Offer From Biarritz Not Good Enough For Iran

by M. K. BHADRAKUMAR

From all accounts, Tehran is struggling to cope with the startling news in the weekend from the G7 summit at Biarritz that a meeting between the presidents of the US and Iran is to be expected in the “coming weeks”.

The cautiously optimistic tone struck by the French President Emmanuel Macron and the conspicuously positive attitude adopted by President Trump along with the fact that the Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif was actually present at Biarritz (with the prior knowledge and tacit concurrence of POTUS) — all these signalled that France’s back-to-back peace initiatives in the recent weeks with Washington and Tehran have come to a defining moment.

From Biarritz, Zarif took off for Tehran ostensibly to change planes for an onward journey to China as part of a previously scheduled Asian tour. Presumably, he briefed Rouhani on what transpired at Biarritz. Zarif is still on the Asian tour — China, Japan, Malaysia, etc., which are, interestingly, major buyers of Iranian oil.

If the Biarritz formula gains traction, these Asian countries have a key role to play in generating income for Iran out of oil sales, which apparently would incentivise Tehran to get into negotiations with the US.

En route to Beijing, Zarif tweeted, “Iran’s active diplomacy in pursuit of constructive engagement continues. Road ahead is difficult. But worth trying.” China’s foreign minister Wang Yi also spoke to Emmanuel Bonne, diplomatic adviser to French President Emmanuel Macron, by telephone on Monday. Bonne said France wanted to coordinate and cooperate with China to ease tensions over Iran and to maintain the 2015 nuclear deal, according to a report by official Chinese news agency Xinhua.

Iran’s FM Zarif (L) was warmly received by Chinese Councillor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi (R) in Beijing on Aug 26, 2019

The initial reaction from Tehran at the level of Rouhani also suggested that he may be open to the idea of meeting Trump. Notably, Rouhani said on Monday, “I believe we should use any tool to protect our country’s national interests. If I think that meeting someone helps solve the people’s problems, I will not hesitate. The principle is our national interests.”

Two days later, however, Rouhani’s Chief of Staff and key aide Mahmoud Vaezi, who is an influential figure in the foreign policy establishment, conspicuously moderated what the president had said. Speaking to reporters in Tehran on Wednesday, Vaezi said any meeting with the US officials will solve no problem and the US must come back to P5+1 negotiation table and respect its commitments to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

Vaezi didn’t altogether reject the idea of a Rouhani-Trump meeting, but added a template that the negotiations must also involve other guarantor states — E3, Russia and China. On the other hand, an Iranian economic delegation is proceeding to France next week. It could be that Tehran is strengthening its bargaining chip as well as insulating itself from the risk of engaging an interlocutor such as Trump who is fickle-minded, lacks consistency and has no coherent policies — and, above all, is surrounded by a team that includes notorious anti-Iran hawks, especially the National Security Advisor John Bolton.

Meanwhile, we see a significant hardening of Tehran’s stance in an interview with the state TV given by the Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for Political Affairs Seyed Abbas Araqchi. Araqchi simply ruled out any negotiations with Washington so long as the sanctions remained in place.

In his words, “We are only talking with the European countries over our specific 11 demands (based on the JCPOA) and we will not negotiate with the US.” Vaezi’s remarks must be taken seriously, as was one of the key negotiators of the 2015 nuclear deal and is an authoritative voice. Vaezi underlined that that no country would accept to enter negotiations while being under “maximum pressure” because doing so would mean “surrender”.

The offer held out in Biarritz appears to be simply not good enough for Tehran. Why should Tehran “surrender” after successfully countering the US’ regime change agenda and “maximum pressure” strategy and has failed to reach the objectives behind its unilateral move to abandon the 2015 nuclear deal?

On Wednesday, Iran’s top military commander Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces Major General Mohammad Hossein Baqeri pointedly reminded everyone that it has been the country’s deterrence power that effectively stopped the US from going ahead with its plans to wage a war against Iran.

Quite obviously, a lot of churning has been going on within the top echelons of the Iranian establishment, which involve multiple agencies at an institutional level and even factions that would have congruent political interests or different priorities at any given time. The influential Majlis has not voiced an opinion. The bottom line is that all power centres would be waiting for the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to speak publicly.

M. K. BHADRAKUMAR

 

Career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service for over 29 years, who served as India's Ambassador to Uzbekistan (1995-1998) and Turkey (1998-2001).

