The 'Saudi Nukes' Saga

Media attention to the matter has been waxing and waning for a numbers of years now, but only in a rather submissive and off the cuff way. Could something really be cooking in this regard? Let's see.

At the beginning of November 2013, early reports surfaced that the Saudis might be trying to develop  nuclear capabilities. Hence, on Nov 6/7 The Guardian, the BBC and the Daily Mail carried articles raising a number of flags suggesting alleged Saudi efforts could be receiving assistance from Pakistan, whose nuclear program, the Sauds reportedly financed. However, two weeks later, Zachary Keck responded that there was no way the Pakis would sell the Saudis the bomb.

A little less than two years later, March 26, 2015, the Saudi Ambassador to the United States went on air on CNN to deny any allegation of capability and even intent:

On June 11, just as the Saudi Ambassador to the United Kingdom was telling The Telegraph that "all options are on the table", no less than Fareed Zakaria penned an Op-ed for the Washington Post debunking the rumours, and arguing that Saudi could never even dream of getting nukes, because just too primitive. Zakaria followed up with a GPS take on CNN to reinforce those points. However, asked to comment on these views, John Burgess, a former US Foreign Service Officer with experience of the Middle East, underscored the aforementioned Saud-Pak connection (June 20, 2015). In June 2015, Zachary Keck even evoked a potential North Korea connection??

Fast-forward to 2016: in an interview with The Independent in January, the Saudi foreign minister is evasive and ambivalent regarding Saudi intentions to acquire nuclear weapons, and on the 20th day of February, Duane Clarridge a former Senior CIA officer drops the bombshell: The Saudis already HAVE SEVERAL nukes:

Six days later, the confirmation: SAUDI ARABIA HAS NUCLEAR WEAPONS, and they've had them for about two years. Approximatively, this would mean they obtained them around February 2014. Comparing timelines, it is likely, therefore, that the November 2013 early reports had picked up on something serious. 

For further reading, Norman Cigar of the Strategic Studies Institute published an interesting book: Saudi Arabia and Nuclear Weapons: How Do Countries Think about the Bomb?  was released in March 2016.

Turkey's EU Accession bid unwinding?

The Austrian Chancellor Christian Kern probably used the right words when he called Turkey’s EU accession talks a diplomatic fiction. The clamour stoked by that declaration is only indicative of how thick that delusion had become.  It was however obvious that, as mentioned in our July 17 post, besides not belonging to Europe in any reasonably way- whether geographical, historical, cultural, or political- Turkey had also been drifting steadily away  from European values. With the country now on the fast track to an authoritarian metamorphosis disguised as state of emergency, it seems clear that accession is a no-go. Following the events of Incirlik, will the next step be a withdrawal or expulsion from NATO?  

Regardless, now that EU accession is finally increasingly off the table, Turkey will have to set its own path- hopefully refraining from blackmail and extortion as it has attempted to do (not without some success) with the EU. As we have observed, Turkey is the heir to a great culture and civilization. Its future course must be inspired by that cultural legacy; it must identify a plausible geographical context to unfold- the most natural being the Middle East; it must rediscover, but obviously reinterpret its history (given the disastrous epilogue of the Ottoman Empire); it must find its own sources and foundations of political legitimacy and good governance, and possibly ones that it can share with its neighbourhood, which could -and perhaps should- include Israel. 

In fact, if these two important states, plus, perhaps, Iran and Egypt, could cooperate to give birth to a Community of the Middle East that would certainly be seen as a positive development. The Europeans should obviously be at the window, hopefully supportive of Turkey's new course, as good and respectful neighbours. 

Collateral damage?

An unfortunate byproduct of regime change in Ukraine: Ukrainian Holocaust Perpetrators Are Being Honored in Place of Their Victims.

Post-Brexit Foreign Policy: A Resurgent Great Britain?

