Wednesday, March 15, 2023

Abortion pills at heart of reproductive rights challenges in Poland, US

Issued on: 15/03/2023 - 
Demonstrators wearing masks with the red lightning bolt, symbolising the Polish women's strike movement, attend a protest against Poland's strict abortion laws in Warsaw, on March 8, 2021. © AFP (Archive)

Text by: Bahar MAKOOI

An activist in Poland was convicted on Tuesday for helping a pregnant woman access abortion pills, as a legal case in the US attempts to ban access to medical abortion altogether. In countries where reproductive rights are already under threat, abortion pills can provide discreet access to safe terminations, but legal battles are blocking access to medicine.

Activist Justyna Wydrzynska was sentenced to eight months of community service on Tuesday, after Polish courts found her guilty of helping another woman to have an abortion.

Poland has some of Europe’s most restrictive abortion laws, with termination only allowed in cases of rape, incest or threat to the mother’s life or health.

Wydrzynska, who plans to appeal the ruling, was arrested in April 2022 for providing abortion pills to a woman named Anna who was around 12-weeks pregnant and a suspected victim of domestic violence.

“It happened in 2020 during the Covid crisis,” says Mara Clarke, co-founder of Supporting Abortions for Everyone (SAFE), a group that defends access to abortions in Europe. “The postal service wasn’t working as normal and we didn’t know if the medicine would arrive in time to help this woman if it was delivered from overseas.”

The World Health Organization (WHO) advises that medical abortions – carried out using tablets sometimes called abortion pills – can be safely self-managed at home in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.

“Anna’s husband initially prevented her from going to get an abortion in Germany, and then confiscated her abortion pills after reading her messages,” says Clarke. He reported Wydrzynska to the police, who then conducted a search of her home.

The maximum penalty in Poland for providing help to carry out an abortion is three years in prison – this makes Wydrzynska’s case “the first time in Europe that an activist has risked being sent to prison for helping a woman who wanted to have an abortion”, says Clarke.

“The fact that Justyna Wydrzynska risked three years in prison for responding to a plea for help from a woman and from a mother who was trying to escape an abusive relationship is a crime in itself against human rights and the right to bodily autonomy.”
‘No other way’

“I'm not feeling guilty at all,” Wydrzynska said in a press conference on Wednesday. “I know I did right. When your reproductive rights are restricted in a country like Poland… there was no other way to help than to share the pills.”

The WHO recommends the use of two abortion pills, Mifepristone and Misoprostol, as an accessible and affordable means of terminating a pregnancy which can be taken anywhere, for example at home instead of in a hospital. (Misoprostol can also be used as a stand-alone drug.)

In addition, the pills can also be taken without direct supervision from a medical supervisor. As such, global usage surged during the Covid pandemic when access to normal health procedures was disrupted.

In France, the US, medical abortions now account for more than 50 percent of total terminations. In the UK and India almost all terminations are now carried out using abortion pills.

The safety and relative ease of taking the medicine also makes abortion pills a useful asset to women seeking abortions in countries where the law limits access.

In Poland, where there are severe restrictions on procedural abortions conducted by medical practitioners, abortion pills offer a discreet lifeline to safe terminations. Typically, activist groups purchase the tablets to be sent by post from external countries via third-party organisations in order to avoid legal consequences.

In the US (which, along with Poland, is one of only four countries to make abortion legislation more restrictive in the past three decades) the national postal service has emerged as a key channel to providing abortion pills in states where legislation has blocked access to terminations.
‘Fear and intimidation’

Yet, this channel is now under new threat. On Wednesday, a US judge in Amarillo, Texas heard arguments to ban sales of Mifepristone across the country – even in states where abortion is legal. This would mean that activists could no longer purchase the drug in states with more permissive laws to send to women facing restrictions.

Anti-abortion activists who brought the case to federal court hope that banning the prescription drug would move the country closer to a total ban on the practice, especially as the presiding judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk, is a deeply conservative Christian with a personal history of opposition to abortion and a court record of favoring right-wing causes.

The United States Food and Drug Administration has urged the judge to reject the request on the grounds that it would force women to have unnecessary surgical abortions and greatly increasing wait times at already overburdened clinics.

"The public interest would be dramatically harmed by effectively withdrawing from the marketplace a safe and effective drug that has lawfully been on the market for 22 years," it said. Current US laws allow use of Mifepristone up to 10 weeks of pregnancy.

At the same time in Texas, another case has been brought by a man suing three women who he says helped his wife obtain abortion pills.

He alleges the three women texted his former partner information about Aid Access, a group that provides abortion medication by mail, and that one of the women dropped off the pills to his ex-wife.

It is the first such lawsuit to be brought in the US since the Supreme Court overturned laws enshrining abortion as a fundamental right.

As in Poland, the case is a “terrifying example of how anti-abortion extremists use the judicial system as an instrument of fear and intimidation”, says Irene Donadio spokesperson for the International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network.
‘I would have done the same’

In Poland, Anna, the pregnant woman Wydrzynska gave abortion pills to, was never able to take the medicine. Days after her husband confiscated the pills, she miscarried. Yet, in an open letter published on March 2 she wrote to Wydrzynska to express her thanks.

“It was an expression of humanity. Because in a situation where people who had a moral obligation, and in some cases a legal obligation, to help me stood up and washed their hands, only you gave me a hand.”

For Donadio, it is no surprise that abortion pills are at the heart of legal challenges against abortion on both sides of the Atlantic. The fact that they can be taken without medical supervision, and even be bought in pharmacies in many countries, makes them an unprecedented channel for female empowerment.

