Thursday, October 29, 2020

Issue 47

THE BRETON/GEROL NEWSLETTER

THE GREATEST LAME-DUCK PRESIDENT EVER?

Although Democratic party supporters remain very nervous, it looks as though Joe Biden will become the next President if the polls are right, if he can avoid mistakes raising questions about his mental health and if he can hold on to Pennsylvania and a few other nearby swing states such as Michigan and Wisconsin. For some political observers who have looked at the historical voting patterns in these latter states, the tendencies that we observe today take their origin in the ethno-cultural make-up of the states and to features going back as far as the American Revolution. Simply put, this is the long-standing confrontation between the Appalachia and Yankee traditions.

Looking at it this way, Donald Trump, for all his failings is not the first US president to have been elected by a contribution from the Appalachia nation. The rebellious gun-wielding anti-government tendency is far from a novelty.

Looking at long-term voting patterns should also give some pause to those who raise the issue of foreign intervention in US elections. The fact is that the US electorate cannot be moved so easily by anything, neither the billions of dollars that are spent by each camp or by the real but limited intrusions of foreign actors such as Iran or Russia. You would know that Iran does prefer Biden. As for Russia, it is now far from clear which candidate they would rather have win the day.

As for what really moves the electorate, the jury is still out. Some have seen Biden’s far-reaching statement on fossil fuels as a blunder that would cost him votes in oil-rich Texas and Pennsylvania. On the Republican side, some were furious with White House Chief of Staff Mark McKinnon’s “surrender” statement on COVID-19. The Republican rush to bring Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court so she can decide on election cases may even have a negative impact on the electorate in some states.

Donald Trump has demonstrated his incapacity to formulate public policy beyond a few mostly negative statements. If he loses the election, it may well be for his penchant for holding rallies that feed his oversize narcissistic ego, but amount to preaching to the converted while insulting every non-believer in sight. His statements about the end of the pandemic do not help either. COVID-19 fears, antipathy to Trump as well as his own insistence on voting problems may have been factors in the unprecedented surge of advance voting. As the candidate with a strong base but one that is significantly short of a majority, Trump stands to lose from a large turnout.

If he loses the election, Trump may well engage in legal contestations in the states with narrow margin victories for his opponent. Opponents genuinely fear he may have more than occasional luck with the courts that he has packed with his supporters. Yet, he could not easily overturn a clear public disavowal. Would he graciously accept the negative verdict of public opinion? Most unlikely. The period between the announcement of the definitive results and the inauguration of the next president in January could be unusually painful, with Trump using every trick in the book to seek retribution as well as protect his personal interests and those of his close family.

--o--

NOT A CLASSICAL LOCAL CONFLICT

History does not always play the major role in local conflicts.

Yet, in the case of the permanent war between Armenia and Azerbaijan for Nagorno-Karabakh since 1988, history could say "mea culpa" about that conflict.

In 1922 when the Soviet Union was formed, Joseph Stalin who at that time was responsible for the nationalities policy of the newly formed Communist Federation, surrounded the Nagorno-Karabakh region, historically populated by Armenians for a thousand years, by Azerbaijan territory. Stalin, hailing from neighbouring Georgia would have known all the nuances of the long-standing ethnic rivalries in the Caucasus. “Divide and Conquer” was a classic approach Bolsheviks took when it came to the ethnic question within the USSR. As a result, only 16% of Nagorno-Karabakh was populated by Azeris. The rest was a large Armenian majority. And let us not forget that only 7 years prior over a million Armenians were massacred by the Turks and their allies (including Azeris).

Fast forwarding the events to 1988, shortly before the USSR fell apart, Azeri population was expelled from Nagorno-Karabakh by the Armenians. On top of that, Armenia managed to occupy five additional agricultural areas as bargaining chips for future negotiations with Azerbaijan. The Armenian goal was also to have a corridor (called Lachin corridor) between Karabakh and Armenian proper. Altogether Azerbaijan lost 20% of its territory by the time the ceasefire was achieved in 1994. Since then public opinion in both countries has prevented any meaningful negotiation.

Today Armenia is facing a well-prepared and well-armed Azerbaijan supported by Turkey while Russia is not particularly enthusiastic in supporting its Armenian ally. As a result, Armenia is currently on the losing end of the conflict. The failure of the Moscow-negotiated ceasefire and then of the Washington-negotiated one would seem to confirm that neither side is genuinely ready to stop fighting. The Azerbaijan objective is to erode the Armenian position to a point where Armenia will be ready to negotiate and may be ready for a new compromise arrangement. Armenia can only try to resist and hope to delay Azerbaijan advance.

--o--

BELARUS REMAINS A GEOPOLITICAL RIDDLE FOR RUSSIA

For Russia, for its tsar-president Vladimir Putin, the crisis in Belarus is of a geopolitical nature. Moscow might not be openly stating its geopolitical calculus, but in its eyes, the Belarus problem resembles the uprisings in Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan and represents a similar problem in the long run. So far though the Belarus turmoil is not of anti-Russia or anti-Putin nature.

Whatever the arguments we hear around the world by analysts that protests in Belarus are not about geopolitics and more about popular grievances against President Alexander Lukashenko, the issue will ultimately transform into a serious geopolitical game.

On October 22nd, at the Valdai conference (this time virtually over zoom), Putin spoke directly about Belarus. He insisted that no one from the outside should interfere in Belarus affairs and suggested that some constitutional changes are inevitable. He also compared people's anger in Belarus to popular street protests in “developed Western democracies” (obviously hinting at Portland and Seattle) and said that at least in Belarus no one gets shot in the back. Putin also said that those among law enforcement involved in extreme violence must be held accountable.

Russia, at the same time, is not taking any chances. In fact, two months ago, Putin announced the creation of a special “law enforcement reserve” for use in Belarus should the situation get “out of control.”

The Russians understand that an “Armenia-style” revolution in Belarus could theoretically take place, but it would open the country more to Europe and thereby create geopolitical dilemmas like those created in Ukraine before 2014. Both Armenian PM Pashinyan (the war in Nagorno-Karabakh is not going too well for Armenia) and President Lukashenko suddenly depend on Putin more than ever.

President Lukashenko at ceremony introducing the new Minister of the Interior, Ninsk October 30th
©President of Belarus Website

For the Russian leadership, events in Belarus are a continuation of the “revolutionary tradition" that has been spreading across the former Soviet space since the early 2000s. Russia would probably replace Lukashenko with a wiser man, but after 25 years of one-man rule such candidates are hard to come by. In Belarus, unlike military games in the Caucasus where Russian military might may eventually be decisive, a more subtle approach is required. One the one hand Russia is not ready to send 'little green men' and on the other it can hardly afford the loss of such a strategic, geopolitical piece as Belarus.

President Lukashenko in Slutsky region, October 23rd
©President of Belarus Website

Unlike with other leaders who lost or were about to lose their jobs, the offer of a comfortable dacha in a Moscow suburb would not be enough to draw Lukashenko away. He is opinionated, messianistic and still has too much energy. Rather than retire him the other approach inspired by Vatican traditions would be to give him a promotion to get rid of him. There is, however, only one position above that of President of Belarus, President of a Belarus-Russia union. Lukashenko would only agree to a position of real power and responsibility. Russia, having had to contend with Lukashenko’s difficult behaviour for years could only give him an honorific position. That leaves only one “peaceful” option, a constitutional reform in Belarus that would take some power away from the president. That will take time and may not be enough for the opposition forces. With the opposition fully intent on continuing protests and strike actions, the end of the year promises to be remarkably interesting.

