Democrat President Joe Biden’s decision to end support of the six-year-long Yemen war, and reassess American arms sales that began under his tenure as Vice President is surprisingly not what is making the headlines around the world this week. Jamal Khashoggi is a name that is familiar not just in journalistic circles but elsewhere too. Khashoggi was a Washington Post Saudi journalist who was killed in 2018 in Turkey. Following Khashoggi’s gruesome murder at the Saudi Embassy, fingers were instantly pointed at Saudi Arabia, and rather spectacularly on Mohammed Bin Salman, a.k.a, MBS. The Trump administration refused to publish a report linking MBS to the murder, despite the American legislature passing an act calling on intelligence services to provide evidence tying MBS to Khashoggi’s killing. However, matters are a bit different under the Democrat White House. Biden, who made it abundantly clear that his administration is not going to base their Middle East Policy on Saudi Arabia, unlike his predecessors, has finally called for the publication of the long blocked report in the public domain. What remains to be seen is how this is going to alter the relationship between the Americans and their strategically important partner in the Middle East.

Jamal Khashoggi had enjoyed a long and distinguished career in the Saudi Kingdom. He was known to have enjoyed close relations with the Royal family and often acted as an official spokesperson for them. . Khashoggi’s relationship with the ruling family and Saudi Arabia was redefined when King Salman’s son Mohammad Bin Salman started accumulating power and was soon made the Crown-Prince, set to inherit his father’s position. It is during this time Khashoggi distanced himself from the helm of power and became a critic of MBS and his policies often calling out the government and central political figures for imposing severe and autocratic policies. Despite his staunch stance, which fell well within the journalistic standards, no one foresaw what would befall Jamal Khashoggi. Khashoggi, having had come to terms with the threat looming over him, had relocated to the United States, in the form of a self-exile and had been a regular contributor to the Washington Post. Khashoggi in the summer of 2018 had travelled to Turkey in search of marital bliss. Tragically, before he could tie the knot, Jamal Khashoggi was reported missing from the Saudi embassy in Turkey and later pronounced dead.

Relations between the United States and Saudi Arabia were extremely warm under the Trump administration. However, the defining feature in this relationship wasn’t the two heads of state, rather the shots were called by Mohammad Bin Salman, and Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner. The two young and like-minded individuals forged a close relationship in the second part of the decade, mainly due to their shared business mindset. In fact, Trump on Kushner’s urgings decided to make his first official overseas visit to Saudi Arabia. From the very onset of his Presidency, Trump cultivated a very close relationship with the Saudi Kingdom making it the fulcrum of his Middle-East policy, and viewing the country as an important ally against America’s long Middle East rival, the Islamic Republic of Iran. The relationship was further strengthened through the Trump Administration’s decision to increase arms sales to Saudi Arabia, whilst backing its campaign in the Yemen war.

Despite Trump and Kushner obviously viewing their Saudi counterparts as their bosom companions, it was still an utter shock to see Trump adopt an ambiguous stance towards the killing of Washington Post Journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Trumps’ decision to blatantly believe what the Crown-Prince had to say, shook the Congress and American Intelligence Services, as the CIA itself concluded with medium-high certainty that Mohammad Bin Salman was aware of and directly involved in the killing of Jamal Khashoggi.

In 2018, the United States Senate, unanimously passed Resolution 69, which recognised that the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has, in recent years engaged in concerning behaviour, which includes its conduct in the civil war in Yemen, the apparent detention of the Prime Minister of Lebanon, suppression of dissent in the Kingdom and of course the killing of Jamal Khashoggi. The resolution explicitly recognises the misleading statements issued by the Saudi government, and that the fact the recent actions have undermined trust and confidence in the long-standing friendship between the United States and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The following resolution having been passed unanimously proved that the United States Senate was ready to take up its role in shaping foreign policy which it had long abdicated in favour of the executive. Despite the directness and consensual adoption of the resolution, it fell short of having any effect on American foreign policy. Owing simply to the fact that the Trump Administration actively suppressed its publication and wrote a blank cheque to the Saudi Government.

The United States turned a new page under the Biden Administration, as it seeks to calibrate American ties with the Gulf country. From the inception of Biden’s bid for the Presidency, he has portrayed a hard stance against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. During his campaign trails, he has gone to the extent of calling the country a ‘pariah’ state. In the short time that he has been in office, he has already reduced arms sales to the country, and the report presented to the Congress a few days ago by the Biden-Harris Administration was the proverbial last nail in the coffin. However, it is still early to determine the exact ramifications the report will have on the American-Saudi relationship and more importantly on the Kingdom’s de facto ruler MBS himself. The Biden administration may seem to be on a war footing undeterred by policies followed by their predecessors, but they have been extremely strategic. Apart from the incessant repetition by the White House Press Office, that decision would be taken keeping in mind that current relationship the two states share, Joe Biden prior to releasing the report also spoke to King Salman, the current head of state. Another anomaly that we see, is a dearth of White House officials rushing to the press to give insights into what the publication of the report means for the Saudis.