“Medical abortion is clearly the result of medical progress that can be used to emancipate women and to protect their health,” says Donadio. “It is revolutionary. That's why it's so disturbing for certain forces because it allows women control over their body, over reproduction, and over their life.”

As well as opposition, there is also support for access to the medicine. In the US, if the federal judge does rule for a temporary ban on Mifepristone, the FDA would likely immediately appeal it, on the basis of the drug's history and its own authority to regulate pharmaceuticals.

In Poland, politicians seem to be hearing the message. On March 6, Wydrzynska spoke in front of MPs from Poland’s centre-left party, Nowa Lewica, to defend her actions. The next day a law aiming to criminalise communicating information about abortion failed to pass after being rejected by a large majority in parliament.

Activists are also unlikely to drop the cause. When Wydrzynska has appeared in court in Warsaw dozens of women have gathered holding banners bearing the message: “I would have done the same as Justyna”.

This article was adapted from the original in French.

Abortion pill under threat in Texas court case

Issued on: 15/03/2023 

















Abortion rights adovcates gather in front of the courthouse in Amarillo, Texas on March 15, 2023
 © Moisés ÁVILA / AFP

Amarillo (United States) (AFP) – US abortion opponents are hoping for a national ban on a widely used abortion pill as their lawsuit against government drug regulators was argued Wednesday before a Texas judge believed to be sympathetic to their cause.

Galvanized after the US Supreme Court ended the nationwide right to abortion last June, anti-abortion forces are now targeting the prescription drug mifepristone in their campaign to win a total ban on the practice.

The suit against the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) takes aim at a pill involved in 53 percent of all abortions in the United States, or more than half a million every year.

While the FDA has never been challenged like this before on its approval of a drug that has proven safe and effective, the plaintiffs, a coalition of anti-abortion groups, believe they can win a national freeze on distribution of mifepristone.

Presiding over the case in federal court in Amarillo, Texas will be Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a conservative Christian with a personal history of opposition to abortion and a court record of favoring right-wing causes.

The case landed in his court via what critics call "judge-shopping," in which plaintiffs take legal action in a district where the judge has a history of rulings that support their case.

It is not clear when Kacsmaryk will make his decisions, but if he rules in favor of the plaintiffs, the US government is widely expected to appeal.

A small group of protesters gathered outside the courthouse Wednesday, carrying signs bearing slogans such as, "Not your uterus, not your decision" and "Defend medication abortion."

Lindsay London, a 41-year-old nurse, said the case was "100 percent ideologically based."

"If they were concerned about people's health there would be many other actions they would be taking. It's ideological, not based in science."

Record of safety


One component of a two-drug regimen used for medication abortion, mifepristone can be used in the United States through the first 10 weeks of pregnancy.

It has a long safety record, and the FDA estimates 5.6 million Americans have used it to terminate pregnancies since it was approved.

But the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian advocacy group, sued the FDA, saying the approval of mifepristone "disavow(ed)" science, "ignored" potential health impacts and "disregarded" the complications that can arise with its use.
People wait in line to enter the courthouse in Amarillo, Texas where a conservative judge with a personal history of opposition to abortion is hearing a case on medication abortion © Moisés ÁVILA / AFP

"The FDA failed America's women and girls when it chose politics over science and approved chemical abortion drugs for use in the United States," they said.

The FDA has urged the judge to reject the request.

"The public interest would be dramatically harmed by effectively withdrawing from the marketplace a safe and effective drug that has lawfully been on the market for 22 years," it said.
Already banned in some states

Currently, some 15 states have laws restricting access to mifepristone by requiring a physician provide it, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health policy and research group.

Abortion care has halted in another 13 states after the Supreme Court overturned the long-established constitutional right last June.

The Texas suit seeks to block mifepristone nationally by overturning the FDA's approval of the drug, and asks Kacsmaryk to first suspend the approval via injunction -- an effective ban -- while the lawsuit proceeds through his court.

Abortion rights groups say a ruling blocking mifepristone would be as earth-shaking as the Supreme Court's ruling last year.

"Access to medication abortion would end across the country -- even in those states where abortion rights are protected," the Center for Reproductive Rights said.

If Kacsmaryk does rule for a temporary ban on mifepristone, the FDA would likely immediately appeal it, on the basis of the drug's history and its own authority to regulate pharmaceuticals.

But abortion rights advocates were preparing for the worst.

"It seems unbelievable that a lone judge in Texas could make a ruling that would impact a product that has been FDA approved and safely marketed for more than two decades," said Elisa Wells, co-founder of Plan C, which helps people access medical abortions.

© 2023 AFP

Falling stocks in Europe and US stoke banking crisis fears


Shares in global investment bank Credit Suisse fell sharply on Wednesday sending shares plunging in other European banks.


A record drop in shares at Swiss banking giant Credit Suisse on Wednesday has fanned fears of a possible banking crisis.

US-listed shares at the global investment bank plummeted by more than a quarter after the banks largest shareholder — the Saudi National Bank — said it would not inject in more cash into the bank.

The Financial Times reported that Credit Suisse had appealed to the Swiss National Bank for a public show of support, citing people familiar with the matter.

At the close of trade in Europe on Wednesday, Credit Suisse's stock price was down 24%, having recovered slightly from its lowest ebb during the day. It was trading at around €1.84 — compared to almost €3 per share last week and more than €7.50 per share late last March.

