Home » War and unrest » Page 9

with teh final answer from the instructions.

beirut – Saudi Arabia and Qatar are ready to invest in an economic zone in south Lebanon near the border with Israel that woudl create jobs for members of the militant Hezbollah group and its supporters once they lay down their weapons,President Donald Trump’s envoy to the Middle East said Tuesday.

Tom Barrack made his comments in Beirut after trips to Israel and Syria where he discussed with officials there the ongoing situation in Lebanon following this month’s decision by the Lebanese government to disarm Hezbollah by the end of the year. Hezbollah’s leader rejected the government’s plan, vowing to keep the weapons.

On Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israeli forces could begin withdrawing from territory they hold in southern Lebanon after the lebanese government’s “momentous decision” to disarm Hezbollah.

The U.S.-backed Lebanese army is preparing a plan for Hezbollah’s disarmament that should be ready by the end of August.The government is expected to discuss the army’s plan and approve it during a meeting scheduled for Sept. 2.

“We have to have money coming into the system. The money will come from the Gulf,” Barrack told reporters after meeting President Joseph Aoun. “Qatar and saudi Arabia are partners and are willing to do that for the south (of Lebanon) if we’re asking a portion of the Lebanese community to give up their livelihood.”

“We have 40,000 people that are being paid by Iran to fight. What are you gonna do with them? Take their weapon and say ‘incidentally speaking, good luck planting olive trees’? it can’t happen. We have to help them,” Barrack said. He was referring to tens of thousands of Hezbollah members who have been funded since the early 1980s by Tehran.

“We, all of us, the gulf, the U.S., and Lebanese are going to act together to create a forum that’s gonna produce a livelihood.”

Could increased economic chance within the Lebanese economic Zone realistically outweigh the political and social factors driving support for Hezbollah?

US Envoy Discusses Saudi Arabia and Qatar’s Investment in Lebanese Economic Zone as a Strategy to disarm Hezbollah

The Proposed economic Intervention

Recent discussions led by a US envoy center around a novel strategy for Lebanon: leveraging substantial investment from Saudi Arabia and Qatar into a designated Lebanese Economic Zone (LEZ) as a means to weaken Hezbollah’s influence. The core premise is that economic empowerment and opportunity can offer a viable alternative to the political and social support currently enjoyed by the organization. This initiative represents a important shift in approach, moving beyond traditional sanctions and diplomatic pressure.

Key Players: The US envoy is actively mediating between Lebanese government officials, Saudi Arabian representatives, Qatari investors, and, indirectly, Hezbollah.

Investment Focus: Initial proposals suggest investments will target infrastructure development, job creation, and support for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) within the LEZ. Sectors like tourism, agriculture, and technology are being prioritized.

Geographic Considerations: The location of the LEZ is crucial. Discussions are reportedly focused on areas with significant Shia populations, where Hezbollah holds considerable sway. The Lebanese landscape, with its coastal strip, mountains, and Bekaa Valley (as noted in recent geographical reports on Lebanon), presents unique challenges and opportunities for zone placement.

The Disarmament Link: A Complex Equation

The connection between economic investment and disarmament is not straightforward. The US strategy hinges on the belief that reducing economic desperation and providing legitimate employment opportunities will diminish the appeal of Hezbollah’s social programs and recruitment efforts.

How Economic Stability Could Impact Hezbollah’s Support Base

Reduced Reliance on External Funding: Hezbollah relies heavily on financial support from Iran. A thriving Lebanese economy, bolstered by Gulf investment, could lessen the need for external funding, possibly impacting the organization’s operational capabilities.

Alternative employment: Providing viable employment options within the LEZ could draw individuals away from Hezbollah-affiliated activities.

Shifting Loyalties: Economic improvement could foster a sense of national unity and diminish sectarian tensions, potentially eroding support for Hezbollah.

Countering Social Programs: Hezbollah provides extensive social services – healthcare, education, and financial assistance – to its constituents. A robust LEZ could offer competing, state-sponsored programs, reducing Hezbollah’s leverage.

Challenges and Potential Obstacles

Despite the potential benefits, the plan faces significant hurdles.

Hezbollah’s Response: the organization is likely to view the initiative with suspicion, potentially attempting to disrupt or co-opt the LEZ.

Lebanese Political Instability: Lebanon’s deeply entrenched political divisions and history of corruption pose a major risk. Ensuring openness and accountability in the management of the LEZ will be critical.

Saudi-Qatar Relations: Maintaining consistent cooperation between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, given their regional rivalry, will be essential for the plan’s success.

Iranian Influence: Iran is likely to actively counter the US-backed initiative, seeking to maintain its influence in lebanon.

Geopolitical Risks: The broader regional context,including ongoing conflicts and tensions,could undermine the stability of the LEZ.

The Role of the Lebanese Economic Zone (LEZ)

The LEZ is central to the strategy. Its success depends on several factors:

  1. Strategic Location: selecting a location that maximizes economic potential while minimizing security risks.
  2. Investment Incentives: Offering attractive incentives to attract both domestic and foreign investment.
  3. Regulatory Framework: Establishing a clear and obvious regulatory framework that promotes business growth.
  4. Infrastructure Development: Investing in essential infrastructure, including transportation, energy, and communications.
  5. Security Measures: Implementing robust security measures to protect investors and ensure the safety of the LEZ.

Historical Precedents & Case Studies

While this specific approach is relatively new, there are historical precedents for using economic development as a tool for countering extremism.