In the past few years, it has been evident to lawmakers on Capitol Hill and the intelligence services that Mohammed Bin Salman, wasn’t the top choice to be the leader of America’s closest ally in the Middle East. However, America’s top choice, Muhammad bin Nayef Al Saud, who served as the interior minister and was responsible for successfully countering the Al-Qaeda in the Kingdom, now lives in Canada in exile. The release of the report has just provided ammunition to the gun lying uncocked with the US Congress. Since the report by the Biden-Harris administration, we have already seen the imposition of the ‘Khashoggi Ban’, which is a new VISA policy, that sets new restrictions pursuant to section 21(a)(3)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The largely unanswered question that remains is how the American officials aim to publicly cooperate with a man who they have held responsible for an act of such nature. A possible divorce driven by public sentiment, or even a temporary souring of relations between the two countries could be a blessing in disguise for the IS and Al-Qaeda. However, another international actor set to benefit is the Islamic Republic of Iran. Ramifications of Joe Biden’s decision to halt arms sales to the Saudis were evident when Iran-backed Houthis rebels were quick to capitalise on this and decided to advance on several fronts. However, in the near future, we need to consider the possibility that America’s decision to distance itself from Riyadh, could very well open doors for China, Russia and may even push the Saudi officials to develop closer ties with the Israelis.

The release of the report, along with growing opposition to the Yemen war and President Biden’s insistence on speaking with King Salman, instead of his son MBS, has heralded a new era in US-Saudi relations. An era that is marked with a host of strategic calculations on the part of the United States, that are aimed at keeping Saudi Arabia at an arm’s length, while being able to exploit its strong position in the Middle East. Like many other acts of geopolitical significance that are often ignored in the hope of a natural solution, I fear this is not applicable in this case. Khashoggi’s death has stirred up feelings against the Saudi Kingdom and the leadership which could very well be directed towards America if they fail to act decisively in the near future.

The post JAMAL KHASHOGGI MURDER: SAUDI-US RELATION RECALIBRATION appeared first on WISER WORLD.

The Process of the Presidential Election

Before talking about the two candidates, it is important to understand how the election process works since it is very different from that of India. The election for the President of the USA is done separately from the legislative (The Senate and House of Representatives). The two main parties, Republicans and Democrats have small primaries and caucuses which are meetings of sorts in various states all over the country to decide the candidate from their party. When the two candidates are chosen, debates and campaigning is done, followed by voting. An electoral college is formed by the states of America and elections are held. Different states have different strengths for their college, keeping in mind the population of the particular state. The total number of seats is 538 and to become the President, a candidate needs to cross 270 seats. Since the division of seats is done on population, states like California and New York carry much more weight. The process from this point is more confusing. If a candidate wins the majority of the seats in a particular state, instead of the number of seats he has won goes into his account, but rather it is the total number of seats in the state that go into his account and it is said that he has ‘won the state’. For example, California has the most number of seats with 55 and hypothetically, if Biden wins 38 seats in the state, he gets the majority of the state. Not only that, in the total count he will get 55 seats to his name. Overall, whichever candidate reaches 270 seats in the college becomes the President. Now, let us look at the candidates.

 As of now, we have two candidates. Donald Trump from the Republican Party and Joe Biden from the Democratic Party as the leading candidates. The campaign has not gone into full swing as of now and the presidential debates are yet to be held. All this said; let’s look at the two candidates.

 The Incumbent – DONALD TRUMP

Starting with the incumbent Donald Trump; he has had little to no opposition when it comes to being endorsed by the Republican Party. The main reason behind this is the simple fact that he is the incumbent and has maintained a certain level of support in his key demographics. He has higher approval ratings than any other politician from the Grand Old Party (GOP) or the Republicans. Nonetheless, not every member has shown unequivocal support. Former presidential candidate from the Republican Party, Mitt Romney had voted to convict Trump during the infamous impeachment trials of early 2020. The economy has played to his advantage, at least before the pandemic and Trump does not shy away from taking the credit. Nonetheless, there are a few things that have played a role in the fall of his approval ratings. At the forefront, we have the mismanagement of the coronavirus outbreak in America. Currently, 4.1 million people have contracted the disease and considering that Trump has previously ridiculed the ability of the virus to spread and not impose restrictions has reflected the lack of leadership. Second, we have an issue that has not been at the forefront of Presidential elections for the last 3-4 races. The issue of race and institutionalized racism has taken America by a storm and Trump has not managed to control it. He has not openly talked about facing the issue of race but has called the protestors thugs and terrorists. Even though bold stances like this worked in 2016, they do not seem to be effective this time around when the issue is as sensitive as a race. With these things in mind, let’s look at the Democratic nominee and former Vice President under the Obama administration, Joe Biden.