--o--

UKRAINE UPDATE

Local elections fiasco

For the first time in the history of modern Ukraine, the local elections that were held on October 25th meant something. As a result of administrative reforms intended to achieve decentralization, local authorities will have greater power in running local affairs. Local management issues are a common problem in virtually all post-Soviet countries. For a country the size of Ukraine, decentralization was both needed and overdue.

President Zelenskyy, October 25th, Kyiv
©President of Ukraine Website

President Zelenskyy and his political party, Servant of the People, decided to run their candidates for these local elections to occupy fully the whole political space. The result was a clear disaster with their candidates receiving around 25% of the total vote. This is a major rebuttal for the President and his party in terms of political credibility. The vote was also an occasion for some opposition parties to consolidate their position. Former President Poroshenko’s party emerged as the stronger nationalist entity in Western regions and the pro-Russia party recovered some of the support it has lost to Zelenskyy in the Southeastern regions. This could also set the stage for a confrontation pattern between the central government in Kyiv and the local authorities. It could complicate even further the implementation of the political and economic reforms that are promoted by Zelenskyy in order to weed out corruption, not that local managers are more corrupt, but that they will reject control from the center.

To complicate matters even further for Zelenskyy, in late October the Constitutional Court invalidated a law that criminalised false income declarations by public officials. The law was considered as an essential instrument to fight corruption. The integrity of the Constitutional Court was called into question, some observing that some of its members were not entitled to take part on the decision and that some were in conflict of interest situations.

At the same time, the Prime Minister expressed the view that Ukraine and the IMF were moving closer in their discussions over the fulfillment by Ukraine of the commitment that would open the door to further IMF financial assistance. This would include anti-corruption measures.

The emergence of opposition locally elected officials as well as the backtracking of judicial institutions illustrate the difficulties confronting Zelenskyy in carrying out reforms even though he is proceeding with the best intentions and started with a strong popular mandate.

Differences of opinion between central and local authorities also seem to play a part in Ukraine’s less than perfect management of COVID-19. Here, there is no second wave but still a first wave that keeps getting bigger. There would also seem to exist some difficulties in having a clear picture of the real situation.

Referendum or glorified opinion poll

President Zelenskyy in Chernivtsi, October 2nd
©Presdient of Ukraine Website

As an aside and almost as a distraction, President Zelenskyy had also added a five-question referendum/opinion poll to the local ballots. For four of the five questions, he received a positive answer. Questions follow with the percentage of Yes answers.

1. The possibility of introducing life imprisonment for corruption of a particularly large scale, 81%

2. The need to introduce a free economic zone in Donbas, 45%

3. The need to downsize the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine from 450 to 300 deputies, 95%

4. The possibility of legalizing medical cannabis in Ukraine to alleviate pain of critically ill patients, 70%

5. The need to raise the issue of using the security guarantees set out in the Budapest Memorandum at the international level to restore its state sovereignty and territorial integrity, 78%

The idea of asking these questions was met with less than unanimous support. It may have been intended to bring in more young voters to participate. It probably turned out as a sign of indecisiveness and a feeble and unnecessary attempt to involve people.

Who is to blame?

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says those who allowed Russia to illegally annex Crimea in early 2014 must be held responsible. In an annual address to parliament on October 20, Zelenskyy did not name anyone in particular, but appeared to be taking clear aim at officials who assumed power after mass anti-government protests toppled Russia-friendly President Viktor Yanukovych in late February 2014.

Presdeient Zelenskyy addressing the Rada, October 20th
©President of Ukraine Website

Zelenskyy also said that his government supports the idea of an amnesty for "the millions of our compatriots, who have no blood on their hands and remain hostage" in Crimea and the districts of Donbas that remain under Russia-backed separatists' control.

--o--

FROM THREE NO'S TO THREE YESES

Fifty-three years ago, in September of 1967 in Khartoum (Sudan), shortly after Israel needed only 6 days to defeat armies of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon and troops from Saudi Arabia and Yemen in one of the most memorable wars of the 20th century, the Arab League had pronounced the so-called "Three No's": "no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it..."

The first Arab country to break the declaration was Egypt in 1979 as it established diplomatic relations with Israel for the return of Sinai peninsula, Jordan followed in 1994 and in 2020 three more Arab states had changed no’s to yes: the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and finally Sudan.

As the world battles Covid-19 and the massive economic recession, the significance of the peace deals has hardly been noticed. Beyond the reluctance to give credit to Donald Trump and his administration, there may be an understanding that some of the deals confirmed a de facto situation and do not resolve the central conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.

--o--

RUSSIA: WHERE SHOULD THE MONEY GO?

Russia's Defense Ministry says it has rejected austerity measures proposed by the Finance Ministry, such as reducing the number of military personnel.

In a proposal submitted to Russia's Security Council earlier this month, the Finance Ministry suggested cutting the country's military personnel by 10 percent, which would amount to some 100,000 members of the armed forces, the Izvestia newspaper reported on October 20th.

The ministry proposed that some of those officers would be given civilian posts instead. It also suggested raising the number of years of service required to receive a military pension.

However, the Defense Ministry argued that similar moves in the past showed their "inefficiency" and led to "numerous problematic issues affecting the combat capacity of the Armed Forces."

In a statement carried by Krasnaya Zvezda, its official newspaper, the ministry said it had sent its position to the Security Council "on the unacceptability of these proposals and the absence of support for them from the leadership of the military department."

The Defense Ministry insisted that the Finance Ministry's proposal to slash the number of military posts would have "'zero' economic effect."

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said no decision had been made on the matter.

The Russian Finance Ministry’s proposals come amid a worldwide recession brought on by the coronavirus pandemic.

According to the International Monetary Fund's latest economic outlook released last week, the Russian economy is expected to plunge 4.6 percent this year before rebounding 3.9 percent in 2021.

Russia last year increased its annual military expenditures by 4.5 percent to $65.1 billion, making it the world's fourth-largest military spender, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

--o--

RUSSIA’S FAR-OUT THINKERS

Russian Archpriest Dmitry Smirnov, known for his controversial public statements that led to public outcry and criticism, has died at the age of 69. Vasily Rulinsky, the press secretary of the Russian Orthodox Church, announced the death on October 21st. He did not mention the cause but most likely it was Covid-19. The priest contracted the virus several months ago.

Smirnov was known for his controversial positions, including his call to bless nuclear weapons, which he described as the "salvation of the Russian people and its culture."

He also called on believers to give all their earnings to the Russian Orthodox church and advised single Russian women to "look for husbands in Africa."

He called women living together with their partners «unpaid prostitutes."

Just before Smirnov was hospitalized with COVID-19 he called the pandemic "an extremely useful phenomenon," because, he said, people started "caring more about their loved ones and better understand Christian values."

In August, following public criticism of his statements, Smirnov was removed from the position of Chairman of the Russian Orthodox Patriarch’s Commission on the Family, becoming its Honorary Chairman instead.

--o--

KAZAKHSTAN

Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev has set the date of elections for the lower house of parliament, or Majlis, for January 10th, 2021. The decree, signed on October 21, paves the way for the energy-rich Central Asian country’s first parliamentary elections since Tokayev in 2019 succeeded Nursultan Nazarbayev, who resigned that year after nearly three decades in power.

Nazarbayev still maintains key positions of power, including head of the country’s Security Council and ruling Nur Otan party.