European and US markets react

Stocks fell in Europe and Wall Street on Wednesday amid worries about the strength of banks on either side of the Atlantic. Germany's DAX had lost 3.32% at the close of trade in Europe
The FTSE 100 in London fell 3.80%.
France's CAC 40 dropped 3.68%
European STOXX 600 index (aggregating 600 of the core companies across the continent) shed almost 3%
And the STOXX Banks index of 21 leading European lenders sagged 8.4%, showing the sector under the most pressure
The S&P 500 was -0.69% at the close of trade
The Dow Jones Industrial Average was down -0.87%
The Nasdaq composite finished up at 0.05% in the green
All major cryptocurrency platforms were also deep in the red for the day; Bitcoin was the most stable, but still down 1.3%

Aftermath of Silicon Valley Bank collapse

The volatility comes after last weeks sudden collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in the US which forced authorities to intervene to prevent the spread of market disturbances.

Multi-national investment firm BlackRock's Chief Executive, Laurence Fink, warned on Wednesday that the US regional banking sector was at risk, and predicted continued high inflation and rate increases.

Europe's bank index has seen more than €120 billion ($127 billion) of value by market capitalization wiped out since March 8.

Germany's financial supervisory authority (BaFin) has moved to allay fears and said the German banking system appeared robust and capable of absorbing higher interest rates.

"Our main focus is currently on some smaller banks with little surplus capital and increased interest rate risks — we are closely monitoring these institutions," a BaFin spokesperson said in a statement.

The European Central Bank looks poised to hike interest rates again on Thursday in a bid to tackle high inflation.

Reuters news agency cited a spokesperson from the US treasury as saying that officials are "monitoring" the problems surrounding Credit Suisse and that they have "been in touch with global counterparts."

Swiss National Bank will offer liquidity 'if necessary'


The Swiss National Bank (SNB) and the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) said in a statement that "the problems of certain banks in the USA do not pose a direct risk of contagion for the Swiss financial markets," and pointed to "the strict capital and liquidity requirements" which applied to Swiss financial institutions.

The SNB said that Credit Suisse met the capital and liquidity requirements imposed on what it called "systemically important banks" and said "If necessary, the SNB will provide CS with liquidity."

kb/msh (Reuters, AP)

Credit Suisse says it will borrow up to $53.7 bn from central bank

Credit Suisse will borrow up to 50 billion francs from the Swiss central bank to shore up its business 

Zurich (AFP) – Credit Suisse announced Thursday that it would borrow almost $54 billion from the Swiss central bank to reinforce the group after a plunge in its share prices.

The disclosure came just hours after the Swiss National Bank said capital and liquidity levels at the lender were adequate for a "systemically important bank", even as it pledged to make liquidity available if needed.

In a statement, Credit Suisse said the central bank loan of up to 50 billion francs ($53.7 billion) would "support... core businesses and clients", adding it was also making buyback offers on about $3 billion worth of debt.

"These measures demonstrate decisive action to strengthen Credit Suisse as we continue our strategic transformation to deliver value to our clients and other stakeholders," CEO Ulrich Koerner said in the statement.

"My team and I are resolved to move forward rapidly to deliver a simpler and more focused bank built around client needs."

Credit Suisse, hit by a series of scandals in recent years, saw its stock price tumble off a cliff Wednesday after major shareholder Saudi National Bank declined to invest more in the group, citing regulatory constraints.

Its shares fell more than 30 percent to a record low before regaining ground to end the day 24.24 percent down, at 1.697 Swiss francs.

Credit Suisse's market value had already taken a heavy blow this week over fears of contagion from the collapse of two US banks, as well as its annual report citing "material weaknesses" in internal controls.

Mounting concerns

Analysts have warned of mounting concerns over the bank's viability and the impact on the larger banking sector, as shares of other lenders sank on Wednesday after a rebound the day before.

Credit Suisse is one of 30 banks globally deemed too big to fail, forcing it to set aside more cash to weather a crisis.

Neil Wilson, chief market analyst at trading firm Finalto, said Wednesday that if the bank did "run into serious existential trouble, we are in a whole other world of pain".

In February 2021, Credit Suisse shares were worth 12.78 Swiss francs, but since then, the bank has endured a barrage of problems that have eaten away at its market value.

It was hit by the implosion of US fund Archegos, which cost it more than $5 billion.

Its asset management branch was rocked by the bankruptcy of British financial firm Greensill, in which some $10 billion had been committed through four funds.

The bank booked a net loss of 7.3 billion Swiss francs for the 2022 financial year.

That came against a backdrop of massive withdrawals of funds by its clients, including in the wealth management sector -- one of the activities on which the bank intends to refocus as part of a major restructuring plan.

© 2023 AFP

Social media frenzy fuels bank busting panic

Issued on: 16/03/2023 

New York (AFP) – Fearful Twitter posts and anxious WhatsApp exchanges coupled with online banking ease are seen as helping power an internet-age run on a pair of now-collapsed American lending institutions.

Both Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank were hit with massive withdrawals by customers fearful of losing their money, but the speed was dizzying in an age when rumors spread like wildfire on social media and apps make moving funds with the click of a button simple.

Congressman Patrick McHenry, chairman of the US House Financial Services Committee, referred to the recent turmoil as "the first Twitter fueled bank run."

Some messages that caused cold sweats among financial customers proved to be misleading, prompting calls to focus on facts not speculation.

Gone is the time when a "run on the bank" meant mobs of customers banging on bolted doors and demanding deposits back.