The Nominee – JOE BIDEN

Joe Biden was relatively late to coming forward with his candidature if we compare it to the likes of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, who had been talking about their campaign for long before the start of the democrat party’s caucuses.  This lack of early preparation was seen during the Iowa caucus and the primary in New Hampshire in which Biden didn’t perform very well. But eventually, things started to fall in place, with the regular debate over Sanders electability and Warren’s early withdrawal, Biden was eventually selected to be the Democratic presidential nominee. All this proposes the question that is Biden the best that Democrats have to offer, to go against Trump. Now even though a lot of voters think that his policies may not be as radical or as glaring as those of Sanders and Warren, he has been gaining the popular vote time and again. The political scientists within the party say that people just consider Biden to be more electable. Even though there are some question marks over his leadership ability and his ability to talk to people in a sense which creates a different political wave (something Trump did pretty well in 2016). Nonetheless, we have seen during the Obama presidency what Biden is capable of in terms of team management and keeping his administration smooth. Further, Biden is gaining more edge in political leadership after he had openly criticised the current President over his handling of the pandemic and the protests. All this is something that the political scientists have talked about the two leaders and there are differences in opinion. But one thing that is not as subjective is the polling data that various news agencies have collected.

Status of Polling Data and Opinion Polls

The latest polling data, as of 9th June by RealClearPolitics shows a lead in favour of Biden by 6 points as he stands on 46%, as opposed to Trump’s 40% approval rate. Similarly, NPR (+8), NY Times (+14), Fox News (+12) and Quinnipiac(+15) all suggest Biden having a huge lead over the president. It is important to mention that the past few months have shown Trump’s worst approval ratings during his tenure, going down to 38%. He, without a doubt, will improve his ratings and consequently improve his numbers in the poll. So, it is not advisable to consider Biden to be the new President, just yet. Also, a data as general as this one is not usually considered to be a clear indicator of who will be winning, as was seen back in 2016 when Hilary had an advantage of 4-5% by the same data  To better understand the polling data we need to divide the data into two different categories. The first is the situation in the swing states and secondly, the situation of the key demographics and the handling of various issues. An important note is that a lot of states are considered to be predominantly Red (Republican) and Blue (Democrats) states. This division is done, keeping in mind the dominance of the said party in the state in the previous elections as well as the general polling data. The states which do not fall under this category are the swing states. In the upcoming election, seven states have been identified by most of the political scientists as the swing states. These are Arizona, Florida, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Georgia, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Different networks consider different states to be swing states but on average these 7 states have been the most common. It is important to note that Trump won all of these states back in 2016. It is also worth mentioning that Biden has led the state of Texas which has been predominantly a red state, and so Trump is expected to win the state back even though a lot of journalists have started to consider Texas to be a swing state. Data between 17th and 22nd June collected by NY Times/Siena poll shows a huge advantage for Biden.  Comparing the current numbers to that of 2016, we see that Trump has completely lost Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, which he won by margins of less than 1 point, and is now trailing by 11, 11 and 10 respectively. Moving on North Carolina and Arizona have shown a smaller advantage as Biden leads by 9 and 7 points respectively. Florida is an interesting state which is considered vital for Trump’s re-election and he won it narrowly in 2016 by 1.6 but is currently trailing by 6 points. All this said, one has to keep in mind two things. First that most of these polls showed an advantage for Hilary as well but she lost these battleground states but second, her advantage was not as big as that of Biden. One would not be surprised if Trump manages to cut down the advantage in these swing states and also manage to win one or two conservative states, but will this be enough for him to regain presidency?

Going by the same source, looking at the key demographics, Biden leads by 74 points with black voters, 39 points with Hispanic voters, 34 points with young voters (18-29), 22 points and 18 points with independent voters. This shows a key advantage that will play in the favour of Biden. Back in 2016, Trump won the election with a huge advantage, running up to 70 points, with independent voters, men, older voters and white people. This time the gap has cut so much that Biden leads in 3 of Trump’s key demographics i.e. independent, men and older voters. This seems like a much more negative trend than one would have predicted. Moving on, key issues like COVID and racial issues have highly favoured Biden. People have started to doubt Trump’s leadership in these two aspects and considering that these are the two main issues of 2020 for America, Biden does seem to be favoured. On the other hand, Trump is preferred when it comes to immigration, economy and job creation. Trump has made it a point to claim the growth of the US economy before the pandemic to his benefit and that seems to be in his favour.

Conclusion

Even though we are just 3-4 months before the elections happen, all of these are predictions and pre-election polls. A lot of things like the presidential debates, widespread campaigning and the actual Election Day turnout, all can change the way things stand today. This was seen back in 2016 to work in favour of Trump but that was because the difference between the two candidates was too small. That may not be the case this time but nothing can be said with certainty. Kanye West has pulled out of the race and it will be fair to say that he did not have much ground before as well. As of now, even though the polls indicate one thing, anything can happen. There is without a doubt a bit of uncertainty and just like 2016, the door is still open for both candidates to win the White House. 

The post USA POLITICS – ANALYSES OF THE USA’s ELECTION 2020 appeared first on WISER WORLD.