The costs of European integration to the White House

By Mohammad Ghaderi

In one of his most recent statements, French President Emmanuel Macron has announced the end of US and Western hegemony in the international system. The remarks come as the EU and eurozone are also facing a severe crisis of leadership.

Macron has warned Western nations against the “strategic mistake” of alienating Russia – but in doing so, he seeks a bigger role for himself in international politics.

“We are living the end of Western hegemony,” Macron told diplomats , after hosting the G7 meeting in the city of Biarritz on France’s Atlantic coast over the weekend. He named the rise of Beijing and Moscow as signs of a shift on the world scene.

The reality is that the European Union and the eurozone, on the one hand, acknowledge the end of Western hegemony, and in particular the United States, and on the other hand, continue to be dominated by Washington. The EU's inactivity towards Europe has led to anger and frustration among citizens.

The EU and the eurozone have a very uncertain future. In other words, America and Europe can no longer speak of international domination.

In such a situation, people like the French President and German Chancellor are worried about the future of the eurozone and the European Union. This concern increases over time. The occurrence of a variety of security, political, economic and social crises has created many challenges in the European Union and the eurozone.

The emergence of these challenges has led to a sharp decline in the popularity of traditional parties in Europe. In such a way, nationalist parties have been able to increase their popularity with the public. Which side are the European Union and the eurozone really heading to?

ill the future of Europe finally be clear these are the questions that concern the mentally ill, such as Merkel and Macron?

Ultimately, the more Europe delays  in moving away from the United States, the more it will pay. It is as if European officials have not yet understood it. There is a long gap between the recent remarks of the French President and the EU's practical approach.

Trump fears the presidential election

By Saeed Sobhani

The China-US trade war has reached a critical stage. Many US analysts believe that in the near future, Beijing could defeat Washington in the trade war. This is undoubtedly the case in the upcoming presidential election. Exactly the same thing that Trump is terribly afraid of! Here's a look at the latest US-China trade battle:

Trump threatens to raise tariffs on Chinese goods to 30% amid escalating trade war

As CNN reported, President Donald Trump on Friday counterpunched against retaliatory tariffs announced by Beijing earlier in the day, pledging to hike the rates importers must pay on Chinese-made goods even higher.Trump said the US will raise tariffs from 25% to 30% on $250 billion in goods that are already being taxed starting October 1.

He also threatened to ratchet up promised tariffs on the remaining $300 billion in Chinese imports from 10% to 15%. Those tariffs, which would hit mostly consumer items, are set to begin taking effect September 1, though most goods will be duty-free until December 15 -- a move Trump made to avoid putting a damper on holiday retail sales. The President's announcement came after Beijing unveiled a new round of retaliatory tariffs on about $75 billion worth of US goods. China will place additional tariffs of 5% or 10% on US imports starting on September 1, according to a statement posted by China's Finance Ministry."We're having a little spat with China and we'll win it," Trump told reporters Friday night before departing for the annual G7 summit in Biarritz, France. "We put a lot of tariffs on China today, as you know. They put some on us, we put a lot of them."

"We're up to about $550 billion -- they've been hitting us for many, many years for over $500 billion a year, taking out of our country much more than 500 billion a year," he added. "So we want that stopped."

It was the latest escalation in an ongoing trade war that has triggered a worldwide economic slowdown and which, for the moment, shows no sign of quick resolution."China should not have put new Tariffs on 75 BILLION DOLLARS of United States product (politically motivated!)," Trump said on Twitter. The intensifying fight unnerved investors, sending the Dow dropping more than 700 points at its worst, closing down 2.4%, or 623 points. The US Trade Representative Office, which acts as the country's top trade negotiator, said it would "begin the process of increasing the tariff rate to 30% effective October 1 following a notice and comment period."

Earlier Friday, Trump ordered US companies doing business in China to find an "alternative" and had promised to deliver further action after he met with his economic team at the White House."We don't need China and, frankly, would be far better off without them," Trump tweeted. "Our great companies are ordered to immediately start looking for an alternative to China, including bringing your companies HOME."

China trade experts said the moves will only deepen the impasse between Washington and Beijing."Everyone knew this was coming," said Craig Allen, president of the US-China Business Council. "There was no doubt this was coming. The response to it is surprising and disappointing. "

Stocks finished a volatile trading day sharply in the red Friday, after a selloff driven by the new retaliatory tariffs from China and the President's criticism of Federal Reserve policy. Trump again attacked Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell over interest rates, which Trump insists are too high even after a rate cut last month.

