Saudi Arabia: Biden considers recognizing Palestinian state for Saudi normalization

Written by: Ella Rutman; Edited by: Aliyah Jaikaran  

On Wednesday, Saudia Arabia’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement to the United States saying that it will not continue the ongoing normalization talks with Israel unless an independent Palestinian state is recognized with the 1967 borders and East Jerusalem as its capital. They added that Israeli forces must stop its “aggression” on the Gaza Strip and withdraw from the region in the ongoing Israel-Hamas war.   

The U.S. has spearheaded diplomacy between Saudi Arabia and Israel for months in the Saudi Deal. In exchange for normalized relations with Israel, Saudi Arabia would receive a U.S. defense pact and assistance in generating its own civilian nuclear program. Progress on the Saudi Deal has ceased as per Saudi Arabia’s demand for an independent Palestinian state.   

According to a senior official, the Biden Administration has assigned policy staff to explore options of the U.S. recognizing a Palestinian state before solidifying a complete postwar deal with Israel. If Palestine obtains statehood, Biden has said that it should be governed by a “revitalized” Palestinian authority, which currently narrowly controls some of the West Bank. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has opposed Palestinian control over the West Bank, further stagnating the Saudi Deal.    

At Thursday’s news conference, President Biden delivered his most piercing criticism of Israel’s actions in Gaza, yet. The president declared Israel’s conduct in Gaza “over the top” and stated that innocent people dying and starving has “got to stop.” Biden emphasized his joint efforts with Qatar, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia to get “as much aid as we possibly can into Gaza.”  

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman reaffirmed Saudi Arabia’s “strong interest in pursuing” normalization with Israel to U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken contingent on an end to the war in Gaza and a Palestinian state. Netanyahu has stated he will not compromise on total Israeli security west of the Jordan River, which contradicts a Palestinian state. The U.S. has repeated its support for the two-state solution. Talks of the Saudi Deal remain idle until concrete movement towards a Palestinian state is made.  

Iranian-backed militias: Biden decides how to respond to fatal drone attack

Written by: Aliyah Jaikaran; Edited by: Luke Wagner 

Three US soldiers were killed and at least 34 injured in a drone attack by “Islamic Resistance in Iraq” (IRI) – a coalition of militias backed by Iran – on a U.S. military base in Jordan near the Syrian border, says the Biden administration. The attack has intensified ongoing tensions in the Middle East since Hamas’ October 7th attacks on Israel, igniting the Israel-Hamas war and Israel’s depredation of Gaza. It is the first occurrence of fatalities among U.S. troops in the Middle East since the outburst of the Israel-Hamas war.  

The attack took place at Tower 22, a U.S. military outpost, in northeast Jordan where the borders of Iraq, Jordan, and Syria meet. The armed drone struck the outpost’s barracks.  

Speaking to a concerned nation, President Biden vowed to punish those responsible for these unprovoked attacks.  Biden then said, “I do hold [the Iranian Government] responsible [for the attacks] in that they’re supplying weapons to the people who did it.” However, direct confrontation between the two rivals seems at this moment unlikely. When asked if the President is considering a strike within Iranian territory, National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said, “We are not looking for a war with Iran.” 

Like the Houthis in Yemen, IRI tried to justify its attacks as acts of solidarity with the Palestinians in Gaza.  The militias claimed that targeting U.S. military assets served as a “continuation” of its resistance against American occupation in Iraq after 2003.  

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Nasser Kanaani rejected allegations that Iran had helped plan or had commissioned the attack. Kanaani asserted that IRI and other militias act autonomously and do not carry out orders from Iran.  

Since Hamas’ October 7th attack on Israel, U.S. troops have been attacked more than 150 times by Iranian-backed militias in Syria and Iraq which resulted in at least 70 wounded before January 28th’s drone attack in Jordan.  

On Wednesday, Biden publicly stated that he had decided on his course of action. As of Friday February 2nd, the United States has not yet responded. 

Israel-Hamas War: Why has the Global South supported the genocide case against Israel?