With a resounding majority, (472 yay to 117 nay), the House of Commons voted to approve  £31bn plan to revamp the Trident nuclear submarine program with new weapons systems. The next day, UK Foreign Secretary met the US Secretary of State and outlined the main pillars of a post-Brexit foreign policy. Much emphasis on shared values, shared language, shared history, a special relationship and a shared role in the world. 

At a time when the international order is increasingly under stress, challenged by rising powers, an almost perpetual European crisis, Middle East crisis, etc, the leaders of an "extricated Britain" feel they have a window of opportunity to play a role in restoring and regenerating that much weakened international order. The way the UK realigns and redefines its place in the world and its foreign policy mission will be a fundamental development to watch in future months. What we are likely to see though is the renewal of the Anglosphere, an alliance of destiny, heir to the once British Empire, as the main stage for UK initiatives, and coalitional platform. For now, let's watch what Britain does to weather the recession it is forecasted to undergo first.

Access Denied: Turkey in Europe does not belong

Recent developments in Europe-Turkey relations call for an articulate and thorough reflection on the current nature of the relationships and the prospects for its future evolution. This is especially the case as a result of the Brexit, which may suggest the idea to some that admitting Turkey could make up for the loss of Britain. This reflection must take place outside of politically correct clichés or dominant frames.

The bottom line is that while Association or even Enhanced Partnership Agreements are more that welcome, the European Union must under no circumstance admit Turkey as a full member. It simply does not belong in Europe geographically, culturally, historically, and politically. And here is why:

1) Geographically, Turkey is and always has been an Asian country. Its territory, comprising primarily the Anatolian peninsula, lies squarely in Asia, and its borders with Armenia, Iran, Iraq, and Syria simply underscore and reinforce this notion. Even its largest city, Istanbul, the former Constantinople, is really an Asian city. The roughly 5% of Turkish territory lying in Europe (it borders Bulgaria and Greece) is really a non-starter for a discussion on the topic.

2) Culturally, Turkey belongs to an altogether different civilization. Like its Ottoman predecessor, is a Muslim country, steeped in traditionally satrapic political institutions. Europe is and always has been a continent rooted in the Judeo-Christian tradition, and institutionally rooted in Greco-Roman democracy. Europeans should have no concern declaring Turkey's foreignness to both fundamental constitutive elements of European identity. Turkey is the heir of a great and thriving civilization that has always defined itself in antithesis to the European one. To acknowledge this is in no way diminutive or demeaning of Turkey, it merely states the obvious fact that Turkey is 'Other' from Europe. Just as Turks are proud of their civilizational heritage, Europeans should be proud of their.

3) Historically, European empires and kingdoms have had to fight to repel Turkish invasions starting in the 13th Century: the Byzantines, the Bulgars, the Serbs, and the Habsburgs. In fact, the Ottoman threat has been a driver of early European collaboration when the continent's great powers formed the Holy League, in the 17th Century, to reverse territorial gains that the Ottomans had made. In short, Europe and Turkey have always been at odds, with the latter ever attempting to gain access to its more advanced neighbours.

4) Politically, European democracies have evolved to become a model of transnational integration building that highly successful institutional architecture known as the European Union, whose shared values are embodied in the concept of "Aquis communautaire" from which Turkey has been drifting -ever more distant. Ankara is expected to drift ever more toward authoritarianism in the aftermath of the so-called "phony coup" of July 2016.
-The secular and constitutional legacy of Republican reformer Ataturk has been squandered, and the democratic advances the country had achieved between the 1990's and early 2000's have been reversed. The country is now in a process fore-islamization, as the AKP party is transforming itself from centrist religiously-inspired party (roughly equivalent to European Christian-democratic parties) to a more openly Islamic party whose reinvigorated values are being institutionalized in the state.
-National and religious minorities are regularly targeted and repressed.
-Ankara still continues to refuse to acknowledge responsibility in the genocide of the Armenians.
- It is engaging in a shameless racketeering practices by weaponizing refugee flows from the Middle East and beyond to extort economic and political favours from the EU. A practice that is utterly unacceptable and that European leaders like Angela Merkel, should not have even allowed Turkey to entertain.
-Erdogan's ever more pronounced cult of personality has led him, after introducing tight censorship and free speech limitations at home, to de facto export it to Europe itself- consider the episode of the German comedian and other critical commentaries addressed to Erdogan in European countries.
-Turkey is playing an ambiguous if not abetting role in the context of the latest wave of terrorism and radicalism surrounding ISIS and spreading from there.