International election observers say that past elections in Kazakhstan have failed to meet agreed standards, citing electoral fraud, repression of opposition candidates, and restrictions on the freedom of the press.

The 107-seat Majlis is currently dominated by Nazarbayev’s Nur Otan party, which has 84 deputies. The pro-government Communist People’s Party of Kazakhstan and the liberal Ak Zhol party each have seven seats. The remaining nine seats are appointed by the Assembly of the People of Kazakhstan, an advisory body controlled by Nazarbayev.

The last parliamentary elections were held in March 2016.

--o--

KYRGYZSTAN

Kyrgyzstan's Central Election Commission has set December 20th as the date for new parliamentary elections after an October 4th vote was annulled following public protests that ousted the government and the parliament speaker and led to the resignation of President Sooronbai Jeenbekov.

After Jeenbekov's resignation in early October, lawmakers elected Sadyr Japarov, a former nationalist lawmaker and convicted kidnapper, who was released from prison by the protesters on October 6th, as the new prime minister and handed presidential powers to him on October 16th.

According to the law, early elections must be held no later than three months after the president’s resignation. Japarov cannot take part in the election as the current legislation does not allow acting presidents to seek office.

--o--

BELARUS, ON THE GROUND

Hundreds of people have been detained by police in Belarus since post-election protests swept the country. The new target of the authorities: lawyers. Attorneys who have been hired or have volunteered to defend detainees and opposition leaders struggle not only to handle huge caseloads, but also the formidable hurdles they say authorities are placing in their way.

Protesters are facing increasingly phantasmagorical and utterly fabricated charges, lawyers say, as Aleksandr Lukashenka clings to power amid growing public opposition, international isolation, and sanctions imposed following the disputed August 9th presidential election that official results say he won in a landslide.

The lawyers find themselves circumventing obstacles, such as scrambling to get to court after being given only a moment's notice that their client's case is being heard, and working under the threat that they, too, may run into trouble with the authorities.

Many lawyers say they face disbarment, detention, or even arrest for their work with the opposition.

--o--

PERSON OF THE MONTH: ABRAHAM KAREM

In the absence of a personality that would stand up for his or her positive contribution, the person of the month title goes to a person who has through his inventions transformed modern warfare. It is also an occasion to observe on the growing impersonal nature of military killing as well as to the relative indifference to extra-judicial executions.

From the barefooted Houthis rebels in Yemen, rugged militants in Gaza, various militias in Syria to the most advanced militaries in the world-all of them rely on the use drones or (UAV's unmanned aerial vehicles). The drones have transformed the battlefield (and like a lot of military-based technologies found their use in many civilian projects) and have made spying and killing even more effective.

The latest examples of the effectiveness of drone technology can be seen in the American assassination of the head of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard chief Soleimani by means of the 'Reaper' drone and series of precision hits by the Azeri military against Armenian targets with the help of Israeli and Turkish made drones.

The man who pioneered this technology is Abraham Karem. He was born in Baghdad, Iraq in 1937. As a teenager, being from a Jewish family, he moved to Israel where he began to develop his interest in drone technology. Along the way he graduated from the renowned Technion University in Haifa and constructed his first drone during the 1973 October war for the Israeli army.

Later on he moved to the United States where he founded a company called Leading Systems which operated from his garage. He manufactured two early drones, 'Albatross' and 'Amber'. A more sophisticated 'Amber' drone, as the US Government contractor 'General Atomics' acquired Karem's company, became a platform for arguably one of the best drones in the world - American made 'Predator'.

--o--

THE AUTHORS

Ilya Gerol, former foreign editor of the Citizen in Ottawa, syndicated columnist in Canadian, US and European media specializing in international affairs. His area of expertise includes Russia, Eurasian Economic Union, Eastern and Central Europe. Ilya Gerol has written several books, one of them, The Manipulators, has become a textbook on relations of media and society.

During his career in the Canadian Foreign Service, Gilles Breton had three assignments at the Canadian Embassy in Moscow. His first posting there began during the Soviet period, in 1983. His last was from 2008 to 2012 as Minister-Counsellor and Deputy Head of Mission. He also served as Deputy Director responsible for Canada’s relations with Russia from 2000 to 2008. As an international civil servant, he was Deputy Director of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights in Warsaw from 1994 to 1997.

Gilles Breton also currently serves as Chairman of the National Board of the Canada-Eurasia-Russia Business Association. The views expressed in this newsletter exclusively reflect the opinion of the authors.

Wednesday, September 30, 2020

Issue 46

THE BRETON/GEROL NEWSLETTER

LOOKING FOR THE UNDECIDED

As one CNN analyst put it recently, it is difficult to imagine that most American voters would not have made their mind by now as to whom they will support on November 3^rd. Donald Trump has been such a polarising figure that voters would likely have made their mind about him. Joe Biden is not an ideal candidate, but represents a reasonable enough option. In that respect, public opinion polls, that predicted a popular vote victory for Hillary Clinton in 2016, are probably right again in foreseeing a Biden popular vote victory by a slightly larger margin than Clinton.

What polls cannot measure so easily is the level of commitment of decided voters and whether they will actually vote. Those voters who have not abandoned Donald Trump by now are unlikely to do so in the coming weeks. The revelations about Trump not paying much income tax, being a money-losing and personally indebted businessman will not change that. The level of commitment of Trump’s so-called base is very strong. The insistence on appointing quickly a new Supreme Court Justice to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg is intended on cementing the support of that base, especially its pro-life and evangelical segments. It would not likely increase the number of Trump supporters as a majority of Americans would seem to have opposed this Republican rush job. In addition, ‘Trump’s repeated statements that he “would have to see” before he recognizes his possible defeat are not likely to attract any new supporters.

Biden’s perceived frailty as well as the fact that he must recruit voters from a much broader ideological spectrum than Trump would suggest the level of commitment of his supporters is less firm. What can help him though is that there are so-called “never-Trumpers” who will vote for anybody but Donald Trump.

In a polarised environment and considering that debates more often than not do not change public opinion trends the face-to-face debates with Donald Trump were nevertheless a concern for Biden supporters as they could allow Trump to cast some doubts about Biden’s suitability and stamina. The first debate on September 29th turned out into a total mess. Biden may not have shined too brightly, but he certainly survived. As for Trump, his refusal to condemn white supremacists or to commit to a peaceful transition, as well as his bullying approach, constant interruptions and personal attacks may have confirmed hitherto lukewarm Biden supporters in their choice.

Some of the main issues that should concern American voters are the management of the pandemic, economic recovery plans, social equality, health care and climate change. These would seem to play in favour of the Democratic candidate. Trump’s attempts to score points on the law-and-order agenda seem to have had limited success.

All things considered, taking into account the monolithic nature of the support for Donald Trump, the distorting influence of the Electoral College and the possible judicial contestations over mail-in votes, it is still too early for the Biden campaign take anything for granted.

--o--

NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT

Yerevan and Baku are still technically at war over Azerbaijan’s breakaway region of Nagorno-Karabakh despite a 1994 cease-fire in a conflict that killed around 30,000 people. Since then, skirmishes have frequently broken out near the so-called Line of Contact that separates Armenian and Azerbaijani forces on the front line of Europe's longest-running conflict.

The situation has evolved in the wrong direction after Azerbaijan was allegedly very disappointed with the absence of any change after the accession to power in Armenia of reformist Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. Pashinyan was not known to have the close association of his predecessors to the Karabakh faction but turned out to maintain the same approach as before. There even emerged rumours that Armenia may want to recognize the independence of Karabakh. Azerbaijan leadership had most of the time managed to contain the pressure of its war party but had to conclude that the existing negotiating framework would produce no result. The fact that Turkey might be willing to provide a helping hand also created a new context. The usual tensions on the Line of Contact did the rest.