Now, as rumors of dwindling bank reserves ricochets about social media, customers can make them real by tapping into online accounts to transfer money.

Federal authorities took over Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) last week less than 48 hours after it first announced bad news.

The forced closure of Signature Bank came just two days later.

In between, high-profile entrepreneurs sounded an alarm and fired off advice on Twitter.

Investor Bill Ackman tweeted during the weekend that if federal regulators didn't quickly step in and guarantee all deposits, runs on other banks would start Monday.

"You should be absolutely terrified right now," investor Jason Calacanis tweeted, using all capital letters for emphasis.

"That is the proper reaction to a bank run and contagion."

Meanwhile, startup founders shared bank trouble rumors in WhatsApp groups.

"The mix of technology and fast-moving rumors fueled a crisis of unprecedented speed," researcher Jonathan Welburn of the Rand Corporation think tank told AFP.

Online banking was around during the 2008 financial crisis, but "the adoption of these technologies is definitely increasing," he said.

Circuit breakers?


Banking regulators need to put in place "circuit breakers" that could quickly suspend banking transactions in the event of cyber attacks, weather disasters, or customer panic, said Hilary Allen, a specialist in financial technologies at American University in Washington.

This is a "very political" undertaking, Allen said.

"Banking regulators need to think about what this kind of technological circuit breaker would look like, and in which circumstances they would be ready to deploy it."

Markets have seen the power of online platforms trigger surges in the prices of "meme stocks" like video game retail chain Game Stop and AMC Theaters due to endorsements in chat forums at Reddit.

"The flip side is that social media can also exacerbate panic and loss of confidence," Allen said.

In the case of SVB, fears which spread on social media resonated loudly with the bank's customers, who tended to be tech-savvy entrepreneurs keenly tuned in to online chatter.

The collapse of SVB was the second largest bank failure in the United States but played out in barely two days.

The largest bank failure in the country, that of Washington Mutual in 2008, took place over the course of eight months.

At that time, Twitter and iPhones were fledgling products; there were no WhatsApp groups, no Slack chat threads, Welburn noted.

"What happens when bankers are drowning their sorrows in the social media age?" Welburn wondered.

"Viral posts, retweets and shares could deprive regulators of precious time."

© 2023 AFP
Israel's Netanyahu shortens Germany trip amid protests



DW
9 hours ago9 hours ago

Israel has seen weeks of protests against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's controversial judicial reform plans. It was unclear if the itinerary change was linked to the demonstrations.



https://p.dw.com/p/4OhOx

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is shortening a trip to Berlin, his office said on Wednesday.

A preliminary itinerary circulated last week said that the Israeli premier would leave Germany on Friday. The new statement said he would return on Thursday.

The office said that the prime minister had earlier held consultations "on developments in national security." The statement did not specify whether the change was linked to the security concerns.

Netanyahu's trip accompanied by protests

Thousands in Israel took to the streets on Wednesday again to protest a controversial judicial reform Netanyahu's government wishes to enact.

Police have given out 30 emergency tickets for blocking emergency routes at the Ben Gurion International Airport, as demonstrators sought to disrupt Netanyahu's travel itinerary, with similar tactics having been employed in recent days and weeks.

"Netanyahu will meet us at every corner, on every flight or at every conference," protest organizers said in a statement. "We will not allow him to destroy the dream of many generations and turn Israel into a dictatorship."
 
Demonstrators gathered near the Ben Gurion airport to protest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's judicial reforms
Image: Tsafrir Abayov/AP Photo/picture alliance

What has led to the recent protests?

Changes planned by the Israeli leadership would allow parliament to overturn Supreme Court rulings with a simple majority vote and grant politicians more influence in appointing judges.

Opponents of the proposed reforms argue that they would effectively end the separation of powers and endanger the role of the judiciary. Netanyahu and his allies argue that the judiciary had become politicized and engaged in judicial activism.

Thousands of people in Israel took to the streets during a visit last week by US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.

Protesters blocked roads to the Ben Gurion international airport and major intersections in a number of cities. Netanyahu was forced to hold talks with Austin near the airport.
Israel says Iranian threat to be focus of Berlin talks

Protests are also expected in Berlin on Thursday, when the Israeli prime minister is scheduled to meet with Chancellor Olaf Scholz and President Frank-Walter Steinmeier.

The Israeli prime minister's office said that Netanyahu and Scholz "are expected to discuss various diplomatic and security issues, especially Iran and developments in the region."

It added that Netanyahu would "emphasize the need to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons."

Netanyahu's visit is due to be accompanied by a large-scale police operation. More than 3,000 officers had been set for deployment from Wednesday to Friday morning, a German police trade union had said, still commenting on Netanyahu's original travel plans.

German authorities have set the highest security level for the stay, with road closures and cordons planned.

Netanyahu has recently visited Rome and is planning a trip to London. The Israeli head of government is seeking to establish a firm stance in the West against the Iranian nuclear program among allies.

Netanyahu and his allies seek to push through with reforms targeting the country's judicial system
 Ohad Zwigenberg/AP Photo/picture alliance

sdi/rc, msh (dpa, Reuters)

Under fire over legal reforms, Netanyahu to face critics in Berlin


Ahead of Netanyahu's departure, critics took their protests to Ben Gurion airport


Issued on: 15/03/2023 - 

Berlin (AFP) – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, under heavy fire at home over planned legal reforms, was due to arrive Wednesday in Berlin where Germany's leaders will also urge him to reconsider the overhauls.

