat of the ‘Chinese Communist Party’s’ access to personal information of US users. In response to this, China has accused the US of “bullying and political manipulation”. Ironically, the Chinese foreign ministry held that the move went “against the principles of the market economy.”
What does it mean?
First, TikTok’s functional openness and operations surpassing borders are valid, but national security necessitates a healthy compromise in the wake of data privacy. Considering Beijing’s geopolitical assertiveness, the dominance of Chinese technology on a global level upholds Trump’s stance and concerns. The app’s large user base in the US, with 50 million users daily, hint at better prospects for Trump.
Second, China’s technological dominance is vital to its status quo, something it would rather build upon. Beijing could lower its tone on this issue, but its past actions indicate rarity in doing so.
Third, data security has become central to electoral politics as an issue that has roped in urban minds. An element of inclusivity is in play, for countries like India that has banned several Chinese apps, and gained major support. Trump’s move in the wake of allegations against Chinese companies after India, could be a strong front runner.
Fourth, the strain in techno-corporate and political relations could sow seeds to restructure service sectors that play a major role in the value chain. In corollary, what was once a virtual space for the digital world now has borders and occasional ceasefires.
Also in the news
China flies warplanes near Taiwan
On 19 September, a fleet of 19 Chinese military aircrafts flew into Taiwan’s airspace in a pincer formation for a second consecutive day. Earlier, on 18 September, the Chinese military sent 18 warplanes, including fighter jets across the Taiwan Straits into Taiwan’s air defence identification zone, in an unusual show of strength which coincide with the visit of the US Under Secretary to Taiwan. The Taiwanese military responded by scrambling their
jets, issuing radio warnings, and mobilising air defence assets.
India and China: Tensions and rhetoric runs unabated
During the week, tensions on the ground and rhetoric at the political level continue to plague India and China’s bilateral relations. According to India, ten patrolling points along the LAC between Depsang Valley and Pangong Tso have been blocked by the People’s Liberation Army. Defence Minister Rajnath Singh stated in the Parliament that China has violated the 1993 and 1996 boundary agreements, and has amassed troops along the LAC since April-May. The Chinese Foreign Ministry responded by saying that the onus of disengagement and ensuring peace solely lies upon India. The statements at the political level signal no change even after talks between the defence and foreign ministers of India and China in Moscow.
India: Zalmay Khalilzad meets NSA and Minister of External Affairs
On 15 September, the US Special Envoy to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad held talks with India’s National Security Adviser Ajit Doval and Minister of External Affairs S. Jaishankar in New Delhi over intra-Afghan talks. Khalilzad reiterated the US perspective and stance on the Afghan peace process and appreciated India’s presence at Doha. The future steps in the negotiations and US-India cooperation in the process were the highlights of the discussions.
The US: RIP Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
On 18 September, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, known as the architect of the legal fight for women’s rights in the 1970s, passed away. Ginsburg was seen as the most prominent member of the Supreme Court after having served 27 years as its member. “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed,” are known to be the last words Ginsburg wrote to her granddaughter. Her death is likely to set in motion a nasty and tumultuous political battle over who will succeed her at the Supreme Court vacancy. On 19 September, Trump made an announcement, that he would appoint a woman judge to replace Justice Ginsburg.