Armenia on September 29th said a Turkish F-16 shot down one of its warplanes (Sukhoi-25), a claim immediately denied by Ankara as "absolutely untrue." Armenian defence ministry said that the Turkish jet was deep in Armenian airspace. The pilot died. The Azerbaijan's Defense Ministry also denied that a Turkish fighter jet had shot down an Armenian plane.

Yerevan's claim came as fighting between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh is continuing in a major flare-up of the decades-old conflict over the disputed territory. Armenian military losses stood at 89 dead with over a hundred wounded. Azerbaijan refuses to release its list of casualties, reporting only its civilian deaths which so far stand at around two dozen killed.

Both sides use heavy artillery, helicopters, drones, and air power.

Several key countries, including the US, Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom called on both sides to cease hostilities.

In a situation when Turkey, a powerful regional player, openly supports Azerbaijan and now very likely provides Baku with some direct military help, Russia which has friendly relations with Armenia and does a lot of business with Azerbaijan has a lot at stake here.

On September 29th, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called on “all sides, especially partner countries such as Turkey, to do all they can for a cease-fire and get back to a peaceful settlement of this conflict using political and diplomatic means.” One sentence of this statement was an obvious message to Turkey: "Any statements about some kind of support and military activity undoubtedly add fuel to the flames," Peskov told reporters. As before in Syria and Libya, Russia finds itself having to find a way to restrain Turkish President Erdogan.

Moscow sells weapons to both Azerbaijan and Armenia but has a military base in Armenia and favors that strategic partnership.

Another country which sells a lot of high-end military equipment to Azerbaijan is Israel. In fact, most drones that Azerbaijan possesses are made in Israel and the Azeri army prefers Israeli technology (especially drones) over Turkish arms. Armenia often decried Israeli sales of arms to Azerbaijan (a Muslim majority country) and reminded Israel about historic parallels between the two countries. Israel, however, pursues its own interests in the region.

The outcome of this conflict largely depends on Russia's (and the international community's) ability to rein in Turkey, a real military powerhouse in the region. One on one Armenia can hold its own against larger and economically stronger Azerbaijan.

A resolution of the conflict at this time may imply a more direct Turkish involvement in so-called peace arrangements.

Armenia now faces the same enemy as it did beginning in 1915 when Turkey and its allies massacred more that a million Armenians, a genocide Turkey still refuses even to acknowledge. This fact casts a dark shadow over the conflict. In imperial times, Russia protected its Eastern Armenia territory. Today’s Russia, even more closely tied to Armenia and with its own large Armenian diaspora, would not allow Armenia to lose a war that would lead to massive Armenian civilian casualties.

--o--

THE NEW POLITIC GAMBIT IN BELARUS

President Alexander Lukashenko who officially had to be inaugurated on October 9th after he won the elections with a "fantastic" 80% majority of votes, suddenly decided to have his inauguration on September 23rd. He invited only highly loyal people including army officers and security personnel. Diplomats were represented only by the Chinese ambassador who declined to have translators present.

Lukashenko's inauguration ceremony
©President of Belarus website

The idea was charmingly simple: to become a legal president at the time when he is not being recognized by most European leaders. In fact, such a speedy and secret inauguration only underlined the lack of legitimacy that from now on will be the part and parcel of the European approach to the regime in Minsk. The massive demonstrations that took place immediately upon the inauguration highlighted the total rejection of Lukashenko with all his 26 years in power.

The official news agency BelTA reported "several hundred" senior officials had been invited to the inauguration ceremony, though it did not say who or how many actually attended

Following the ceremony, spontaneous demonstrations broke out in Minsk, the heart of more than six weeks of nationwide opposition to the results of the August 9th election that Lukashenka claims to have won.

The Belarusian rights organization Vyasna, which has documented the detention of thousands of protesters since the vote, said at least two demonstrators were detained near the Independence Palace, where the inauguration took place.

Interestingly enough, even Vladimir Putin did not send a congratulatory message to his Belorussian colleague on this occasion.

In the West, a growing list of countries said they would not recognize Lukashenko's presidency. Canada and a few others are also imposing personal sanctions on Lukashenko and his entourage.

According to Professor Valery Solovey, one of the most informed Kremlin observers, Putin is currently looking for a decent replacement to the Belarus leader with a tragic and comic behaviour. It looks like Russia and Belarus may down the road go ahead with some long-discussed kind of union that will be based on coordination in key economic, financial and security areas. The process might give Lukashenko a new job and title. This will take time though and the protests are continuing.

--o--

KREMLIN TAKES NAVALNY BACK

Kremlin critic and anti-corruption campaigner Alexei Navalny posted on social media a picture of himself sitting on a park bench in the German capital after being discharged from the Berlin hospital where he was being treated for what Germany has said is a case of poisoning with a Soviet-style nerve agent.

At the time, the German government said that laboratories in France and Sweden had reconfirmed German tests showing that the poison used on Navalny was a Novichok agent.

The Kremlin has said there is no proof of that and has asked for evidence to be shared, to no avail.

It is clear thar Navalny was poisoned by a substance of the Novichok family, but not at the same level as the previous similar poisoning cases in the UK. It is also clear that he is on his way to a full recovery and wants to return home.

His wish was welcomed by Putin's press-secretary Dmitry Peskov who confirmed that nobody in the government would object to Navalny's return to Russia and that he was "free" to return to Moscow "at any moment".

The question however remains: the conditional house arrest and several unsubstantiated charges against the leading Russian opposition figure have not been dropped and consequently his stay in Moscow will not be trouble-free. There is another problem, the key problem, will the Russian government carry out a criminal investigation into Navalny's poisoning as it is demanded by the international community? Even if it does, will the investigation answer all the questions that have been raised around the circumstances of the incident. Will it also answer the nagging unresolved question: cui bono? Who is profiting from this story? Whatever the damage some allege has been done to Russia-Europe relations, there little evidence of a desire in the Kremlin to get to the bottom of the story, or even to appear to do so.

--o--

UKRAINE: PROGRESS AND GOOD INTENTIONS

One step forward

During a late September working trip to the Donetsk region, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy held a meeting on the work of the Ukrainian side of the Trilateral Contact Group (Ukraine, Russia and the OSCE).

The quotes from the minutes of the meeting are eloquent: […] It was noted that the regime of comprehensive and permanent ceasefire is an undeniable success on the way to peace in Donbass. […] Indeed, we observe minimization of losses. Today, the silence mode (i.e. ceasefire) has been maintained for the 62nd day.

President Zelenskyy visiting troops in the Donetsk region, September 26th
©President of Ukraine Website

There is no question that achieving a cease-fire and making it last is a significant accomplishment and a fulfillment of a key promise. In addition to negotiating a cease-fire with the opposing side, Zelenskyy had to bring his own side together. The gratitude he extended to the military establishment was not pro forma. After years of fighting, building an internal consensus with stakeholders holding entrenched positions was most unlikely not an easy task.