The German government is under pressure for hosting Netanyahu at a time of the disputed reforms, with critics urging Berlin to scrap the visit.

Speaking in Tallinn on Wednesday, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier said he planned to raise the reforms with Netanyahu when they meet on Thursday.

Israel is the "only democracy in the whole region, a country with a strong constitutional state", he said.

"What I would like to see is that what we have admired about Israel... is preserved."

Netanyahu's government, which includes ultra-Orthodox and extreme-right parties, introduced its judicial reform package in January.

The changes would allow lawmakers to override Supreme Court decisions that strike down legislation with a parliamentary majority, and then deny the court the right to review such a move.

It would also make it harder for the Supreme Court to strike down legislation it deems to contravene Basic Laws, Israel's quasi constitution.

Netanyahu's government has argued the reforms are needed to limit judicial overreach, but protesters have decried them as threatening Israel's liberal democracy by weakening key checks and balances.

Ten consecutive weeks of nationwide demonstrations have followed, with critics also charging that the proposed changes aim to protect Netanyahu as he fights corruption charges in an ongoing court battle.

Ahead of Netanyahu's departure, critics took their protests to Ben Gurion airport.

"Dictator on the run" and "Don't come back", read placards held up by demonstrators near the airport, where a convoy of cars bearing Israeli flags circulated between the terminals, making them difficult to access, an AFP correspondent reported.

Netanyahu's flight was delayed by hours as he held talks with his coalition partners while President Isaac Herzog prepared to announce his compromise outline.

Herzog, who holds a largely ceremonial role, has for weeks been toiling over a proposal to soften the government's legal overhaul.
'Worst possible time'

The controversy in Israel puts Germany in an uncomfortable position.

Germany and Israel forged strong diplomatic ties in the decades after World War II, with Berlin committed to the preservation of the Jewish state in penance for the Holocaust.

Successive German governments have described Israel's national security as a crucial foreign policy priority.

On the eve of Netanyahu's departure for Germany and ahead of a planned trip to Britain, 1,000 writers, artists and academics wrote to the two nations' ambassadors urging their governments to scrap the visits, denouncing what they called his "dangerous and destructive leadership".

In Frankfurt, Meron Mendel, who heads the Anne Frank educational centre named for the teenage Holocaust victim, also said Berlin should have declined the visit.

"If an Israeli prime minister wants to get rid of common democratic values, then today is the worst time possible to invite him to Berlin," Mendel told public broadcaster Bayerischer Rundfunk.

Berlin should have clearly informed Netanyahu's office that it was not possible to receive him at this time, said the German-Israeli historian.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz's government must "finally realise" that "no business can be done with a far-right Israeli government", said Mendel, noting that the German-Israeli friendship is based on common values.

Some Israelis living in Berlin have also called for protests against the visit, including a demonstration at the Brandenburg Gate on Thursday.
'Normal guest'

Government spokesman Steffen Hebestreit on Monday said Netanyahu is the "elected prime minister of Israel and therefore also a normal guest in Germany".

Besides meeting Steinmeier, Netanyahu will hold separate talks with Scholz.

According to Netanyahu's office, the prime minister and Scholz "will discuss diplomatic and security issues, first and foremost the Iranian issue, as well as regional developments".

It said the Israeli leader would "stress the need to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear arms".

The meeting with Scholz is the first in their current roles, "and an expression of the special relations between Israel and Germany, and of the cooperation in a range of fields", added Netanyahu's office.

© 2023 AFP

Iran-Saudi deal: China's growing clout in the Middle East



William Yang in Taipei
03/14/2023
March 14, 2023
DW

The recent Saudi-Iran deal is a major triumph for Chinese diplomacy, but Beijing may find the Middle East to be a tricky region to operate in, say experts.

After China successfully brokered a deal last week to restore relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Beijing appears set to take on a larger role in the Middle East and potentially challenge US dominance in the oil-rich region.

Under the agreement reached in the Chinese capital on Friday, Riyadh and Tehran agreed to reopen their embassies and exchange ambassadors after seven years of severed diplomatic ties and tensions.

The rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia, respectively the leading Shiite and Sunni Muslim powers in the Middle East, has dominated regional politics in recent years, affecting not only the two nations but also others with both sides backing rival camps in proxy wars from Yemen to Syria and elsewhere.

Beijing described the result as a "major outcome" achieved through "concerted efforts" by the three countries, emphasizing that China "pursues no selfish interest whatsoever in the Middle East."

"China has no intention to and will not seek to fill the so-called vacuum or put up exclusive blocs," Beijing said in a statement on Saturday, adding: "China will be a promoter of security and stability, partner for development and prosperity, and supporter of the Middle East's development through solidarity."
Tricky region for Chinese diplomacy

The deal is a major triumph for Chinese diplomacy, said Camille Lons, a research associate at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

It also marks a shift in Beijing's strategy as "until now, it had refused to get entangled in regional disputes, and smartly benefited from the US-led security umbrella while doing business with the entire region," she noted.

"But by getting more involved in politics, China takes the risk of exposing its own limits."

Ian Chong, an expert on China's foreign policy at the National University of Singapore (NUS), shared a similar view.

He pointed out that Beijing may find the Middle East to be a tricky region to operate in.

"There are lots of complicated interests and tensions so how brokering this deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia will play out remains to be seen," he told DW.
A long presence in the Middle East

China has cultivated strong economic and political ties with both Riyadh and Tehran in recent years. Saudi Arabia is China's largest oil supplier, with trade between the two countries amounting to $87 billion (€81 billion) in 2021.