Post-Conflict Reconstruction in Bosnia: International investment in Bosnia and Herzegovina after the Bosnian War helped to rebuild the economy and foster reconciliation, reducing the appeal of extremist groups.

Marshall Plan (Post WWII Europe): The Marshall Plan demonstrated the power of economic assistance in stabilizing war-torn countries and preventing the spread of communism.

UAE’s Economic Engagement in Egypt: The UAE’s significant investments in Egypt following the 2013 political upheaval aimed to stabilize the economy and counter the influence of Islamist groups.

Though, these examples also highlight the importance of good governance, transparency, and addressing underlying political issues. Simply injecting capital is not enough.

Keywords & Related Search Terms

Hezbollah disarmament

Lebanon economic crisis

Saudi Arabia Lebanon investment

Qatar Lebanon investment

Lebanese Economic Zone (LEZ)

US Middle East policy

Iran influence Lebanon

*

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

The New Asian Entente: How Trump is Forcing South Korea and Japan to Rewrite the Security Playbook

Over $350 billion in pledged investments. A potential shift in U.S. military strategy focused on China. And a growing alignment between North Korea and Russia. These aren’t distant threats; they’re the immediate pressures reshaping the geopolitical landscape for South Korea and Japan, all amplified by the unpredictable foreign policy of a single administration. The era of relying on a consistent U.S. security umbrella is fading, forcing Seoul and Tokyo into a complex dance of diplomacy and self-reliance.

The Trump Factor: Transactional Diplomacy and the Erosion of Trust

The core issue isn’t simply tariffs, though those are significant. It’s the fundamental shift in how the U.S. views its alliances. President Trump’s “America First” approach treats security commitments as transactional – demanding increased financial contributions from allies like South Korea for the 30,000 U.S. troops stationed there, and hinting at a reduced U.S. footprint in the region to prioritize containing China. This has created a palpable sense of uncertainty, prompting South Korea and Japan to proactively seek alternative strategies.

As Victor Cha, the Korea chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, points out, Trump is keenly focused on trade imbalances. South Korea, with one of the largest trade surpluses with the U.S., is under pressure to rapidly address this gap, adding another layer of complexity to the relationship. But the stakes are far higher than economics; they involve the very foundation of regional security.

A Thawing Relationship: Seoul and Tokyo Find Common Ground

Historically fraught with tension stemming from Japan’s colonial past, the relationship between South Korea and Japan is undergoing a remarkable, if pragmatic, shift. President Lee Jae Myung’s recent visit to Japan – a rare diplomatic move – underscores this change. Driven by the “Trump risk,” as analyst Choi Eunmi of South Korea’s Asan Institute for Policy Studies describes it, both nations are recognizing the need to present a united front.

This isn’t necessarily about forging a deep alliance, but rather about leveraging collective strength. As Yukiko Fukagawa, a professor at Japan’s Waseda University, explains, Washington has long been frustrated by the historical disputes hindering trilateral security cooperation. Now, facing shared challenges from China and North Korea, both countries are under pressure to set aside differences for larger objectives.

Exploring Economic Cooperation: Trade Pacts and Investment

The potential for economic cooperation is a key element of this evolving dynamic. Discussions are underway regarding restarting free trade talks and South Korea’s potential entry into the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Furthermore, a trilateral scheme involving investment in U.S. energy production – specifically natural gas in Alaska – is being floated as a way to appease Trump’s demands while simultaneously addressing security concerns related to LNG shipments. This approach, as suggested by Ban Kil-joo of South Korea’s National Diplomatic Academy, allows for a win-win scenario where security responsibilities can offset demands for increased defense spending.

The North Korean and Russian Threat: A Catalyst for Change

The growing cooperation between North Korea and Russia is a significant driver of this realignment. With both nations seeking to evade sanctions and break isolation – particularly in the context of the war in Ukraine – the threat landscape is becoming increasingly complex. This partnership complicates U.S.-led denuclearization efforts and raises concerns about a potential escalation of tensions.

This evolving threat necessitates a more robust and independent security posture for both South Korea and Japan. While maintaining the U.S. alliance remains crucial, relying solely on American deterrence is no longer a viable strategy.

The Future of U.S. Forces Korea: A Shifting Focus?

Perhaps the most significant concern is the potential reshaping of U.S. Forces Korea (USFK). The Trump administration is signaling a desire to shift the focus of USFK from deterring North Korea to responding to a potential conflict with China over Taiwan. This would likely involve reducing the conventional forces dedicated to the Korean Peninsula, placing a greater burden on South Korea to defend itself against the North.

Experts warn that this shift could leave Seoul with fewer benefits but higher costs and risks, especially given the accelerating North Korean nuclear program. South Korea is understandably hesitant to commit to intervening in a Taiwan Strait conflict, given its economic reliance on China. Navigating this delicate balance will be a central challenge for President Lee during his summit with Trump.

To mitigate these risks, South Korea should seek firm U.S. commitments to maintaining deterrence against North Korea, even as it potentially accepts a more flexible role for USFK. Increased airpower and the deployment of strategic assets like bombers could offset any reduction in troop presence, preventing miscalculation by the North.

The situation demands a proactive and nuanced approach. South Korea must clearly articulate its role in regional security, supporting U.S. efforts to maintain Indo-Pacific stability while avoiding direct confrontation with China. The future of security in Northeast Asia hinges on this delicate balancing act.

What are your predictions for the future of the U.S.-South Korea-Japan alliance? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

Adblock Detected

Please support us by disabling your AdBlocker extension from your browsers for our website.