On the overall issue of implementing the Minsk I and II peace Agreements, the situation is showing very little sign of improvement. Old-time politicians on Zelenskyy’s new negotiating team got into trouble over some of their controversial statements. Former President Kravchuk, now lead Ukrainian negotiator, nevertheless passed a clear and accurate diagnostic on the Minsk process, calling it impossible to fulfill: "We are now in a rather difficult situation: there are Minsk Agreements, but they cannot be implemented given the obvious reasons. Also, it is because when they were being signed, it was already clear that they would not be fulfilled.” To be clear Kravchuk refers to the Ukrainian side’s problems with the Minsk Agreements: "Those led by [the then-President Petro] Poroshenko laid down one thing, and now they demand something else. And those who laid this down and signed it remind us that international agreements must be fulfilled.’’

Ultimately, Kravchuk sees a summit of the Normandy leaders as the only way out of the current deadlock, the underlying implication being that a modified arrangement must be negotiated

No way to run a railway

In putting an end to his membership of the Board of the State Railway Corporation well-known international consultant Anders Aslund delivered a damning indictment on the senior management of that corporation as well on members of President Zelenskyy’s ruling party (Servant of the People). Aslund’s complaints bear on the treatment of the members of the Board as well as the rejection of their improvement proposals. What Aslund’s complaints reveal is that the new political leadership is unwilling to proceed with market-driven reforms and that it takes a narrow populist view of the remuneration of senior officials. For a party intent of fighting corruption, the latter reveals a lack of understanding of the principle that adequate remuneration is one good way of preventing the need to engage in corrupt practices.

In addition, there is still an ongoing deadlock with the IMF and to some the extent the EU over Ukraine maintaining the independence of all anti-corruption bodies, this being a condition for further financial assistance. This, among other things, prompted the EU European High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs Josep Borrell to state during his recent visit to Ukraine that the EU is not a charity or a cash machine. Opinion polls suggest that Ukrainians are fully behind the anti-corruption fight, but that they are less keen having the IMF “manage” Ukraine.

President Zelenskyy is now strongly pushing for the adoption by the Rada (Parliament) of an Anticorruption Strategy for 2020-2024. It may seem like it took a lot of time to get the government to get its act together in the form a strategy. It was, however, a necessary process of reckoning that good intentions are not enough.

COVID-19 problems

The COVID-19 situation in Ukraine is not improving, but even more concerning is the fact that the official reports may not reflect the real situation. During a conference call in early September it was brought to the attention of the President that the chief physicians of a number of medical institutions in Ukraine sometimes force staff to conceal COVID-19 infection at work as they are afraid of administrative penalties for hospitals. The President immediately called on the Ministry of Health to protect doctors.

It has been surmised since the beginning of the pandemic that the reporting of cases was not uniform between various countries and not uniform within certain countries. This was given as a possible explanation of reporting delays in China and inaccuracies elsewhere. Local authorities do not want to report what they fear might bring retribution. Ukraine would not be different than many other countries in this respect, but the problem was at least made public and it was addressed by the political authority.

--o--

PUTIN AT RISK, UNLIKELY

Some Western observers had voiced the hope that events in Belarus might have an impact on the round of regional and local elections that were held in Russia in early September. The idea was that the elections might be a test, even a challenge, for the Putin-supported party. There was no perceivable Belarus influence on the outcome. This is not because there was no coverage in Russia of the events in Belarus. The Russian public receives or has access to all the information that it needs to appreciate what is going on in Belarus.

Kremlin-supported candidates generally did very well at the level of gubernatorial elections, less well at the level of local legislatures and councils. A few associates of opposition leader Navalny even managed to get elected at the local level in Siberia. From the Kremlin’s point of view the outcome was almost optimal. From the point of view of genuine oppositionists, any victory is still a breakthrough as it feeds the hope that change is possible.

President Putin on-line conference with newly-elected regional leaders, September 24th
©President of Russia Website
Add caption

It was probably wishful thinking for some to expect that the Belarus crisis could contaminate Russian politics. At this stage, the Russian electorate would not seem to recognize the Belarus situation as offering a precedent for Russia. There would be a multitude of reasons for that, including the personality of the leaders and the way they manage their democracies. In Belarus Lukashenko’s claim that he won 80% of the popular vote was too implausible to be accepted at face value.

Beyond broader policy issues, sub-national elections in Russia are a different exercise: regional and local elections can be influenced by national issues and can present a risk for the ruling party if there is a major source of dissatisfaction. They, however, seem to be largely influenced by local factors as is evidenced by the large differences between the percentage of votes received by winning governors, some barely squeezing over 50%, others securing a landslide. The sub-national elections also afford the electorate the opportunity to express its views with the expectation that these views will be reasonably reflected in the outcome, despite the allegations of irregularities.

In Russia, at this time, the level of dissatisfaction with national leadership does not seem high enough to have caused serious difficulties for most ruling party candidates at the regional level.

This would also show that regional leaders who were running this time and that have been supported by the national leadership are performing relatively well. Recruiting competent managers has been a long-standing concern of the Presidential Administration.

In opening even a small door to a genuine opposition party, the local elections are also serving as a pressure valve in the managed democracy system by allowing the official recognition of a few divergent voices.

--o--

ABRAHAM ACCORDS

This month president Donald Trump presided over a signing ceremony at the White House September 15th, that included Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Bahrain’s Foreign Minister Abdullatif al-Zayani, and the UAE’s Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

The officials signed two separate documents: the Israel-UAE peace treaty and a declaration of intent by Israel and Bahrain to make peace. There was not enough time to negotiate a final agreement on the second accord since the announcement of the second diplomatic breakthrough on September 11th.

The agreements between Israel and the two Gulf States are truly historic in a long and often treacherous road to broader Arab-Israeli peace. These are the first two Arab states to sign peace agreements with Israel since Egypt in 1979 and Jordan in 1994.

U.S. officials lauded the Abraham Accord between Israel and the UAE, named after the biblical forefather shared by Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, as a pivotal and historic hinge event.

The two peace accords are unquestionably dual achievements of the Trump administration negotiating strategy, as well as a testimony to Netanyahu’s long-standing strategy of engaging moderate Arab states that increasingly share many of the same interests and concerns as Israel.

Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain all face threats from Shiite Iran as well as from Sunni Islamist extremist groups. All three also are concerned about Turkey’s increasingly destabilizing role in supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoots in conflicts in Syria, Gaza, and Libya. There is also very little doubt that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia stands right behind their smaller allies in the Gulf. Right after the ceremony the Saudis opened its vast airspace (Saudi Arabia is the world's 12th largest country by territory) to the Israeli commercial air traffic.

Not only does Iran need to beware of close military and intelligence cooperation between Israel and the two Arab kingdoms, but the accord also is expected to clear the way for the export of more sophisticated U.S. weapons to the two countries, possibly including F-35 stealth jets and armed drones that were denied in the past.

The peace accords also break the long-standing-and failed-Palestinian veto on any peace deals with Israel by Arab states. The thinking in Washington and most Arab capitals has shifted towards a more realistic reappraisal of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It became apparent to most serious observers of the Middle East that the central issue in the area is not the absence of the Palestinian state but Shia-Sunni hostilities, terrorism, Iranian activism, civil wars in Syria and Libya and various manifestations of radical Islam. In fact, as was correctly pointed out by the rulers of the UAE, the Arab states can exert more meaningful pressure on Israel in respect to the Palestinian problem as a peace partner and not as an enemy. This was empirically proven by the Israeli u-turn on planned annexation of parts of the West Bank prior to the peace pact.

Morocco, Oman, and Sudan also are likely prospects to enter peace negotiations with Israel in the near future.

