All right, y'all welcome back to the show.
It's anti-war radio.
I'm Scott Horton and our first guest on the show today is Benjamin Tua.
He is a retired foreign service officer, served in Israel from 1982 through 85, and currently is an independent analyst and contributor to foreign policy in Focus, which ought to be high on your list of bookmarks.
That's fpif.org.
They have an unending list of excellent writers on the most important topics there at foreign policy and focus.
Welcome to the show, Ben.
How are you doing?
I'm doing well, Scott.
Thank you.
And yourself?
I'm doing great.
I really appreciate you joining us today.
My pleasure.
All right.
So this piece, winners and losers in a new Middle East is really great.
I appreciate the trying to squeeze in, you know, all these different countries into one analysis here and sort of give us a broad picture of how the Middle East is changing.
And of course, you start with Egypt and we might as well do the very same thing here.
What is the current state of the revolution in Egypt, do you think?
Well, basically, they're waiting for elections.
I think that's going to take place in either September or August.
And of course, there's the uneasiness on a number of different sides.
The military is basically in control of the situation and seems to be basically calling the shots.
There's concern by some groups that some of the better organized elements in the society, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, may have an advantage because the parliamentary elections would be so soon.
But things seem to be going relatively smoothly.
There have been some inter-confessional conflict, you know, Muslims and Christian cops.
But the situation seems to be moving along relatively smoothly, given the difficulties.
And are you pretty confident that they actually will have some elections and that the revolutionaries in Tahrir Square are going to more or less get what they've demanded?
Because so far, all that's happened was they got rid of their civilian, so-called civilian, military-backed dictator, and they just got a council of military dictators instead, for the time being.
Yes, that's true.
But on the other hand, I don't think the Egyptian military has any appetite to stay in power.
They're...
They'd rather have a civilian front man anyway.
Well, I would call it more than a civilian front man.
I think it's not going to be just another Mubarak.
I think it'll be somewhat better now.
Is it going to be a perfect democratic system?
I would say probably not.
But, you know, let's take a look at Turkey, which has been working on its democratic system for a long time, with military intervention from time to time.
And yet, you know, it now is considered a quite open society.
Well, yeah, I sure don't want to be a naysayer.
I am very happy to see how much progress the revolutionaries have made so far.
And really, I've been very happy to see, and I've been talking with some of them on the show here too, about, you know, how well they seem to understand that they cannot let up for a minute, that they have to stay committed.
And apparently, you know, virtually the entire movement over there really got that message that this isn't the kind of thing that they can accomplish in a month or two.
That's going to take a while and they have to remember what it is that they want and they have to continue to go after it to get it.
Absolutely.
I mean, democracy and more representative government and transparency is a constant work in progress, as we know so well in this country, where, you know, there's concerns, even in our longstanding democracy, that the people are not being appropriately represented, that special interests have too much power and so on.
And in these societies, in the Middle East, it's a tougher haul.
But, you know, Egypt is a very sophisticated society.
And I have a sense that they're going to get it right.
You know, there'll be some wards and there's going to be some setbacks and so on.
But I think basically they're on a good path and they probably will sustain that.
Well, and as you point out in your article, if the government is actually subject to the will of the people there at all, that means they're going to have to change their foreign policy.
They say they want to stay very good friends with the United States, which I guess they have to or they'll starve since we export two thirds of their food supply over there.
But they also have already begun to open up with the Egyptians and to some degree help broker the deal between Hamas and Fatah in Gaza.
Right.
Absolutely.
Yes.
I think you were referring to the prospect of possible establishment of diplomatic relations with Iran, but also the unity agreement between the Fatah and Hamas elements is very important.
As you know, a couple of days ago, they opened the border with Gaza on a more or less permanent basis.
And that seems to be working quite well.
So there are going to be some important changes.
Israel is now, you know, kind of awakening from a long dormancy and it will be asserting itself much more in the region.
And I believe in a more positive way.
Well, yes, you write in your article again, it's Benjamin Tua, winners and losers in a new Middle East at Foreign Policy and Focus, and you say that the Israelis, I guess you assume they will realize that this same set scenario is basically going to continue to play out across the Middle East where the people have more to say about their government's foreign policy.
And that means that they really need to go ahead and get out in front of this parade and make peace and have a long term, you know, workable deal with their neighbors before they get themselves in too big of a mess here.
Yes, absolutely.
The now I'm hoping that this is what will happen.
Sometimes governments don't act in their best interest.