Commerce between Iran and China, meanwhile, was worth more than $16 billion in the same year, with Tehran depending on the Asian giant for as much as 30% of its foreign trade.

China has also pledged to invest $400 billion in Iran over 25 years.

Chinese President Xi Jinping traveled to Saudi Arabia in December for a state visit, and Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi visited Beijing in February.

Chong from NUS said that by facilitating this deal, Beijing is signaling that it is now not just a leading economic player but is also willing to get involved in politics in the Middle East, a region which is the primary source of China's energy imports.

Tuvia Gering, an expert on China-Middle East relations at the Diane and Guilford Glazer Center at the Institute for National Security Studies in Israel (INSS), said Beijing hopes to carve out a bigger role for itself because the region has become "strategically important" to it.

"It's not just for energy security, but on this wider gamut of areas," Gering told DW, pointing to Chinese investments in regional infrastructure as part of its massive multibillion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative.

The Saudi-Iran deal comes at a time when many countries in the region perceive the US as winding down its engagement there.

This doesn't mean Beijing could replace Washington in the Middle East, said Gering.

"China said it doesn't want to be dragged into regional conflicts, and I don't think that wish has changed even though recent developments may have given Beijing a bit more appetite to become more active," he underlined, adding that China still needs to gain the region's trust before it can become a reliable partner. "China is still a new actor and these things take a long time."

Is US influence waning?

The US, meanwhile, welcomed China's efforts to help end the war in Yemen and deescalate tensions in the Middle East, but rejected the notion that it was stepping back from the region.

It also stressed that the agreement was two years in the making.

"This is not about China. We support any effort to deescalate tensions in the region. We think that's in our interests, and it's something that we worked on through our own effective combination of deterrence and diplomacy," said White House national security spokesperson John Kirby.

John Calabrese, director of the Middle East-Asia Project at the Middle East Institute, said Beijing's role in brokering the deal doesn't fundamentally alter Washington's position.

In his view, Beijing's main goal in the region is still "maintaining its economic interests and expanding its economic equities."

"This requires regional stability to the extent that the US is still equipped to do so," he said, adding that de-escalation between Tehran and Riyadh is in the interest of the Middle East, China and the US.

And despite US-Saudi tensions over an array of issues — ranging from human rights violations to Riyadh's continued participation in a pandemic-era oil pact with Russia — Saudi Arabia remains one of Washington's staunchest security partners in the region.

Lons from IISS said the agreement shows that Gulf states like Saudi Arabia are willing to diversify their security and strategic partnerships so that they do not rely entirely on the US.

She described these countries' approach as "pragmatic" and warned against overestimating Beijing's importance to the region.

"When it comes to hard security guarantees, they are fully aware that the US remains their key partner."

Edited by: Srinivas Mazumdaru


Iran, Saudi Ink China-Brokered Deal to Restore Ties

By Nigar Bayramli March 14, 2023

None

Wang Yi, director of the Office of the Central Foreign Affairs Commission of China, Ali Shamkhani, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, and Minister of State and national security adviser of Saudi Arabia Musaad bin Mohammed Al Aiban pose for pictures during a meeting in Beijing, China March 10, 2023. / Reuters

Middle East regional rivals Saudi Arabia and Iran signed a China-brokered deal to restore diplomatic ties, seven years after relations were severed.

A joint statement was signed on March 10 between Ali Shamkhani, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), Saudi National Security Adviser Musaid Al Aiban, and, China's senior diplomat Wang Yi, according to Iran's state broadcaster IRIB.

As per the joint statement reached by the three countries, Iran and Saudi Arabia have agreed to resume diplomatic relations within two months and reopen embassies and agencies in both countries, Iran’s news agency IRNA reported.

It added that both Riyadh and Tehran stressed "respect for sovereignty and non-interference in each other's internal affairs", in accordance with a previous security cooperation agreement signed in April 2001.

The statement concluded that "the three countries declare their decisive will to use all efforts to strengthen regional and international peace and security."

Diplomatic relations between the two countries were severed in 2016 after protesters stormed Saudi Arabian diplomatic missions in Iran in retaliation to the execution of Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, a religious leader, in Saudi Arabia.

Iran supports the Lebanese Hezbollah group and Yemen's Houthi rebels, against whom Saudi Arabia has led a military campaign since March 2015.

Saudi Arabia had blamed Iran for a 2019 missile and drone assault on its oil plants, a charge Tehran denies. The two countries have also been locked in rivalry for decades, backing allies fighting proxy wars across the region.

Shamkhani said that the move followed Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi's visit to China in February, and his talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping. The discussions provided a platform for "new and very serious negotiations" between Iranian and Saudi delegations.

Referring to the agreement, Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Nasser Kanani said during a press conference on March 13 that the two countries would reopen their embassies in Tehran and Riyadh "within a timeframe of not more than two months", along with consulates in the Iranian city of Mashhad and the Saudi port city of Jeddah.

Meanwhile, Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan told the Saudi daily Asharq al-Awsat that the China-brokered agreement does not mean all disagreements have been resolved, adding that the agreement indicated the mutual will of Saudi Arabia and Iran "to resolve differences through dialogue".

Iran's Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian said in a tweet on March 10 that the resumption of bilateral relations would "provide great capacities to the two countries, the region and the Islamic world".

"The neighbourhood policy, as the key axis of the thirteenth government's foreign policy, is strongly moving in the right direction, and the diplomatic apparatus is actively behind the preparation of more regional steps," the minister added.