Eventually, the Bahrain and UAE diplomatic pacts could lead Palestinians to adopt a more realistic negotiating position vis-à-vis Israel. But regardless of how the Palestinians react, those two agreements represent a powerful diplomatic breakthrough that will cement a closer strategic cooperation against Iran.

--o--

PERSON OF THE MONTH: SVIATLANA TSIKHANOUSKAYA

Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya is a Belorusian human rights activist. She is 38 years old. Before her political career she was an English teacher. She is married to activist Sergei Tsikhanousky, who was a candidate for the same election until his arrest on May 29th of this year. She subsequently announced her intention to run in his place and became the main opposition candidate.

Tsikhanouskaya, who was forced into exile in Lithuania under pressure from autocratic Belarus leader Alexander Lukashenko, said in Vilnius after talks with President Macron, the most prominent world leader she has met, that he had promised to help negotiate the release of those jailed in Belarus.

Election authorities gave Lukashenko 80% of the vote, but Tsikhanouskaya claims she received 60-70% if results were properly counted.

Belarus has been rocked by protests since Lukashenko claimed victory over Tsikhanouskaya in a deeply flawed election last month, and then unleashed a brutal crackdown on his opponents.

If Lukashenko is a European, gentler version of Venezuela's Nicolas Maduro, then Tsikhanouskaya is akin to Juan Guaido who accused Maduro of rigging the elections and proclaimed himself president. The similarities though have its limits. Guido remains in Venezuela being supported by a substantial number of the population. Tsikhanouskaya is in exile and her influence in Belarus opposition is rather symbolic. Most of the opposition in Belarus is not so much for Tsikhanouskaya as for forcing Lukashenko out.

Yet, for the time being, Tsikhanouskaya is the face of the Belarus opposition in the diaspora.

--o--

US-RUSSIA

Russian officials say they have not given the US any new deadlines in talks over the New START treaty, the last remaining bilateral nuclear arms pact, but that there cannot be any pause in discussions as time is running out.

The US has said it wants any new nuclear arms control treaty to cover all types of warheads, contain stronger verification and transparency measures, and bring China on board, a move Beijing has rejected.

"The issue of primary importance that should and must be promptly dealt with is, of course, the extension of the Russia-U.S. Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which will expire shortly, in February 2021," Russian President Vladimir Putin told the 75th UN General Assembly on September 22nd.

Russia has said it is ready to extend the New START without preconditions and warned there is not enough time to renegotiate a complicated new treaty.

New START, which caps the number of deployed long-range nuclear warheads each country can have, expires in February unless the two sides agree to extend it for five years.

In his UN speech, Putin also announced a plan to propose a "binding agreement" to ban space-based weapons.

CYBER SECURITY FOOTNOTE

President Putin recently reiterated to the US the “suggestion to agree on a comprehensive program of practical measures to reboot our relations in the field of (cyber) security”.

To the many in the US and elsewhere who have accused Russia of using cyber attacks to meddle in the affairs of other states, this will sound rather cynical and pointless. Putin may be cynical, but pointless not necessarily. He would know that his suggestion would be at best ignored, but obviously wanted it to be on the record prior to the US election so that it can be picked up, perhaps, after the election.

The fundamental question for the US is whether it thinks it can outsmart Russia in matters of cybersecurity or whether it would ever trust Russia enough to seek agreed limitations in this field as was the case with classic security and disarmament issues. The additional question in the case of cyber security is how to deal with powerful third parties and with sophisticated non-state actors. Unlike in traditional disarmament discussions, there are many more competitors active in the field.

CSTO, BUSINESS AS USUAL

Kazakhstan’s Defense Ministry says military maneuvers scheduled to be held in Belarus in October by the member states of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) have nothing to do with ongoing protests against Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko.

The ministry's spokesman Ghani Nusipov said on September 16th that the exercises, called Unbreakable Brotherhood, by the military forces of CSTO member states Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, and Tajikistan had been scheduled long before the disputed August 9th presidential poll in Belarus.

A day earlier, Russia's Defense Ministry said the Unbreakable Brotherhood exercises will be held from October 12 to 16 in Belarus.

--o--

THE AUTHORS

Sunday, August 30, 2020

Issue 45

THE BRETON/GEROL NEWSLETTER

OFF TO THE RACES

On August 20^th, 33 years after he started his first campaign for the presidency, 77-year old former Vice- President Joe Biden accepted the Democratic presidential nomination and the challenge to take on United States President Donald Trump in the November 3rd election.

The Democratic Convention that chose Biden was as no other in history. It was formally held in Wisconsin, but essentially all virtual. Biden had his first opportunity to address the nation as a presidential candidate in a formal speech. The speech was a test for Biden, who is well known for his straight-talk gaffes. However, some have noted that Biden's speaking abilities have faltered in recent years, with some critics raising questions about his mental acuity. Trump has already started calling the former vice-president "Sleepy Joe".

Biden's big night came as the US economy continues to struggle, with unemployment rising amid the coronavirus pandemic. Observers have noted that the convention was lofty in its criticisms of Trump and its hopeful rhetoric, but relatively light on policy proposals.

Biden delivered concrete proposals with personal stories. The speech was a pleasant surprise for those who expected Biden to deliver a low-energy, gaffes-filled rambling as he often did prior to the convention. The speech he gave received positive reviews from such conservative networks as FOX and even Ben Shapiro's the Daily Wire had good things to say about it.

David Frum (former speechwriter for George W. Bush who came up with the famous catch phrase "axis of evil") said that the speech was primarily directed at those Republican voters who have supported Trump in 2016 but now grew tired and irritated with never-ending scandals and the divisiveness of Trump's presidency.

Joe Biden came through as a humane, measured, old-school retail politician, kind of a middle of the road alternative to the whacky and unpredictable Trump. Joe Biden also catered strongly to black voters by praising his former boss Barack Obama and his recent VP pick Kamala Harris.

Several other Democratic party figures spoke on the final night of the Democratic National Convention (DNC), with former presidential candidates Mayor Pete Buttigieg, New Jersey Senator Cory Booker and billionaire media mogul Mike Bloomberg featuring prominently.

Biden was riding high in the polls prior to the convention. He still enjoys a considerable lead over Trump nationally, but the gap is narrowing. In 15 battleground states which will decide the election Biden is either leading within the margin of error or tied with the incumbent.

The Republican convention was technically held in North Carolina, but also essentially a virtual affair except for the last evening event held on the grounds of the White House. There, in front of a 2,000-strong (and un-masked) crowd 74-year old Donald Trump, a masterful and cunning campaigner, unleashed an all-out assault on Joe Biden and his party. Donald Trump had ridiculed all recent polls (not without justification if we remember 2016 predictions of virtually all news outlets of the impending Hillary Clinton's landslide victory). The biggest attacks by Republicans were against the Democratic Party's radical turn to the left. Trump and other speakers went on to claim that the aging Joe Biden will not be able to stem the left wing move on the environment, medical care, law-enforcement, taxation and foreign policy. Trump also defended his handling of COVID-19 and presented himself as the only candidate capable of taking on China. He also took credit for crushing ISIS, killing its leader and keeping America out of military adventures.

Recent analyses (including that of Nixon White Counsel John Dean) have tried to explain the un-wavering support of Trump’s base for an individual without moral fiber or any of the qualities expected of a US President. The emerging conclusion is that it revolves around the appetite for certain groups (less-educated white men and evangelicals) to bind with an authoritarian leader. The corollary is that these supporters will not withdraw their support no matter what their candidate does wrong or no matter convincing arguments the other candidate may produce. This could lead to an outcome similar to 2016: we may have a candidate losing the popular vote but winning the Electoral College. There have been US authoritarian leaders before, Nixon regarded as the most recent, but this makes for strange times. The November 3^rd election could well be the most electrifying and nerve-wracking in modern history, even more so when the incumbent still refuses to say that he will definitely accept the results.