"My only question is, who is our bigger enemy, Jay Powell or Chairman Xi?" the president tweeted referring to Chinese leader Xi Jinping. Late Friday night, Trump told reporters he wouldn't stop Powell if the chairman wanted to resign.

Trump's China trade war spirals as 2020 looms

The dangerous new twist in the tariff war between the United States and China will heap ominous pressure on the global economy at a moment when it is already struggling in the undertow of their trade superpower showdown. China's announcement of new tariffs on $75 billion in US goods and an incandescent reaction from President Donald Trump and his swift increase in existing tariffs on Chinese products underscored that the dispute is escalating with no obvious way to calm hostilities. A long disagreement over China's trade and economic practices has now also become a personal duel and a matter of face between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping -- and a perilous pivot point for a volatile world order that is being reshaped by China's rise.

A day of trade war Friday dramatically increased the political stakes of the confrontation for Trump -- at the same time the new tariffs threaten to further damage the US economy."This has become a process without a clear objective and without a clear strategy and without a clear endpoint," said Craig Allen, president of the US-China Business Council. "And it's being played out in many worsening global economic circumstances. It is more uncertainty heaped upon already existing uncertainty."

The President's remark that trade wars are "good and easy to win" in 2018 is now looking even more ill-advised and leaves Trump looking as though he engineered a showdown with a rising economic superpower in which it will be difficult for him to prevail. If China's retaliation on Friday was calculated to further panic Trump about the state of the US economy -- amid growing fears of a slowdown that would complicate his reelection hopes next year -- it has already succeeded.

The new tariffs came at the end of the week when the White House's messaging on the economy has been incoherent. Assurances by the President's top advisers that growth is robust and there is no concern about the economy have been undermined by Trump's contradictory statements -- at various times he has said he's thinking about tax cuts to stimulate growth and then insisted he is not because there is no need for them.

The confusion has multiplied concerns that Trump's administration is ill prepared to mitigate a recession if one does come and lacks the stability and calmness needed to tackle any financial crisis.

Trump's increasingly furious attacks on Federal Reserve chief Jerome Powell amount to some of the most incendiary rhetoric by a President about the economy and the US central bank's policy-making in living memory. His insistence on an interest rate cut of 100 basis points would mean the Fed adopting policies that are usually put into practice only during a serious economic downturn. It also raises questions about Trump's understanding of the infrastructure of the US economy and the independence of the central bank, which is supposed to shield it from interference by presidents worried about their political prospects.

The latest tariff tit-for-tat also seems to trap Trump into an escalation with China that it will be difficult to control. If he goes ahead and responds with more tariffs, the President risks further rattling investors and damaging US consumers. He has already delayed a set of new tariffs worth $160 billion on Chinese imports until December to avoid harming the holiday shopping season. That decision was seen by many as an admission by Trump that Americans are hurt by paying higher prices for Chinese products despite his frequent and misleading assurances that only China was being harmed by the tariffs."The bottom is collapsing and this relationship is getting worse and worse," said Allen.

Since last year before Trump and Xi met over a steak dinner in Buenos Aires, experts have worried about the possibility of a new cold war between the world's two largest economies if they are unable to resolve their differences. The risk of so-called "decoupling" is likely to be more disruptive than the President's "America First" agenda, according to policy analysts who have carefully watched the on-again, off-again trade war that began last summer with the first tranche of tariffs. Hawks within the administration -- like Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro -- have strongly argued that a parting of ways with China is necessary to secure US dominance, while others in the wing have expressed concerns about China's military power or tensions with North Korea.

"I think really American-China policy is only unified with a single person in the White House," said Scott Kennedy, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington-based think tank. "It's unpredictable. It can flip-flop. I don't think American policy has finally settled in one place where we have decided to treat China as an enemy across the board."

Former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson warned of the risks of the world's two largest economies divorcing in a speech in Singapore last November."I fear that big parts of the global economy will ultimately be closed off to the free flow of investment and trade. And that is why I now see the prospect of an economic iron curtain -- one that throws up new walls on each side and unmakes the global economy, as we have known it," said Paulson, who served under President George W. Bush.

Trump has questioned why he must attend G7

China's recent action was unlikely to improve Trump's mood as he flew to France on Friday night for the G7 summit. He's been complaining about European trade policy as well and has a record of breaking china at international summits -- including last year's G7 in Canada, which saw him leave early. The next time Xi and Trump would be expected to meet would be at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Chile in November. But with the trade war still worsening, hopes for a resolution then look farfetched. While Xi is often portrayed as a strongman authoritarian and China's most dominant leader for the last 30 years, he is not immune to domestic political pressures.

