Author: MandarinTangerine

The last rebel bastion in Syria, Idlib, may soon fall to Assad and the Russian troops assisting him. The US appears to have no intention to reverse this conclusion. Syria will become, or already has become, a Russian proxy state. Russia will have its desired seaport and Assad as her ally.

Syrian forces will then extract penalties on all resisting parties still in the country. We will never know the number of casualties.

The US never had a choice. Obama knew this, and so does Trump. We couldn’t afford to risk another failed state in the Middle East. We had no appetite for another Iraq.

And the Syrian refugees in Jordan and Turkey? Those who can return will return, to what they deem to be a country under the control of Assad. I’m told the refugees are already beginning to go back to their homeland. As amazing as it sounds, Assad has won.

KuwaitiSeekerCarrollReview[2]

See recent review!

I just finished Gelvin’s new book, The New Middle East. This brief treatise is a must for all who try to keep up with the Middle East.

It is, in many ways, a sad book, because the outcome frankly seems hopeless. And I agree with the facts and most of his conclusions.

A couple of brief examples suffice. First, the educational system in the Middles East. Gelvin correctly notes that the teaching system in the area fails to emphasize critical thinking. Most of the time is spent on rote memory and repetition. This observation comports with my experience in teaching medical students. They were quite familiar with the textbooks and lecture notes. But when faced with a patient where integration of facts and principles was required, they consistently had trouble reaching a useful synthesis.

Another obvious area is the fact that women are second class citizens. Even in the best circumstance, women are not fully engaged in the betterment of their society, and this is not their fault. They are not allowed to participate as are the men. The obvious consequence is that the states in the Middle East automatically sacrifice nearly half of their possible productivity.

Gelvin’s little book is clear and beautifully written.  The readability is enhanced by his use of a question and answer format.

I recall my visit to Hodeidah, Yemen several years ago, when the country was at relative peace. The city lies on the eastern coast of the Red Sea.  The beach was not glorious and nothing like the beach on the Egyptian side where the rich Western tourists come for their vacations. We went for a swim in a deserted area and the water was not clear. We walked along the shore toward town where the fishermen brought in their catch. Unlike the Egyptians who restricted fishing in order to preserve the creatures for their luxury dive trade, the Yemenis harvested as much as they could. We stopped at a fish seller, asked them to carve off a fresh piece, and they cooked it for us over their charcoal fire. The next day our Yemeni hosts took us to an outdoor restaurant. Under a tent we ate with perhaps twenty Yemeni men and consumed the best fish and shrimp I’ve ever had.

But those days are over.

The Saudis and UAE , with US logistical assistance, are waging war against the Houthi army, the latter supported by Iran. Hodeidah is now the critical port for the shipment of supplies of all kinds into Yemen. This shipping entry point supplies more than two-thirds of the necessary goods for Yemen.  This includes medicines, food, and other life essentials. The capital, Sanaa, is utterly dependent on the shipments arriving in Hodeidah. Under bombardment from the Saudis, the supply ships can no longer safely dock at the port.

Is this the final choke point for Yemen? The country can’t survive without these supplies.

There is another possibility. The Iranians may see it as their duty to increase their support for the Houthis. Will all the combatants be drawn into a wider conflict?

Is there an undercurrent in the US that demeans foreigners among us? Do we cross the street to avoid them? Are we afraid they’ll hurt us? Are we afraid they’ll take our jobs?

What does Scripture say about treatment of immigrants (often referred to as sojourners)?

Well, there are tons of examples. Here are a few:

“There shall be one law for the native and for the stranger who sojourns among you.” Exodus 12:49

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.” Leviticus 19:33-34

The opening of the US Embassy to Israel in Jerusalem has elevated the old controversy once again. Is present-day Israel the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy?

Beginning in 1948 with the new State of Israel, many evangelicals began to develop the position that God was bringing His prophecies concerning Israel to a conclusion.  This position has been expressed in association with the doctrine known as dispensational premillenialism. Apart from details of that doctrine, however, stands the idea that the events we are seeing today reflect the immediate culmination of the Biblical prophecy. Psalm 132:13 says, “For the Lord has chosen Zion; He as desired it for his dwelling place.” And Ezekiel 5:5, “Thus says the Lord God: This is Jerusalem. I have set her in the center of the nations, with countries all around her.” And Zechariah 12:5 “Then the clans of Judah shall say to themselves, ‘The inhabitants of Jerusalem have strength through the Lord of hosts, their God.'”

Other passages detract from the view that we are seeing the endgame of prophecy in present-day Jerusalem. Romans 2:28 says, “For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical.” And Galatians 3:8 “And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham saying, ‘In you shall all the nations be blessed.'”