--o--

BELARUS: TERRITORY OF UNCERTAINTY

It is an odd revolution by any standard: there are no recognized leaders within the country, political parties and even defined political goals. People of this quiet and somewhat pastoral copy of the defunct Soviet Union are united only by a distaste for Aleksandr Lukashenko, a former Soviet collective farm manager who has ruled Belarus for 26 years. As one activist in Minsk observed "our revolution is so peaceful that what we need is our version of Mahatma Gandhi ''.

Lukashenko managed to run a European country for a quarter of the century without even having a political party of his own, not to mention an opposition. As a result the revolution divided the country into two unequal parts: the population itself and Lukashenko's personal apparatus that includes police, KGB and the Army. At the same time he antagonized not only his own country, but the European Union and all neighbouring states including Russia.

At the time of crisis nobody expressed a particular desire to stand by his side.

The EU limited its reaction to a rather symbolic set of sanctions targeting Lukashenko's inner circle. Taking into account the delicate geopolitical position of Belarus, Russia has expressed its lukewarm support for Belarus as a country and dispatched some advisors to Minsk.

In an August 27^th interview, Putin allowed that Russia had put together a police group that could intervene in Belarus should the situation require. He, however, also added that he did not expect the need for this police group to intervene and that he saw the situation in Belarus being resolved through political means. There was a message for the protesters: do not go too far. There was also a message for Lukashenko: use of force will not resolve the problem.

Although Lukashenko and Putin frequently met and conversed by phone over the years, there is a general sense that the Putin administration has found Lukashenko a difficult partner. They would not be sorry to see him leave. There is also no indication that the proponents of change in Belarus would not want continuing strong relations with Russia.

For now, it looks like certain compromises on the part of the regime will take place in order to defuse a stand off, put an end to the strikes and work out a new constitution. How can Lukashenko move to agree to any compromise is the key question. This is in any event a short term solution. In the long run Lukashenko will have to leave the political scene.

--o--

ANOTHER CUP OF TEA?

Alexei Navalny, the best known opposition leader in Russia was most likely poisoned by tea he drank from a plastic cup at the airport in the Siberian city of Tomsk, where he had been meeting his supporters. On the way to Moscow the plane he was on made an emergency landing in the city of Omsk after Navalny got violently sick.

From Alexei Navalny's Facebook Page

After two days in the Russian hospital, where the local doctors ruled out poisoning, he was flown to a hospital in Berlin where the doctors confirmed poisoning as the most plausible reason for Navalny's collapse. Several independent lab results have confirmed the diagnosis.

The most interesting part of this story is not particulars of the toxicology report or what poison was used but who poisoned him and on whose orders. The Kremlin view had been that Navalny was annoying but not politically significant. Tolerating him rather than scaring, hurting or killing him seemed a better policy, both domestically and from a foreign policy point of view. He could also be occasionally sent to jail whenever necessary. What would have triggered a change of opinion at the top is not clear. There is also the possibility that some the of officials whose alleged corruption was denounced by Navalny took the initiative. There is, however, at this time no clear indication as to who that could be.

Here it is important to take into consideration that it is not the first fatal cup of tea consumed by Kremlin's critics. In 2006 the former GRU defector to England Aleksandr Litvinenko was poisoned and later died of polonium poisoning in the tea which was served to him by Russian agents in a London restaurant. Before that Anna Politkovskaya, a well-known Russian investigative journalist was also poisoned by drinking tea but managed to survive. Shortly after she was shot dead by some Chechen men who were later caught, tried and convicted. However, the investigation failed to dermine who ordered the murder.

So far the reaction from the Kremlin was that no investigation is required until the Navalny poisoning is proven conclusively.

--o--

UKRAINE UPDATE

On August 24^th, Ukrainians celebrated the 29th anniversary of the independence of post-Soviet Ukraine. The celebrations attended by President Zelenskyy in Kyiv had their solemn moments but were not without a celebratory and light-hearted dimension. Despite all the difficulties facing the country, life goes on.

There were no major political developments this month, but the growing COVID-19 problem is a serious concern. Unlike in some neighbouring countries, the pandemic situation is slowly deteriorating rather than improving. If there was a time when the number of new cases would have seen to slow down, the long-term observable tendency is for constant growth in the number of cases. In a country where the level of testing is relatively low, the number of deaths is seen as a more reliable indicator of the real situation. A record number of deaths was registered on August 26th. There was also a significant increase in the number of new cases registered daily. Opposition leader Tymoshenko has contracted the disease and been moved to intensive care. The central government’s capacity to impose the necessary measures to regain control of the situation is doubtful.

The authorities’ decision to close the country’s borders to foreign travelers even had repercussions in relations with Israel. There is a long-standing tradition that was revived after the end of the communist regime for Breslov Hasidic Jews to make a pilgrimage to the grave of Nachman of Breslov, a famous religious leader, in the Central Ukrainian town of Uman around the time of Rosh Hashanah. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu was reportedly against the idea of the pilgrimage this year for fear that it would compound Israel’s own problems with COVID-19. Since he could not block it against the wishes of his own ultra-religious political allies, he relied on President Zelensky to intervene against the massive presence of Israeli pilgrims in the relatively small town of Uman. The incident may not be so significant in itself, but it illustrates an aspect of Ukrainian life whose diversity and complexity is not always evident to outsiders.

Whereas the Ukrainian authorities want less foreigners to come in, they would have liked to take in the members of the Wagner group of mercenaries that were arrested in Belarus earlier in the month. The Wagner mercenaries are reported to have conducted military activity in various countries including in Eastern Ukraine. As such they would be considered as war criminals in Ukraine. How they found their way to Belarus is somewhat mysterious. The President of Belarus alleged they were sent to disrupt the presidential elections in his country. (There was no need for anyone else to do that.) There were even rumours that US elements had been involved in luring the mercenaries to Belarus. Ultimately, they were quietly sent back to Russia after the Belarus presidential election.

The good news was probably that the ceasefire along the demarcation line in the Eastern Ukraine conflict is holding. As was noted at the end of August, there has been a period of at least 33 days during which there were no casualties.

This quieting of military activity would seek to pave the way for another summit meeting the Normandy Four (Ukraine, Russia, France and Germany) in the near future with a view to moving the peace process along. Replacing former President Kuchma by former President Kravchuk as the senior Ukrainian representative in the Tripartite Contact group that manages the ongoing diplomatic discussions with Russia and the OSCE seems to have helped, if nothing else, the atmosphere of the discussion.

There are also continuing noises that former Georgian President Saakashvili will become Prime Minister shortly. The political rumour mill still consumes a lot of energy.

--o--

HISTORIC PEACE DEAL BETWEEN ISRAEL AND UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

The Israel-United Arab Emirates (UAE) agreement is the third peace agreement between Israel and an Arab country. The other two were signed with Egypt (1979) and Jordan (1994).

Location of Israel and the UAE

It could increase the prospects for peace, stability and prosperity in the Middle East.

