The International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES)[1], based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, is renowned for its regular analysis of global developments, particularly focusing on the Middle East, the Balkans, and other significant regions worldwide. A notable contribution comes from Dr. J. Scott Younger, who is the President Commissioner at Glendale Partners and serves as a member of the IFIMES Advisory Board. Dr. Younger has authored an article titled “Unhappy World,” which delves into pressing global issues, with a particular focus on the ongoing crises in Gaza and Ukraine.
I was watching on the TV the “’Last Night of the BBC Proms’” last Saturday and, as usual, thought of the great Russian duo, Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov. I wondered what they would have thought of today’s Russia with its restrictions and peddling of misinformation. The world is in an unhappy state.
The hot news is the recent suspected Israeli ‘attack’ on Hezbollah in Lebanon threatening another war on Lebanon and possibly one of wider scope. This has not been claimed nor denied by the Israelis but it very much looks like their modus operandi, smart phones/pagers tampered with to explode simultaneously such that injury and death would affect the Hezbollah owners. The trouble was that the method of ‘attack’ affected other people, non-Hezbollah, children being killed also. The Israelis claim that all their attacks are targeted against terrorists!
Meanwhile the Israelis have been moving troops from the Gaza conflict north to the Lebanon border in anticipation of a full-scale conflict. This has the hand of PM Benjamin Netanyahu and his cronies on the Israeli cabinet all over it. It is much in his interest to keep the war going as long as possible, to avoid being caught for financial irregularities and worse. He knows that he has Biden’s backing, albeit the President is very unhappy that Netanyahu has turned down a ceasefire plan put forward by many parties, who want to see an end to the war. Joseph Biden has openly declared he is a Zionist, although he disagrees, with some voiced frustration, with Netanyahu’s belligerent actions, and having his wishes ignored.
Throughout the appalling Gaza conflict, not forgetting the disgraceful actions of Hamas which started the conflict, we have had one year of constant trouble. Netanyahu has known the calibre of Biden and ‘played’ it to the very limit. As Prime Minister, Netanyahu has been proscribed by the International Cort of Justice (ICJ) in the Hague for condoning Israel’s many actions, breaking humanitarian law.
It has been a most frustrating year, many visits by diplomats of several countries to Israel with all giving the same message to Netanyahu, namely to draw up an immediate ceasefire in Gaza in exchange for hostages taken by both sides, the Israeli hostage, in particular, from the 7th October 2023 attacks. Netanyahu’s conditions whereby he would maintain a good measure of control over Gaza going forward, not unsurprisingly, was unacceptable to the Palestinians. In addition, Netanyahu was against the two-state solution, that Europe was pushing for and finally the US, and which the Palestinians wanted. He would want a solution whereby Israel would control all of the original territory that was Palestine but Palestinians could stay but under apartheid conditions. Obviously not a solution. It is becoming clearer every day, although it has been for some time that no solution will be achieved while Netanyahu and a small coterie of far-right religious zealots retain a hold on the government.
Had all countries threatened to withdraw arms support to Israel in early days of the conflict there would likely have been a somewhat different outcome. By far the largest contributor for arms sales to Israel is the US and they don’t see the need to sanction, but the threat to cancel some important arms from the total of what is received may be enough for Israel to hesitate and re-think their policy.
There has been a policy towards the government of Netanyahu of appeasement. Some European governments have cancelled their commitments of arms sales, such as Spain, but their sale of arms to Israel is trivial compared with that of the US. Britain also has withdrawn certain arms from their portfolio but again this is very small compared with the US. The result of continued hesitation may be a bigger war, a regional conflict. The lesson of history has yet to be acknowledged.
Hamas and Hezbollah are designated terrorist organisations, and some of their actions, particularly the brutal action of 7th October2023, can be so accorded. However, we have to go back to the Balfour Declaration of 1917, implemented at the end of WWII in 1948 to see what the agreement was, signed by both parties. It contained a very important caveat, which is repeated here - ‘’nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine’.’ Obviously, this has not happened. One can understand why; the world was in turmoil after WWII and coming out of this would take another decade or so.
The nations who had an interest, if not responsibility, for the Palestine lands, were distracted by other events, considered more vital for the west. Democracy and its way of life were threatened by an upsurging communist Soviet Union with an authoritarian, Stalin, as its leader. Some of the early Israelis would have found it hard to settle, many coming from a war-torn Europe and even surviving the dreadful Holocaust into a strange land which was ethnically different, spoke a quite different language, and many of the indigenous population were descended from generations of people who had lived on the land. Basically, they were farmers, caring for many thousand olive groves, with centuries of belonging to the Ottoman empire, the later years being relatively peaceful excluding the time of WWII.
Merging two widely different cultures would have been difficult at the best of times, and required help and understanding. Unfortunately, this was not forthcoming. The Jewish people, coming from a mostly European background found themselves to have been better educated and, in time, taking most of the governmental/management decisions. There was no empathetic body of sufficient clout which could gain the respect of a Palestinian or Israeli in matters of disagreement or dispute. The UN was yet to find its feet- founded October 1945. In time the two peoples became more and more estranged to the point there has been conflict from time to time, only to see dissident groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah rise up and, on the other side, the religious right, some extreme, intolerant in their views.
