Economic woes in the Land of the Pharaoh

Egypt's political woes are well-document but are increasingly being overtaken by its economic concerns. Growing foreign debt, dwindling currency reserves, rising prices, devaluating currency and an IMF loan that …just….wont…get off the ground, Egypt's medium-term outlook remains massively negative. Foreign investors are running from the state leading to a major downturn in its financial account (investment in local shares and assets) while its current account (balance of export earnings minus import payments) isn't looking to flash either and is surging towards US$3 billion. In addition, the country can not pay for fuel leading to regular shortages. For further information on this increasingly dire picture check out Carnegie's article "Egypt and the IMF: Time for a Different Approach" http://carnegieendowment.org/sada/2013/04/09/egypt-and-imf-time-for-different-approach/fyna

Stratfor's U.S. Naval Update Map: May 23, 2013

The latest Stratfor US Naval update (23 May) is insightful. One carrier in the Arabian Gulf and a large amphibious big deck warfare ship in the Gulf of Aden – a low number for the region. Critically, none in the Mediterranean, meaning no Syrian intervention in the near-term. With Russian ambitions growing in this area (http://www.debka.com/article/22965/Russia-staffs-Mediterranean-fleet-Turkey-weighs-payback-for-Syrian-bombings), Obama is clearly not looking to confront the Russian naval moves any time soon. Many carrier groups are also at home port, likely refitting. In the Pacific, just one carrier, the Nimitz, steaming around the South China Sea. Get more here http://www.stratfor.com/image/us-naval-update-map-may-23-2013

Lebanon and its relationship with Hezbollah, Iran and Syria

Lebanon's weak political institutions and military make the country susceptible to instability in Syria. This premise has been proven over and over again since the end of the civil war in the 1990s and is no more evident now than at any other time in its history. Political parties in Lebanon are split for their support of the Syrian regime. Indeed, one of the primary political groupings in the country, Hezbollah, is actively supporting the Assad regime with men and material. So, what can be done about this state of affairs? Can Lebanon ever escape its cycle of stability and instability and its sponge-like sensitivity to regional developments? Yes and no. 

If Hezbollah renounces violence and disbands its militia, the country has a chance. At the moment Hezbollah maintain a ten thousand strong militia force, which acts outside of the bounds of the legitimate security forces. If this militia can be integrated into the legitimate security forces and 're-orientated' towards national interests the country would have a significant defensive platform from which to stabilise its domestic security environment. This would, however, take a massive amount of 'backbone' to achieve. Hezbollah would also need to redefine its core reason for existence, which is to resist Israeli aggression. 

Hezbollah's pre-occupation with Israel appears odd. Formed to resist Israeli occupation of southern Israel the group continues to operate an armed wing, despite Israel withdrawing from southern Lebanon in 2000. At present there are one or two areas where control of territory is disputed, but this is certainly insufficient reason to continue armed struggle. To understand why its current goals remain unchanged one needs to look at Iran and Syria. These two countries supply Hezbollah and finance its activities. Iran hates Israel and wants it destroyed and Syria wants the Golan Heights back, a strategic elevated region, which dominates all approaches to northern Israel and southwestern Syria. So, for Hezbollah to back off and demilitarize it would require the Syrian and Iranian pressure to disappear. This may yet happen should the rebels overthrow the Syria regime and if a new political movement emerged in Iran. The Syrian war is still raging of course and the result is on a knife edge. Iran on the other hand is heading to the polls to select a new president. If a moderate is installed (Ahmadinejad is definitely out, having maxed out his number of terms) the relationship with Israel and, therefore, Hezbollah, could be redefined. We wait and see and in the meantime more people will die in Syria and uncertainty over Lebanon's future will persist.

Grand political games in the Middle Eastern theatre

Grand political games are being played out across the Middle East. At the higher spectrum we have Russia attempting to reassert its influence in the Mediterranean so that it can influence developments in Syria specifically. The US lack of commitment to the Syrian rebel cause has provided the Russians with a perfect opportunity. They are likely to increase their naval presence in the Eastern Mediterranean imminently and will increase their military support for the Syrian regime, which is increasingly making gains against the rebels. On a more regional focus, the Iranians are on the front foot in negotiations over its nuclear weapons and in Syria. With the US constraining Israel anxiety, Iran is progressing with its development program while continuing its support of the Syrian regime. Turkey meanwhile remains upset over the mid-May car bombing in its Hatay province, an attack blamed on Syrian intelligence. Yet Turkey has not responded as yet. This is interesting and points again to its precarious position. It is emerging from a successfully negotiated ceasefire with the PKK but doesn't have the support of NATO or the US to intervene in Syria. It will continue to issue provocative statements but not intervene until it is confident that it will not lose any confrontations. While the Syrian regime is on the front foot, Turkey is unlikely to make moves against Syria. At a micro level, the disjointed rebels in Syria are suffering. They are being bombarded by Syrian government artillery and heavy weapons and are increasingly affected by in-fighting and disagreements over ideology. The Islamist influence is growing, posing massive concerns for the future of the country and region. If the Islamist militant fringe is allowed to grow further it will evolve into an insurgency that may make the Iraq insurgency look like child's play. This analysis will all change however if and when the US decide to awaken to the growing threat to their regional hegemony and the likely outcome of non-involvement. 

Kim Jun Cartman!

Al-Qaeda in Iraq and the al-Nusra Front merger - fact or fiction

There has been a lot in the press lately about the connection between two Sunni Muslim extremist groups in the Middle East, namely the Iraq-based Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) and the Syrian-based, al-Nusra Front. The argument went that the shadowy al-Nusra were supported by ISI and other likeminded groups and was made up of local and foreign fighters. In recent days a statements from ISI leader, reportedly made on Jihadi forums, was release claiming that al-Nusra had merged with ISI to form al-Qaeda in Iraq and Syria (AQIS). The claim by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has not been independently verified and this new group is yet to claim any attack. The announcement is not spectacular and reveals what is probably the worst kept secret in the region, that the two groups are closely linked. The statement could also be hot air and one always wonders if there is a greater or a background actor at play here. To discover who this may be we should consider the ramifications of the announcement. Syrian rebels in Syria are coming under increasing pressure to distance themselves from al-Nusra. The US has the group listed as a terrorist organization and much funding the rebels require to battle Bashar al-Assad is being held back due to the al-Nusra involvement in rebel battles. Basically, the West fears a Sunni extremist takeover in Syria once Assad falls. So who could benefit from this apparent undermining of the rebels? Number one would be Assad himself and his allies, Iran and China. Could this be some sort of announcement initiated by the Syrian regime? Do they or Iran have connections to ISI? Unlikely, but let's wait for further statements from the ISI before accepting that the two groups have indeed merged into a super militant body.

North Korean lunacy

Ok, so here we have a mad dictator who is keen on challenging the world. Of course I speak of North Korea's Kim Jung Un. This lunatic appears hell bent on destroying not only the US and South Korea but also his own people. Lets be clear, if he decides to take on the US he will end up like al-Gaddafi or Saddam. Done. So what is he really on about? Does he really want war? I think the answer is no. The North Koreans are attempting to project power or at least the appearance of it to 1) bolster domestic support and 2) secure concessions from the West and South Korea (or at least get the UN sanctions lifted). That said, North Korea is a highly unstable country and the slightest spark or incident could ignite a regional war. It is this outcome that makes Un's rhetoric even more concerning. That they are willing to play with fire points to a regime that is worth removing from the planet. . .Got to deal with those nukes first though.