President Obama still has unfinished business
Andrew Bowen/Al Arabiya/January 13/16
Last night, in his final State of the Union address, President Barack Obama sought to reassure the American people that the U.S. was on the right course and that he was leaving to his successor a stronger America than when he entered office. On challenges abroad ranging from the North Korea to Syria, Obama expressed confidence that his administration has handled these crises responsibly and he exercised responsible American leadership that avoided the pitfalls of his predecessor. In his remarks to both chambers of Congress, the President tried to sell to the American public that he has put the U.S. on better footing to address global challenges than the country was on when he entered office. He highlighted his core foreign policy achievements: the Paris climate agreement, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and his diplomatic opening with Cuba. While Obama hailed the success of the Iran nuclear agreement, the President sought in light of events (including a ballistic missile test and the detainment of U.S. naval vessels in the Gulf by Iran) to assure the American public that he would stand firm against Iran’s destructive regional behavior. Seeking to ensure his nuclear deal wouldn’t be derailed by further sanctions, Obama stressed to Congress that the deal was sound and that his administration was committed to enforcing the agreement. So far, the President’s response has been flat footed.
Final year of presidency
The President sought to assure the public (despite low approval rating on his handling of terrorism) that his administration is taking the best steps to combat ISIS. He outlined his plans to close Guantanamo Bay before he leaves office despite the push back he has faced so far from Congress. This rosy rhetoric notwithstanding, the President failed though to deliver a convincing case for how he would substantively address ISIS (a global challenge that he’s consistently misjudged). The next President will not only have to address growing challenges but also alliances that have been weakened at a time when partnerships with such states are essential to addressing these challenges. Obama faces wider challenges as well, ranging from Afghanistan to Iraq that his remarks last night either underestimated or glossed over in attempt to paint a positive image of his legacy. These crises could potentially derail his final year priorities and equally overshadow the positive legacy he hopes to leave.
A less secure global position
Obama leaves to his successor a number of global challenges, which he failed to pro-actively address. Despite his optimistic outlook, the U.S. is in a less secure global position than when he took office. His inaction, critically on Syria and Iraq, leaves the U.S. and its regional partners decades of challenges. A direct consequence of this has been Russia’s intervention. As evidenced by recent domestic terrorist incidents, the American homeland isn’t immune to these challenges either. His successor will be forced to weigh the use of committing American military force globally to confront ISIS. Equally, his naively optimistic assessment about his relations with Iran has already begun to backfire. The Iranian leadership has shown little interest in improving relations with the U.S. and has already tried to test the deal. Iran continues to threaten the security of American allies in the region and its interests (as noted recently by the assault on the Saudi embassy and consulate in Iran). His successor faces a less constrained Iran with fewer tools to respond and the prospects of Iran achieving a nuclear weapon within a decade. The President’s lack of follow through on his commitment to his allies in the Gulf after Camp David underscores how he leaves his successor deeply strained relations in the region. The next President will not only have to address growing challenges but also alliances that have been weakened at a time when partnerships with such states are essential to addressing these challenges. While the President tried to optimistically assure the American public that the U.S. is stronger globally due to his leadership, his handling of crises underscore how he is leaving the country in a weaker position globally when he leaves office in 2017. American leadership frankly isn’t what it used to be. It’s this dark legacy that he sought to gloss over in his final State of the Union.
What’s in store for Egypt-Russia relations in 2016?
Maria Dubovikova/Al Arabiya/January 13/16
A 10-day New Year holiday break has just come to an end in Russia even as Egyptian Parliament starts work for the first time in three years. The two powerful strategic partners have been weakened by major internal problems. Some challenges are common such as corruption, sluggish political systems, and deep economic crisis. They are, however, caused mostly by different factors. Year 2015 appeared to be very different for their bilateral relations. They seemed to be on the rise following the visit of Egyptian leader to Moscow, third such visit in two years. Important agreements were signed such as the one related to construction of Egypt’s nuclear plant in the Dabaa province by Russia’s RosAtom. Russia also extended a $25 billion loan to Egypt for the construction of the nuclear plant, which the country vitally needs to meet its growing demand for electricity. Kremlin continues military cooperation with Egypt, supplying the country with weapons. Following the deterioration of Russia’s relations with Turkey, Egypt proposed its services to supply Turkish products, primarily fruits and vegetables, to Russian markets. At the same time ban on flights between Russia and Egypt – imposed by Russia in the wake of A-321 crash over Sinai – triggered rumors that Russia has betrayed Egypt and that the ban is a sign of worsening bilateral ties. The current situation is not as bad as some describe it and is not as positive as others make it out to be. Russia needs Egypt as a partner in the Middle East. The country is located at a strategic crossroad and, despite weaknesses, remains critical to the region and the Mediterranean. On the other hand, despite suffering from a severe crisis, Russia continues to be one of the key powers at the global stage. Egypt needs Russia as a stable partner to diversify its foreign relations and reduce dependence on particular players.
Economic crises and interdependence
Egypt needs Russia’s nuclear assistance for its energy sector and to maintain its military supplies. But will it be enough for a country that needs investments, social welfare, development assistance and advanced technology to bring it to a new level of development and improve the quality of life of its citizens? What Russia can propose is not even enough to keep the country stable under current circumstances. Russia has no money to invest in Egypt and its infrastructure. Most of the projects and investments discussed at bilateral levels are likely to remain stuck due to strong economic crisis Russia faces.
Russia cannot afford to risk the lives of their tourists, as a consequence of its policies in the Middle East, and lay responsibility on the often corrupt and careless Egyptian authorities. Russia also worries about the stability of the Egyptian regime. The year gone by has been tough for President Abdelfateh el-Sisi. Cairo faces complex problems ranging from terrorist activities in Sinai to the socio-economic issues. The crisis in the country has been dramatically aggravated by ban on flights imposed by Russia. The crisis deepened following the recent attacks on tourists in Cairo and on hotel in Hurghada.
Terrorist threats to tourist destinations has dampened the prospect of flight resumption in the immediate future. Flights aren’t likely to resume before February and most likely not before spring. Even after resumption, they are likely to remain limited to tourist destinations. The threat of terrorism, however, is no longer limited to airport zones. Securing all tourist destinations and hotels is extremely difficult and needs time. The deepening of the tourism crisis makes the situation more explosive in Egypt.
Russia cannot afford to risk the lives of their tourists, as a consequence of its policies in the Middle East, and lay the responsibility on the often corrupt and careless Egyptian authorities. The country is likely to assess situation inside Egypt after January 25. There is no political motive in steps being taken by Russia as it needs a stable and prosperous Egypt. But stakes are too high for Russia in Syria and it cannot allow ISIS to attack its tourists thus pushing Kremlin to change its course in the region.Another problem in bilateral ties is that the Egyptian proposal to become an alternative to Turkey in terms of food supplies is unrealistic. Food export will lead to soaring prices in the domestic markets and it can hardly survive this under the current circumstances. The current volume of agricultural production in Egypt is not quite enough even to satisfy the demands of the local market. Moreover, it has nothing else to propose to Russia.
The problem with both Russia and Egypt is that they need each other. They also understand each other but for bilateral cooperation this appears insufficient. The deepening of the crisis between the two countries does not make the prospects of their cooperation brighter. A lot depends on the stability of the Egyptian regime and on how Russia will tackle the crisis this year. Year 2016 won’t be a year of breakthrough in the bilateral relations. Even in the best case scenario they will remain at the same level.