The wave of protests in Hong Kong is putting him under even greater scrutiny months before celebrations marking 70 years of Communist China -- a fact that gives Xi even less room for political maneuver. Two years after being hailed as a historic figure and removing term limits in a move that was seen as potentially letting him rule for life, Xi is enduring the worst year of his presidency so far. But the longer the trade war goes on, the more politically dicey it also gets for Trump -- a factor that might be helping to shape Chinese thinking. The showdown becomes a question of which side can endure the most pain. Trump has confidently predicted that Xi will have to give in because China won't be able to take the damage to its economy. It is true that the tariff war is having an effect -- it has helped push Chinese industrial output growth to its lowest rate in 17 years. But Xi is sitting atop an authoritarian system that can muzzle the public and mitigate the political damage of a trade war. He has no need to worry about reelection in 2020. Trump, by contrast, has been fuming at the media in recent days, accusing it of alarming consumers about the state of the economy and taking it into a recession. Beijing may be calculating that Trump will not be able to stand the political heat of the trade war as his reelection race ratchets up -- a position his increasingly angry outbursts tend to support -- and might be interested in stepping back from the brink. In a sign of political sophistication, Beijing has deliberately targeted farming -- an industry that is endemic to the Midwestern swing states that Trump needs to win reelection.

So the President faces a dilemma. Does he cool the rhetoric and seek a deal with Beijing -- and thereby turn his back on one of the central pillars of his entire political project? Or does he carry on the fight -- even if it has a serious impact on the US and world economy and creates a political backlash that could put his hopes of a second term in doubt?

Trump Asserts He Can Force U.S. Companies to Leave China

As New York Times reported, President Trump asserted on Saturday that he has the authority to make good on his threat to force all American businesses to leave China, citing a national security law that has been used mainly to target terrorists, drug traffickers and pariah states like Iran, Syria and North Korea. As he arrived in France for the annual meeting of the Group of 7 powers, Mr. Trump posted a message on Twitter citing the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, a law originally meant to enable a president to isolate criminal regimes not sever economic ties with a major trading partner over a tariff dispute.

“For all of the Fake News Reporters that don’t have a clue as to what the law is relative to Presidential powers, China, etc., try looking at the Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977,” Mr. Trump wrote. “Case closed!”

The president’s threat to all but cut off one of America’s most important trading relationships could disrupt a global economy already on the edge of recession amid his trade war while further unsettling giant companies in the United States that rely on China in their production and sale of everything from clothing to smart telephones.Mr. Trump has often made drastic threats as a negotiating ploy to force a partner to offer concessions, as when he vowed to close the border with Mexico or impose tariffs on its goods to force action to halt illegal immigration. But if he were to follow through, it would be the most significant break with China since President Richard M. Nixon’s diplomatic opening to Beijing in the early 1970s.

Mr. Trump’s claim that he has the power to order American companies to pull out of China also represents the latest assertion of authority by a president who has repeatedly crossed lines that his predecessors have not. While he came to office criticizing President Barack Obama for exceeding the power of his office, Mr. Trump has gone even further in creative ways to take action on his priorities.“Any invocation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act in these circumstances and for these purposes would be an abuse,” said Daniel M. Price, a former international economic adviser to President George W. Bush. “The act is intended to address extraordinary national security threats and true national emergencies not fits of presidential pique.”

Under the weight of Mr. Trump’s tariff war, China has already fallen from America’s largest trading partner last year to the third largest this year. The United States remains China’s largest trading partner. China said Friday that it would raise tariffs on American goods in retaliation for Mr. Trump’s latest levies and the president vowed hours later to increase tariffs even further.

China’s commerce ministry issued a strongly worded statement on Saturday warning the United States to turn back from ever-escalating confrontation, but it did not threaten any new trade measures.“This unilateral and bullying trade protectionism and extreme pressure violate the consensus of the heads of state of China and the United States, violate the principle of mutual respect, equality, and mutual benefit, seriously undermine the multilateral trading system and the normal international trade order,” the Chinese statement said.

In 2018, Trump’s erratic belligerence spiraled

Syed Zafar Mehdi

TEHRAN - As we get ready to bid adieu to 2018, an eventful year marked by trials, tribulations and triumphs, it is time to look back at some of the major developments that shaped the year.

As yet another year goes by, it is time to reflect and see whether the world is getting better or worse. Optimists would tell you that the world is certainly becoming a better place. But, there is a section of people who believe that the world has taken a turn for the worse.