The State of Israel today is similar to its surrounding nations. Israel operates for its self-interest, not in a role to bless its neighbors.  (I am not intending this as a critical comment. All current nations seek their self-interest.) The Israel of today is a secular state, not a theocracy.  The government is not guided by Biblical principles. As such, how can current Israel be the representative of end time prophecy?

My conclusion is that we are not seeing the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy in the State of Israel today.

But God keeps His own counsel. All Scripture is God-breathed, and all will indeed be brought to completion. The Lord always surprises. He knows the end from the beginning. Even with all the Old Testament prophecies, the world was shocked by the coming of Jesus. I doubt we’re clever enough today to predict what He will do next.

The country of Jordan has long been a haven for Middle East refugees. Due to its central location, its government, which has been relatively tolerant to refugees, and its peaceful history, Jordan has taken in a remarkable share of refugees over the last 70 years. Beginning with new state of Israel in 1948,  Jordan accepted refugees from Palestine. This process continued following the 1967 war. The flow of refugees into Jordan increased with the rise of ISIL, and then even more with the current war in Syria.

About one-third of Jordan’s population are refugees from other countries in the Middle East. The government receives some assistance from other countries and aid groups, but in terms of the overall cost, this is minimal.

The costs to Jordanian society are immense. The country has insufficient water and sanitation resources. Health care facilities cannot manage the load. The increased competition for housing has driven up property costs. The crime rate is higher. Taxes have risen.

As a consequence, Jordanian citizens are restive and dissatisfied with response of their government. How long will the population tolerate the remarkable generosity of the government? Practically speaking, the government has little means to correct the situation. They have limited ability to restrict the influx and minimal means to repatriate the refugees.

Here in the US, we find our county more and more distrustful of immigrants. But as we continue to decrease the number of immigrants here in the US, we neglect a huge, smoldering problem in Jordan. And the problem may soon erupt and become our problem.

AL JAZEERA NEWS recently reported that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has pulled support from Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas for his failure to accept Israel’s various offers for peace over the years.

The question is: what’s the reason for the Crown Prince’s stated position?

Is this just one of the several new positions already staked out by bin Salman, positions designed to show new directions of the Saudi government?

Does this reflect bin Salman’s apparent friendship with Jared Kushner?

Is this an attempt by bin Salman to gain favor with the US government? Is this part of the reason for the US continuing to support the Saudi war against Yemen?

Are the new moves by bin Salman indicative of a real shift in Saudi policy?

One thing is clear: young Mohammed bin Salman warrants careful watching in the Middle East.

Levant is an old term indicating the area of the Middle East along the eastern Mediterranean. The term entered modern usage from French, but the word is derived from Italian. The original meaning had to do with “rising”, indicating the rising of the sun in the east. The French used the word in their mandate over Syria and Lebanon after World War I.

The experience of the French was quite wide-spread in earlier days, not only in Syria and Lebanon, but also in other areas of the Middle East and North Africa. With the rise of the US in the region, the role of France declined.

But now, as we see the US moving to a more isolationist position, France, under the leadership of Emmanuel Macron, is asserting its role in the area. Macron wants France to become a “great power” again. He has begun the process by inserting himself as an intermediary between the US and Russia. He plans to visit Putin in St. Petersburg later this year. He recently intervened in the crisis over the resignation of Saad Hariri, the Lebanese Prime Minister, assisting in Hariri’s restoration. Thirdly Macron has acted to mediate the ongoing Gulf crisis between Qatar and four other Arab states.

These moves represent France’s intent to replace the role of the US in the region, an effort at globalism versus isolationism.

How may these events affect the US in the long-term? How may they affect the Middle East?

Not many in the West and fewer in the US know the story of Googoosh. Her life mirrors the history of modern Iran.

She was born Faegheh Atashin in 1950 in Tehran, the daughter of parents of Azerbaijani origin. Her career extended from the 50’s through the 70’s as a movie star and singer. At the peak of her career she was the best known pop singer in the Persian language.

With the Iranian revolution in 1979 the theocracy banned her from singing , along with all other female singers. Even though she could not sing in public, her fame grew in Iran through pirated recordings. She did not perform again until the election of Mohammed Khatami when she was allowed to perform, but only outside the country and not in Iran (2000).

In 1980 she was imprisoned for a short time in Iran.

In 2009 she participated in an international protest at the UN in sympathy with the Iranian riots over the 2009 elections.

In February she released a video in support of the gay and lesbian community in Iran, where the death penalty can be imposed for homosexuality.  As such, she was one of the first Persians to speak out.

She continues to perform outside Iran in cities with large Iranian populations.

Googoosh, in her public life, represents the vitality of the Persian people, even as they continue to live under the thumb of the theocracy.