US 'Imperial Anxieties' Mount Over China-Brokered Iran-Saudi Arabia Diplomatic Deal



One American intelligence expert urged the U.S. to maintain friendly relations with "barbarous, but long-standing allies" in the Middle East lest China fill the vacuum.



Wang Yi, China's top diplomat, stands between Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, and Saudi Arabia's minister of state and national security adviser, Musaad bin Mohammed Al Aiban, on Friday in Beijing.

(Photo: Chinese Foreign Ministry)



BRETT WILKINS
Mar 11, 2023

While advocates of peace and a multipolar world order welcomed Friday's China-brokered agreement reestablishing diplomatic relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia, U.S. press, pundits, and politicians expressed what one observer called "imperial anxieties" over the deal and growing Chinese influence in a region dominated by the United States for decades.

The deal struck between the two countries—which are fighting a proxy war in Yemen—to normalize relations after seven years of severance was hailed by Wang Yi, China's top diplomat, as "a victory of dialogue and peace."

The three nations said in a joint statement that the agreement is an "affirmation of the respect for the sovereignty of states and non-interference in internal affairs."

"The U.S. encourages war while China pushes the opposite."

Iran and Saudi Arabia "also expressed their appreciation and gratitude to the leadership and government of the People's Republic of China for hosting and sponsoring the talks, and the efforts it placed towards its success," the statement said.

United Nations spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric thanked China for its role in the deal, asserting in a statement that "good neighborly relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia are essential for the stability of the Gulf region."



Amy Hawthorne, deputy director for research at the Project on Middle East Democracy, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit group, toldThe New York Times that "China's prestigious accomplishment vaults it into a new league diplomatically and outshines anything the U.S. has been able to achieve in the region since [President Joe] Biden came to office."

Yun Sun, director of the China program at the Stimson Center, a think tank in Washington, D.C., called the deal a sign of "a battle of narratives for the future of the international order."

CNN's Tamara Qiblawi called the agreement "the start of a new era, with China front and center."



Meanwhile, Ahmed Aboudouh, a nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council, another D.C. think tank, wrote that "China just left the U.S. with a bloody nose in the Gulf."

At the Carnegie Endowment, yet another think tank located in the nation's capital, senior fellow Aaron David Miller tweeted that the deal "boosts Beijing and legitimizes Tehran. It's a middle finger to Biden and a practical calculation of Saudi interests"

Some observers compared U.S. and Chinese policies and actions in the Middle East.

"The U.S. is supporting one side and suppressing the other, while China is trying to make both parties move closer," Wu Xinbo, dean of international studies at Fudan University in Shanghai, told the Times. "It is a different diplomatic paradigm."

Murtaza Hussein, a reporter for The Intercept,tweeted that the fact that the agreement "was mediated by China as a trusted outside party shows shortcomings of belligerent U.S. approach to the region."




While cautiously welcoming the agreement, Biden administration officials expressed skepticism that Iran would live up to its end of the bargain.

"This is not a regime that typically does honor its word, so we hope that they do," White House National Security Council Strategic Coordinator John Kirby told reporters on Friday—apparently without any sense of irony over the fact that the United States unilaterally abrogated the Iran nuclear deal during the Trump administration.

Kirby added that the Biden administration would "like to see this war in Yemen end," but he did not acknowledge U.S. support for the Saudi-led intervention in a civil war that's directly or indirectly killed nearly 400,000 people since 2014, according to United Nations humanitarian officials.



U.S relations with Saudi Arabia have been strained during the tenure of President Joe Biden. While Biden—who once vowed to make the repressive kingdom a "pariah" over the gruesome murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi—has been willing to tolerate Saudi human rights abuses and war crimes, the president has expressed anger and frustration over the monarchy's decision to reduce oil production amid soaring U.S. gasoline prices and Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Nevertheless, the Biden administration is currently trying to broker a peace deal between Saudi Arabia and Israel following the Trump administration's mediation of the Abraham Accords, a series of diplomatic normalization agreements between Israel and erstwhile enemies the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.

The United States, which played a key role in overthrowing Iran's progressive government in a 1953 coup, has not had diplomatic relations with Tehran since shortly after the current Islamist regime overthrew the U.S.-backed monarchy that ruled with a brutal hand for 25 years following the coup.



Jonathan Panikoff, director of the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative in the Middle East Programs for the Atlantic Council, urged the U.S. to maintain friendly relations with brutal dictatorships in the region in order to prevent Chinese hegemony there.

Panikoff wrote in an Atlantic Council analysis:

We may now be seeing the emergence of China's political role in the region and it should be a warning to U.S. policymakers: Leave the Middle East and abandon ties with sometimes frustrating, even barbarous, but long-standing allies, and you'll simply be leaving a vacuum for China to fill. And make no mistake, a China-dominated Middle East would fundamentally undermine U.S. commercial, energy, and national security.

Other observers also worried about China's rising power in the Middle East and beyond.



New York Times China correspondent David Pierson wrote Saturday that China's role in the Iran-Saudi Arabia rapprochement shows Chinese President Xi Jinping's "ambition of offering an alternative to a U.S.-led world order."

According to Pierson:

The vision Mr. Xi has laid out is one that wrests power from Washington in favor of multilateralism and so-called noninterference, a word that China uses to argue that nations should not meddle in each other's internal affairs, by criticizing human rights abuses, for example.

The Saudi-Iran agreement reflects this vision. China's engagement in the region has for years been rooted in delivering mutual economic benefits and shunning Western ideals of liberalism that have complicated Washington’s ability to expand its presence in the Gulf.