Written by: Luke Wagner; Edited by: Chloe Baldauf

On Friday, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that the allegations claiming Israel had committed acts in violation of the United Nations 1948 Genocide Convention were “plausible” enough to justify the court’s continued deliberation of the case.  The South African Government brought the case to the international court alleging that “acts and omissions” by Israel in its offensive in Gaza have been “genocidal in character” because they are intended to bring about the “destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian [people].”

The ICJ case’s strongest proponents have been states of the Global South.  Many Muslim-majority states such as Iran, Turkey, Jordan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, and the Maldives have supported South Africa’s case.  Additionally, many Latin American and African states have been among the loudest proponents of the genocide case against Israel.

Jakkie Cilliers, founder of the Pretoria-based Institute for Security Studies think tank, said that the Western support for Ukraine and Israel has made many African nations feel neglected while they continue to face their own struggles.  Cilliers suggested that this shared feeling is perhaps why many in the Global South have come to identify strongly with the Palestinian cause.

Johann Soufi, an international lawyer and former legal office chief at the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) in Gaza, said that many nations in the Global South feel that the international system has never worked for them and are frustrated to see the international community respond quickly to the concerns of the West – like Russian aggression against Ukraine and Hamas’ October 7th attacks.  Many in the Global South view international justice increasingly as “selective justice” and a reflection of a “neo-colonial” status quo, according to Mr. Soufi.

In early January, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken called South Africa’s accusations of genocide “meritless” and a distraction from efforts to improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza although the US has refrained from making any public comments on the trial.  Washington’s strong support of Israel has made it isolated among members of the Global South who wish that the United States were more willing to criticize Israel.  Steven Gruzd, head of the African Governance and Diplomacy Program at the South African Institute of International Affairs, said that “African states are beginning to identify more strongly with the global south [identity] than the US.”  According to Ms. Cilliers, “the momentum has swung to Russia and China.”  

These are concerning trends for US diplomats not only in Africa but also in Latin American and Muslim-majority states.  This week, Secretary Blinken is traveling throughout the African continent this past week, presumably to rekindle some connections and show some attention to a region which has felt sorely neglected during the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East.  Additionally, Blinken spoke with South African Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor on Thursday to discuss the conflict in Gaza, including “the need to protect civilian lives,” provide humanitarian assistance to Palestinian civilians, and work towards lasting peace that “ensures Israel’s security and advances the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.” 

If alienating members of the Global South becomes an issue of greater American concern, it is possible that more conversations about the future of Gaza include African and Latin American states.

Yemen: Houthi leader says that direct confrontation with the US is a “great honor”

Written by: Katie Barnett; Edited by: Luke Wagner

On Thursday, the United States conducted its fifth round of airstrikes against the Houthis, an Iranian-backed rebel group based in western Yemen.  Purportedly in response to Israel’s military operation in Gaza, Houthi militants have launched missiles at Israel and hijacked cargo ships passing through the Red Sea.

The Houthis have claimed that all of the ships they attacked were Israeli-owned or operated, but many have been commercial ships with no connection to the Government of Israel – such as Tuesday when Houthi missiles directly hit a Greek cargo vessel.  Houthi Red Sea attacks have severely impacted international trade and many major shipping companies have stopped using the Red Sea route – opting for the much longer route around southern Africa.

The United States and the United Kingdom militarily intervened in the Red Sea earlier this week.  On Thursday, Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh explained that the United States determined that the Houthis “presented an imminent threat to merchant vessels and U.S. Navy ships in the region.”

Ms. Singh asserted that the US is not at war with the Houthis and does not want to see a regional conflict. However, Ms. Singh was emphatic that U.S. intervention will continue until the Houthis stop their assault on commercial shipping in the Red Sea.

President Joe Biden echoed Ms. Singh’s remarks on Thursday – affirming the necessity of U.S. military action while acknowledging that the strikes have not stopped the Houthis thus far.

Meanwhile, Houthi leader Abdul Malik al-Houthi called it “a great honor” to be “in direct confrontation” with the United States and Israel.  This statement indicated that the Iranian-backed militant group would not back off from its aggressive position easily.  It seems that a direct conflict with the United States is exactly what the Houthis aim for.  Perhaps, a war with the West would please its benefactors in Tehran.  As for now, Al-Houthi has shown no intention to bring an end to the conflict in the Red Sea.