The UN and US have asked for the new conflict to be brought to an end. It will not, until the US stops supplying arms or makes a genuine threat in that direction. Alternatively, the Israeli government removes Netanyahu from his post and appoints a person who sees the long-term value of a two-state solution with the Israelis undertaking to assist in bringing it about. No more illegal raids on the west bank with armed threats to take away Palestinian livelihoods and homes!
The US is self-absorbed at the moment with the Presidential election approaching. With Biden stepping down the choice is between ‘I’m always right even when I’m wrong’ Donald Trump and the Democratic candidate, V-P Kamala Harris, relatively untried, but having the backing of two former Presidents, Barack Obama and Bill Clinton. Unfortunately, Biden has shown weakness, both in Afghanistan where the American withdrawal was shambolic and has led to a terrible situation for Afghans, especially women, who have been forced to remain under Taliban archaic strictures, and in Israel. He should have done his homework on the man he was meeting, Netanyahu, on his quick trip to Israel, shortly after the 7th October event, and kept his Zionist views to himself. Netanyahu must have been pleased with the outcome of their meeting, and the carte blanche approach he could adopt and has. We shall have to wait and see if the change in President will mean an alteration in policy, but current events may bring about a complete change of events before the new person even takes office.
The US under Biden have dithered in their support of allowing Ukraine to use the British long-range missiles across the border into Russia. Putin has threatened that this would mean an upscaling of the war with NATO and Russia would reply with all force necessary, meaning possibly nuclear. Is this just bluster, as all threats so far have been? Volodymyr Zelenskyy is once more off to the US to plead his cause; the weapons are needed and he needs the agreement of the US to proceed. If not, he could ultimately lose the war, which would be devastating for not only Ukraine but also worrying for east European countries close to or bordering Russia. Russia is also being supplied arms from N. Korea and Iran, which are helping it to make advances in Ukraine, for example Kharkyiv where buildings are regularly hit and civilians killed. The Ukrainians are currently targeting Russian military targets with some success; these are being used against Ukraine. The west, the US and Europe, cannot afford to be seen to lose this war, which Putin’s Russia started. It would show weakness, a possibility of some lack of agreement within the ranks of NATO, and embolden China in their ambitionns to take Taiwan and spread their creeping influence in the Western Pacific.
The Middle East, in the form of Israel and now in Lebanon, and Ukraine dominate the news, but they are not the only countries where there are problems. There are a number of other countries, where there is trouble if not internal conflict for a variety of reasons, which have resulted in significant migrations – Somalia, Myanmar, some other countries in sub-Saharan Africa, S. America, etc. There are many distressed citizens who are fleeing poverty, or just to seek a better life. This not the answer. We need people to stay where they have roots and develop the land, in its broadest sense, but they need to be given a chance in a stable environment, and the opportunity to take pride in their endeavours. This is important for the future.
This is a major project for the world, not just for the UN but behoves better off concerned countries, to engage with a poor country and concentrate on education and apprentice schemes while the food and water, infrastructure in all its guises, are under the leadership of other specialists. It can be done, for instance in illiterate, very poor communities of 10,000-100,000, where the children are taken through primary 1, junior high, and some go on to graduate senior school and university, some of them returning to help the generation following.[2] It is fully acknowledged that this will take time, at least two decades, but it is more worthwhile than dropping bombs on Gaza and killing thousands of children and leaving those who survive mentally scarred for life.
About the author:
Dr J Scott Younger, OBE, is a professional civil engineer; he spent 42 years in the Far East undertaking assignments in 10 countries for WB, ADB, UNDP. He published many papers; he was a columnist for Forbes Indonesia and Globe Asia. He served on British & European Chamber boards and was a Vice Chair of Int’l Business Chamber for 17 years. His expertise is infrastructure and sustainable development and he takes an interest in international affairs. He is an International Chancellor of the President University, Indonesia and Honorary Senior Research Fellow of the Glasgow University. He is a member of IFIMES Advisory Board. Lived and worked in Thailand from 1978 to 1983 and visited Burma, Bangladesh and Nepal for projects.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect IFIMES official position.
Ljubljana/Glasgow, 26 September 2024
[1] IFIMES - International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has a special consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council ECOSOC/UN in New York since 2018, and it is the publisher of the international scientific journal "European Perspectives."
[2] Younger, J. S., Booth, D. J. & Kurniawan, K. (2012). Sustainable development: the East Bali Poverty Project. Proc. Inst. of Civil Engineers, Jour. Municipal Engineering Division.
Younger, J. S., Booth, D. J., Parry, D.E. & Kurniawan, K. (2017). Sustainable Humanitarian Development the East Bali Poverty Project. Proc. Inst. Of Civil Engineers, Jour Municipal Engineering Division.