Pierson noted Xi's Global Security Initiative, which seeks to promote "peaceful coexistence" in a multipolar world that eschews "unilateralism, bloc confrontation, and hegemonism" like U.S. invasions and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.


"Some analysts say the initiative is essentially a bid to advance Chinese interests by displacing Washington as the world's policeman," wrote Pierson. "The plan calls for respect of countries' 'indivisible security,' a Soviet term used to argue against U.S.-led alliances on China's periphery."

The U.S. has attacked, invaded, or occupied more than 20 countries since 1950. During that same period, China has invaded two countries—India and Vietnam.

"The Chinese, who for years played only a secondary role in the region, have suddenly transformed themselves into the new power player."

New York Times chief White House correspondent Peter Baker also published an article Saturday about how the "China-brokered deal upends Mideast diplomacy and challenges [the] U.S."

"The Americans, who have been the central actors in the Middle East for the past three-quarters of a century, almost always the ones in the room where it happened, now find themselves on the sidelines during a moment of significant change," fretted Baker. "The Chinese, who for years played only a secondary role in the region, have suddenly transformed themselves into the new power player."

Some experts asserted that more peace in the Middle East would be a good thing, no matter who brokers it.



"While many in Washington will view China's emerging role as mediator in the Middle East as a threat, the reality is that a more stable Middle East where the Iranians and Saudis aren't at each other's throats also benefits the United States," tweeted Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Washington, D.C.-based Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

"Unfortunately, the U.S. has adopted an approach to the region that has disabled it from becoming a credible mediator," he lamented. "Too often, Washington takes sides in conflicts and becomes a co-belligerent—as in Yemen—which then reduces its ability to play the role of peacemaker."



"Washington should avoid a scenario where regional players view America as an entrenched warmaker and China as a flexible peacemaker," Parsi cautioned.


China-aided deal challenges US
Saudi pact leaves America on sidelines


China’s Wang Yi (centre) with Iran’s Ali Shamkhani (right) and Saudi Arabia’s Musaad bin Mohammed Al Aiban in Beijing on Friday


Peter Baker | Washington | Published 12.03.23

Finally, there is a peace deal of sorts in West Asia. Not between Israel and the Arabs, but between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which have been at each other’s throats for decades. And brokered not by the US but by China.

This is among the topsiest and turviest of developments anyone could have imagined, a shift that left heads spinning in capitals around the globe. Alliances and rivalries that have governed diplomacy for generations have, for the moment at least, been upended.
Advertisement

The Americans, who have been the central actors in West Asia for the past three-quarters of a century, almost always the ones in the room where it happened, now find themselves on the sidelines during a moment of significant change.

The Chinese, who for years played only a secondary role in the region, has suddenly transformed themselves into the new power player. And the Israelis, who have been courting the Saudis against their mutual adversaries in Tehran, now wonder where it leaves them.

“There is no way around it — this is a big deal,” said Amy Hawthorne, deputy director for research at the Project on West Asia Democracy, a nonprofit group in Washington.

“Yes, the US could not have brokered such a deal right now with Iran specifically, since we have no relations. But in a larger sense, China’s prestigious accomplishment vaults it into a new league diplomatically and outshines anything the US has been able to achieve in the region since Biden came to office.”

President Joe Biden’s White House has publicly welcomed the re-establishment of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran and expressed no overt concern about Beijing’s part in bringing the two back together.

Privately, Biden’s aides suggested too much was being made of the breakthrough, scoffing at suggestions that it indicated any erosion in American influence in the region. And it remained unclear, independent analysts said, how far the rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran would actually go.

After decades of sometimes violent competition for leadership in West Asia and the broader Islamic world, the decision to reopen embassies that were closed in 2016 represents only a first step.

It does not mean that the Sunnis of Riyadh and the Shias of Tehran have put aside all of their deep and visceral differences.

Indeed, it is conceivable that this new agreement to exchange ambassadors may not even be carried out in the end, given that it was put on a cautious two-month timetable to work out details.

The key to the agreement, according to what the Saudis told the Americans, was a commitment by Iran to stop further attacks on Saudi Arabia and curtail support for militant groups that have targeted the kingdom.

Iran and Saudi Arabia have effectively fought a devastating proxy war in Yemen, where Houthi rebels aligned with Tehran battled Saudi forces for eight years.

A truce negotiated with the support of the United Nations and the Biden administration last year largely halted hostilities.

New York Times News Service

From: Inside Story

What are the implications of the Saudi-Iranian diplomatic deal?

China brokers agreement between two adversaries to restore diplomatic relations.

Iran and Saudi Arabia have agreed to restore diplomatic relations following talks between the two regional rivals in China.

Entrenched on different sides on a host of issues, and in proxy wars – notably in Yemen, Syria and Lebanon – few would have believed even days ago that a rapprochement between the two was about to happen 

The United States was not involved in the deal in a region where it would see itself as the dominant power.

China brokered the Saudi-Iran negotiations – with the announcement of the successful outcome made in Beijing.

What are the implications of this agreement – in the region and beyond?

Presenter: Adrian Finighan

Guests: 

Foad Izadi – Associate professor at the University of Tehran

Hillary Mann Leverett – CEO at political risk consultancy Stratega in McLean, Virginia

Ibrahim Fraihat – Conflict resolution specialist, associate professor, Doha Institute, and author of, Iran and Saudi Arabia: Taming a Chaotic Conflict