Their misgivings aren’t completely unfounded. Looking at the world today and how certain countries are acting as ‘globocops’, bullying and intimidating other countries through interventionism, intrusiveness, and imperialism, it can be argued that our world still isn’t a better place to live in.

It was another year for the American industrial-military complex to advance their hegemony around the world and for the megalomaniac U.S. president to prove why he is such a loathed world figure today.

The year 2018 started with Donald Trump launching a tirade against former U.S. ally Pakistan with a hyperbolic tweet, which raised eyebrows in Islamabad and led to fractures in the U.S.-Pakistan ties.

“The United States has foolishly given Pakistan more than 33 billion dollars in aid over the last 15 years, and they have given us nothing but lies & deceit, thinking of our leaders as fools. They give safe haven to the terrorists we hunt in Afghanistan, with little help,” Trump tweeted.

It was followed by suspension of security aid to Pakistan, from $255 million to whopping $900 million before culminating in $3 billion. The sequence of events that led to the decline and fall of this relationship began on the first day of this year. Despite the latest overtures, the divorce is final.

Another interesting development that happened in the beginning of this year was the sensational Twitter battle between North Korea’s Kim Jong Un and Trump.

Kim warned that the U.S. was “within the range of our nuclear strike and a nuclear button is always on the desk of my office.” That didn’t go down well with mandarins in Washington and the president himself. He responded in his characteristic way, boasting he had a bigger nuclear button than Kim.

A few months later, he held a summit with his Korean counterpart and famously told a crowd of his supporters that he had “fallen in love” with the North Korean leader. A perfect match it was.

Ironically, a year later, North Korea’s nuclear program is still thriving and Trump’s handshake and love letters have failed to dissuade North Koreans from building a robust nuclear arsenal.

Known for his loud-mouthed, thoughtless utterances, Trump made many controversial and provocative remarks throughout the year. He called some African nations “shithole countries”, which backfired in a way he wouldn’t have imagined.

Trump used the vulgarity to describe Haiti during a meeting on immigration. However, veteran journalist Bob Woodward in his recent book ‘Fear: Trump in the White House’ writes that Trump has used the term many times, including during his 2016 campaign in Little Haiti.

This year, the U.S. president also blasted G7 leaders in Canada, insulted leaders of European Union and announced an unprecedented trade war with China. He threatened to impose heavy tariffs on Chinese imports to force Beijing into renegotiating its trade balance with the U.S.

However, the old man forgot that the U.S. will be a loser as big companies like Walmart import billions of dollars of cheap goods from China. The war is still going on and there is no sign of truce.

The year’s most important strategic event, though, was Trump’s unilateral withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran – a decision that shocked the world and exposed the hypocrisy of the U.S. As Financial Times noted, Trump “isolated America from the rest of the West by quitting the Iran deal”.

The brutal murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was one of the biggest stories of this year. And the way Trump deemed “credible” Saudi explanation that the journalist died in a fistfight was preposterous. He even denied a U.S. intelligence conclusion that Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman was directly involved in the killing.

This year, Trump not only engaged in blatant war-mongering and saber-rattling, but he also crushed the values of universal human rights, violated press freedom, and supported dictators accused of horrendous war crimes.

Yet he had the audacity to stand up in the United Nations and claim that his administration had “accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country.” The titters from the world leaders sitting in the hall was a perfect response to his grandiloquence and pomposity.

As Guardian editorial on Thursday noted, Trump’s increasingly “erratic belligerency” is not simply a display of his unsuitability for the presidency. “It is the behavior of a president who sees the threats facing him and whose instability is such that he may try to pull the temple down with him.”

Bloomberg, reviewing his performance this year, said the damage Trump has wreaked on the U.S. role in the world is “only beginning to manifest itself”, adding that the year saw a “staggering number of countries misruled by the worst crop of world leaders in recent memory”, with Trump topping the list.

New York Times said 2018 has been a year of “perpetual motion” for Trump, who has “presided over near constant turmoil as he has increasingly relied on his own instincts”.

The year ends where it began, with resignation of Defense Secretary James Mattis, withdrawal of U.S. forces from Syria and Afghanistan and the much-publicized government shutdown.

The latest poll by Reuters/Ipsos showed that 47 percent of adult Americans held Trump responsible for the government shutdown, which officially began at midnight on December 22.

The year ahead doesn’t promise much change with people like Trump presiding over a devilish empire, announcing open war against the world, barring Israel and Saudi Arabia. Because petrodollars matter and the powerful Jewish lobby in the U.S. matters too.