All this being said, Turkey has its own path to take. This however, knowing that Turkey is different historically and culturally, and even politically, it has chosen a different path. Europe and Turkey must not be enemies, but they are not brothers. They can be business partners respecting one another and acknowledging their respective differences.

Europe has demonized Putin and imposed sanctions on Russia partly in light of developments taking place in Russia, or undertaken by Russia. However, there are surprisingly few nuances distinguishing Erdogan's Turkey from Putin's Russia- whether in its domestic or foreign policy. It would be scarcely justifiable should Bruxelles admit Ankara to the EU club, not to mention the fact that Ankara is increasingly out of place even in the NATO alliance. 

Deflecting Attention Won't Change the Facts

After brewing for several days, the conservative election rigging incident has now snowballed all the way up to the Prime Minister's desk.

Unsurprisingly, the PM retorted with defiance and his habitual dose of rhetorical aggression, in an effort to divert attention (Globe and Mail, 29. 02. 2012).

Naturally, he blamed the opposition, evoked once again the far from comparable Vickileaks spat, and as in standard tory scripts he went on a vehement tirade against the Liberal Party.

Incidentally, someone should tell the PM that accusing the grits which have been out of government for the past 6 years, for facts that are old of almost 10 years, is becoming slightly specious.

Lastly, the PM dismissed the whole thing as a "smear campaign" and rumors circulated by "sore losers".

The (not so) funny thing in this whole story is that Elections Canada and the RCMP are taking this whole issue very seriously and their investigations keep spreading from riding to riding (CBC, 29. 02. 2012).

As it turns out, allegations suggest that as many as 30 to 40 ridings were affected by the robocalls, though facts remain to be ascertained and verified. However, the magnitude, scope, systematic and recurrent features of the episodes which seem to outline a coherent pattern are suspicious.

Remember the "strong, stable, conservative national majority"?

Again, it is early to pass a conclusive judgement on the matter, but history may well end up showing that national majority was a PHONY mirage! Pun intended, as usual...

Election Rigging Robocalls Are Latest Proof of Conservative Practice of Putinism

The latest scandal plaguing the Conservative Party of Canada is just another indication of their true fraudulent colors.

Substantive evidence suggests that "robocalls" were made on behalf of Conservative agents (the nature of the link to the party is yet to be ascertained) to mislead electors on the precise location of their polling office (Globe and Mail, 25. 02. 2012).

It is apparent that the only plausible motive for doing this was to prevent those targeted voters (probably identified through their campaigning software as Liberal or NDP electors) from casting their vote which would have favored the rival candidate.

To take the reasoning to its natural conclusion, as in a syllogism, this amounts to election rigging.

That the Conservatives take democracy rather lightly had already been demonstrated, over time, in various instances. That they could go this far, however, is not only disturbing: it is criminal. And it is no coincidence that the incident is being investigated by the RCMP!

At the same time, this is not entirely unexpected, recalling the bogus telephone polling that was conducted in the riding of Montreal Liberal MP Irwin Cotler, spreading erroneous rumors of his resignation only a few months after the May elections).

Liberal leader Bob Rae has compared this to the infamous practices of former US President Richard Nixon. It is probably reductive.

In only a few years, the Conservatives have, and the list is not exhaustive, prorogued parliament to conceal the findings of a parliamentary commission, conducted character killings on their opponents, eliminated the public financing of political parties hoping to undercut the survival of those rival organizations, and now we learn about their election rigging practices.

This latest episode only confirms our previous analysis (See the post for December 3, 2011): Stephen Harper has finally brought Putinism to Canada. And this, by all means, we could do without.