But I think going behind the rhetoric, Israel, you know, they've got some smart people there.
And the Israeli leadership must realize that trends are not moving in their direction and they have to make some adjustments.
And it's about time the Arabs, the Palestinians essentially have said we will accept Israel in the Middle East, but it has to be an Israel essentially within the pre six day war, 1967 borders and so on, with some adjustments and so on.
And the issues are not easy.
And the Palestinians would wind up with approximately 22 percent of the mandate territory of Palestine.
And the Israelis would get 78 percent.
I think that's a pretty good deal for the Israelis.
And it is something for the Palestinians.
And it may be something that will allow them to leave in dignity and running their own affairs.
Well, I mean, but with the Likud party in power and with the seeming strength of the further right parties than that, Shas and Yisrael Bettenu, they got the foreign minister there, Avigdor Lieberman.
I wonder what you think the chances are that they'll just continue on doubling down on their, you know, compounding their error and putting themselves in an outright, you know, South African apartheid type situation.
Well, that would be suicidal, and I think we have to get beyond the rhetoric now.
Some important things are going to be happening just in the next few months.
You know, there will be this U.N.
General Assembly vote on recognizing a Palestinian state that's going to empower the Palestinians.
And it's something that nobody can do anything about.
The United States has no veto in the U.N.
Israel cannot prevent it.
It will probably become a fait accompli.
And I just think that even, you know, I mean, it was Menachem Begin, after all, who made peace with Egypt.
And while the Israelis have not fulfilled all their obligations and it's a cold peace, you know, the peace has been maintained over these many years.
And now it's up to Israel to make some additional steps.
And I think they're just going to have to do it.
And even Netanyahu is going to have to bite the bullet.
All right.
It's Benjamin Tua, former Foreign Service officer, writer at Foreign Policy In Focus.
That's fpif.org.
The latest piece is Winners and Losers in a New Middle East.
And we'll be back with more after this.
All right, welcome back to the show.
It's anti-war radio.
I'm Scott Horton and I'm talking with Ben Tua.
He's a former Foreign Service officer.
And served in Israel from 82 to 85.
Currently, he's an independent analyst and contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus.
That's fpif.org.
And we're talking about his piece, Winners and Losers in a New Middle East.
And so I think where we left off, you were saying even Netanyahu knows better and they're going to have to do the right thing here, huh?
Yeah.
And I think they're kind of being forced into it.
And in a sense, some of these things are being taken out of the hands of the Israelis.
They're being taken out of the hands of the Americans and developments in the Middle East are starting to be the driver.
But Israel's ties have been fraying for a long time with its most important allies.
I think Americans are starting to understand that Israel's policies are not always wise.
When you get people in the military, Admiral Mullen, General Petraeus and other senior officials discussing the Middle East and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as something that requires urgent resolution because important American national interests are involved.
I think this is a bit of a game changer.
Well, I wonder this.
Could you tell me your perception of the relative strength of the Israel lobby in Washington, D.C. right now compared to, say, in the early 1980s when you worked for Ronald Reagan?
Well, I would say that one difference, one important difference, well, there are several differences.
Number one, AIPAC, which is the leading lobby, kind of an umbrella organization, now has significant competition.
And I'm thinking of J Street, I'm thinking of Americans for Peace now.
I'm thinking of Jewish Voices for Peace.
There are many organizations out there which are challenging AIPAC and so on.
And I think that in the United States, especially younger people do not have the same attachment to Israel in the sense of Israel right or wrong, you know.
But they're looking at the policies.
And when you get things such as this Gaza blockade, which has terrible implications in terms of injustice to noncombatants, to civilians, when you get the so-called Gaza War, which was really, I mean, I don't think you can call when the Israeli army attacks schools and so on, you know, a war.
I mean, really rather one-sided than the results of it.
You know, the numbers of, I think it was 1,300 some Palestinians killed, and I think there were 13 Israeli casualties and so on.
You know, and also technology is not helping Israel.
I mean, you know, Hezbollah essentially defeated the Israeli army.
The old methods are not working and so on.
Well, I appreciate your Sony optimism about, you know, the idea that people in power are sensitive to these obvious truths.
It doesn't seem like reality ever has anything to do with dictating their decision making from this end.
Well, I see your point.
And, you know, when I say I'm optimistic, I think that there's maybe a 30 percent chance of something happening, whereas a couple of years ago I would have given it 10 percent.
Right.
Yeah, that sounds about right.