For several years Israel and several Gulf states have been closely collaborating mainly on security issues and under the table. Now, these relations are being opened and upgraded. People across much of the Sunni Muslim Arab world do not perceive Israel anymore as an enemy, but rather as an ally. It will increase the legitimacy of Israel's existence as a Jewish state in the Middle East. A combination of both threats and opportunities have pushed for the agreement. The threat both countries are facing is Iran's quest for hegemony and domination in the Middle East from Iraq, Syria and Lebanon to Yemen. The Arab Gulf states are especially prone to the Iranians threats.

Striking a peace deal with Israel, the UAE chose path to peace and prosperity. It has also chose to press Israel on the Palestinian issue as a friend and as history proved many times Israel is way more susceptible to friendly initiatives than hostility.

Ruling elites of most Arab nations know this but only the very few admit this by signing peace deals with the Jewish state preferring to deal with Israel under the table.

The UAE has resources while Israel has the human power to promote innovation, sustainability and entrepreneurship. The Israel-UAE agreement prevented Israel's plan to unilaterally annex areas in the West Bank that the Trump peace plan allocated to Israel. But it also sends the Palestinians two messages:

• The Palestinians can no longer exercise veto power on relations between Israel and Arab states which strongly share with Israel significant security and economic interests.

• Blocking the Iran threats is more important than the Palestinian cause.

The announcement of the peace treaty was made in Washington. The Trump administration may have wanted to get credit for having somehow facilitated the deal, but did not seem to convince many of its real contribution to a process that follow its own dynamics.

--o--

PERSON OF THE MONTH : KAMALA HARRIS

55-year old Kamala Harris finished first for the second spot on the 2020 Democratic ticket. She thus became the first Black American woman and the first person of Southeast Asian origin to make it to the presidential ticket of a major US party. Her selection drew acclaim from the ranks of those who were most likely to vote for Joe Biden this November. Harris’ nomination is indeed a major political milestone. Her accomplishment consists of presenting herself as the most suitable candidate for the circumstances of 2020. As a Senator from one of the largest states in the Union, she was initially well positioned. The idea that she may have been an overly zealous Attorney General of California and the harsh criticism she directed at candidate Biden early in the campaign may have delayed her appointment, but were not sufficient obstacles to her selection.

Harris’ education and early professional career are virtually textbook perfect. The fact that she had some of the high school education in Montréal and that she frequently visited her mother’sfamily in India would suggest she had the opportunity to develop an early awareness of world diversity.

Experience would tend to show that the Vice Presidential candidate does not bring a large number of new voters to the ticket, but that it can firm up the support of existing supporters. A less than ideal candidate may not lead to the loss of supporters, but can become a distraction and even a liability: Dan Quayle and Sarah Palin come to mind. Kamala Harris’ record would suggest that she will definitely strengthen the Democratic ticket and will be a formidable campaigner. Biden supporters may not look forward to the Biden-Trump debate, but most cannot wait to see what Harris will do when she faces off with 61-year old stiff Mike Pence.

Even more important, whatever happens in November 2016, Harris is already in a good position for the 2020 Democratic Presidential nomination.

--o--

BRIEFLY NOTED

USA-1

The U.S. Justice Department will seek to reinstate the death penalty for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the ethnic Chechen convicted of killing three people and injuring hundreds of others during the 2013 Boston Marathon.

An appeals court in Boston on July 31 overturned the death sentence that had been handed to Tsarnaev in 2015. The court ordered a new trial to determine what penalty Tsarnaev, 27, should receive, finding that the judge who oversaw the case did not sufficiently vet jurors for biases.

Attorney General William Barr said on August 20 in an interview with the Associated Press that the Justice Department would appeal the court’s ruling. “We will do whatever’s necessary,” Barr said. “We will take it up to the Supreme Court and we will continue to pursue the death penalty.”

USA-2

American federal prosecutors have charged a former U.S. Army Green Beret living in northern Virginia with spying for Russia from 1996 to 2011. Prosecutors said on August 21 that Peter Rafael Dzibinski Debbins, 45, periodically visited Russia and met Russian intelligence agents.

In 1997, Debbins was even allegedly assigned a code name by Russian intelligence operatives and signed a statement saying that he wanted to serve Russia, according to prosecutors.

"When service members collude to provide classified information to our foreign adversaries, they betray the oaths they swore to their country and their fellow service members," said G. Zachary Terwilliger, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia., whose office is prosecuting the case. "As this indictment reflects, we will be steadfast and dogged in holding such individuals accountable."

TURKEY

The killing of a notorious crime boss from the Caucasus region is echoing across the criminal underworld of the former Soviet Union, with reverberations reaching an alleged Uzbek crime boss in Turkey who is the nephew of the former international amateur boxing chief.

Nadir "Lotu Guli" Salifov, a reputed member of the "thieves-in-law" criminal syndicate, had been known as a top crime boss in Russia and Azerbaijan.

He was shot dead at a restaurant in Turkey's southern coastal city of Antalya on the evening of August 19. According to police sources the killer was one of Salifov's bodyguards and that the bodyguard stood behind Salifov and shot him four times, including at least one shot to the back of his head, while he was seated at a card game.

IRAN

The joint commission on the Iran nuclear agreement will meet in Vienna on September 1st, the European Union has said, after the U.S. and its European allies sparred over Washington's bid to reimpose UN sanctions on Tehran. The meeting will be chaired by the EU and attended by representatives of Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and Iran.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on August 20th formally launched the process of activating a mechanism aimed at reimposing UN sanctions on Iran, citing Iranian violations of the 2015 nuclear deal, which Washington exited in 2018.

France, Germany, and Britain said they cannot support the U.S. move, as it is incompatible with efforts to support the Iran nuclear deal.

"In order to preserve the agreement, we urge Iran to reverse all measures inconsistent with its nuclear commitments and return to full compliance without delay," the three said in a joint statement on August 20.

The United States maintains it has the right to trigger the re-imposition of sanctions through the agreement's "snapback" mechanism.

KYRGYZSTAN

The Bishkek city court has upheld a lower court's sentencing of former Kyrgyz Prime Minister Sapar Isakov to 18 years in prison for corruption.

The ruling was announced on August 20th during a session held via video link due to restrictions prompted by the coronavirus.

On June 9th, the Birinchi Mai district court found Isakov guilty of misusing state funds allocated for the renovation of Bishkek's National History Museum and a hippodrome in the northern town of Cholpon-Ata while in office.

That ruling came as Isakov had already been serving a 15-year prison term after being sentenced in December 2019 on corruption charges stemming from his involvement in a 2013 project to modernize the Bishkek Thermal Power Station.

The Birinchi Mai court sentenced Isakov to 12 years in prison, but the judge said that "in aggregate, taking into account his earlier conviction and prison sentence of 15 years, Isakov shall be sentenced to 18 years in a high-security penitentiary."

He also ordered Isakov to pay about $3.3 million in fines.

Isakov, 43, served as prime minister for nearly eight months, from August 26, 2017 to April 19, 2018. He denies the charges.

The probes against Isakov and several other high-profile figures were launched amid tensions between former President Almazbek Atambaev and current President Sooronbai Jeenbekov.

Atambaev himself is currently in prison, serving a sentence of 11 years and two months for the illegal release of notorious crime boss Aziz Batukaev in 2013. He denies the charge.

--o--

THE AUTHORS

Ilya Gerol, former foreign editor of the Citizen in Ottawa, syndicated columnist in Canadian, US and European media specializing in international affairs. His area of expertise includes Russia, Eurasian Economic Union, Eastern and Central Europe. Ilya Gerol has written several books, one of them, The Manipulators, had become a textbook on relations of media and society.