You know, and it's always darkest before the dawn.
People do accuse me of optimism, but, you know, I mean, a diplomat never gives up.
And you always try to find a way to resolve the conflict and move to a better place.
And certainly talking and dialoguing and so on is better than bombing and shooting.
And if you can prevent the latter from happening and you're at least, you know, in some kind of engagement and so on, you know, you're in a better place.
And if that engagement, you know, sometimes look at the the conflict with Northern Ireland, for example.
Yeah, they worked it out.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And there are other conflicts.
I think that John Mueller was saying our problem in the world today is peace is breaking out all over.
We ran out of U.N. peacekeepers there to enforce ceasefires.
And really the only real wars going on in the world right now are in the Congo and America's wars.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And I think we have to I think the president, although there's been some disappointment, you know, I think he's really trying to to get out.
You know, remember that he said he were going to be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless going in.
And we've got the troop down numbers down to 50,000 or a little bit less.
And I think that plus the American public, you know, we won't stand for much more of this.
And it's expensive.
Well, now, you don't really address this so much, I guess a little bit.
It kind of comes across in the whole thing, but it's not its own separate category in your article.
Winners and losers in the new Middle East.
But it seems like the biggest loser here is the American empire and that we're losing many of our puppet dictatorships.
And we're certainly having a Democratic pressure from below put on all of them.
And it seems like if there's one example of, you know, going down in flames here as bad as possible, it's the intervention in Libya.
How are they ever going to get out of that thing without getting much, much deeper in?
Well, you know, there are many ways for a country to have influence and to be great.
And empire is not necessarily the best.
It's usually not.
It's certainly not the most profitable in terms of lives and treasure.
And it often hurts the people that you're occupying more than, you know, with the not being there would.
I think on Libya, we have to be a little bit patient.
It's as simple as that.
It's not going to happen overnight.
It could happen quickly.
But I mean, as I read reports and so on, I see that, you know, now the oil minister has defected and so on.
The pressure is growing and it's going to be incremented.
It'll take some time.
I think another example we could take is the South African apartheid regime.
I served in southern Africa.
I was there in the early 70s.
And, you know, you thought, how is this going to end and so on?
And it did take a long time.
But eventually, you know, there was some triumph of justice in that situation.
Well, so but in terms of Libya, I mean, I hate to be the naysayer again here, but it seems like as long as it takes to get rid of Gaddafi, whether it's next week or next month, then they're going to have to occupy the place in order to have purple fingered elections and train up the new army and the rest of this nation building nonsense.
Now, are they going to get out before then turn the country over to the thousand guys we've been fighting for, some of whom are Al-Qaeda and Iraq veterans?
Well, again, I have to be more optimistic than than you.
You're welcome to be.
Thank you.
Please do.
I don't think we're going to have troops on the ground in Libya.
At any point.
I really don't.
But would it I mean, how are they going to quit?
You know what I mean?
Well, the thing is, well, the thing is, once Gaddafi leaves the scene, a lot of the people who supported him are going to switch sides.
And some of them are already switching sides because they think that they've got a losing proposition.
And so what you have to do is have some kind of national reconciliation there.
You know, it's the society is part tribal and he kind of made sure that he destroyed any vestiges or elements of civil society.
So it's not going to be easy, but it's not going to be a boots on the ground operation.
And I think that the largely hands off approach that President Obama is taking is is about right.
I mean, you can't let a situation continue where the you know, the leader of the country says he's going to hunt people down like Berman and so on and exterminate them.
And, you know, and he was doing some of this stuff.
Well, I mean, Libyan forces, Libyan forces have taken many cities since that time and they haven't gone exterminating men, women and children.
He was just talking about the rebel fighters.
Right.
Which is the same thing Obama would say to Americans if they were trying to rebel against him.
Well, I it seemed to me over the top and the number of those killing Gaddafi's alone and everything, but I don't think he's been committing campaigns of rounding up women and children and masquerading them in the town square or anything.
Yeah, I must say I don't see many reports of that, you know, but you're right on that.
I think there was some exaggeration which backfired on him and which people were able to capitalize on to to make a quick move.
All right.
Well, I'm sorry, Ben, that we're all out of time.
I hope we can do this again.
It's been very interesting conversation.
All right.
Well, thank you, Scott.
It was good being with you.
All right, everybody.
That's Benjamin Tua from Foreign Policy In Focus.
Winners and losers in a new Middle East.
FBIF.org.
