Hosted by Christina Ruffini and Sir Richard Dearlove
Guest
Episode Summary
In this week's 'One Decision in Brief' episode, hosts Christina Ruffini and Sir Richard Dearlove, former head of Britain's MI6, catch up on President Donald Trump's whirlwind tour of the Middle East, including his decision to not visit Israel, the business deals he closed in Saudi Arabia, lifting the nearly 50 year-old sanctions in Syria and meeting the nation's interim president, Ahmed al-Sharaa. Could this kind of diplomacy prove fruitful for the Middle East and the United States? Plus, the hosts discuss the United States' decision to expel Afghan refugees while granting protective status to white South African families.
Listen & Subscribe
- Watch on YouTube
- Listen on Apple Podcasts
- Listen on Spotify
Transcript
INTRODUCTION
Raffini: Welcome to One Decision in Brief. I'm Christina Raffini here with Sir Richard Dearlove, and we're going be talking about some of the most consequential decisions of the week. First, the choice of President Donald Trump to go to the Middle East and not visit Israel. The decision he made to lift sanctions on Syria's new fledgling government and what implications that could have, and the decision to bring South African white refugees to The US. I think this week, Sir Richard, we wanna talk about some of the decisions President Trump made while on his Middle Eastern trip. And the first decision that comes to mind with me is that he didn't go to Israel. He focused a lot of it on Saudi instead. What does that tell you?
SAUDI ARABIA AND THE ABRAHAM ACCORDS
Dearlove: Yeah. Well, I think the relationship with Saudi is gonna be at the center of the administration's Middle Eastern policy. Not only did he not go to Israel, he hardly mentioned Gaza in the whole of the trip. So clearly, at the moment, I wouldn't say it's being pushed to the side, but it's being deliberately separated. I think we've discussed this before. The extraordinary thing about the whole Gaza situation is the way that the Saudis have not really intervened. They've made various noises, but they haven't done anything significant. It's clearly the new Abraham Accords, which are well down the track.
Raffini: Which seem to be focused on financial deals and not necessarily normalization with Israel. Because, you know, the Saudi government has been quoted as saying, although they later denied, we talked about this before, you know, I don't necessarily care about Gaza, but my people do. I think it's untenable for them to be able to sign normalization deals with Israel given the current state of play in Gaza. So what do they do instead? As you said, they just kind of don't talk about it. They go around it. They do this $142,000,000,000 arms deal with The US. They do $20,000,000,000 in deals in AI data centers, $14,000,000,000 in gas turbines from GE, and just kind of move forward. Are the Abraham Accords under that umbrella kind of dead for the moment?
Dearlove: Well, I don't think so. Because if you look back at the Abraham Accords, what was surprising about them, the dimension which was not much published or much spoken about, was actually the development of the relationships behind the scenes between those participating Arab countries and the Israelis. I don't think at the moment those can be warmed up because the Gaza situation is too potent, but they're there on the agenda for the future. And for example, I remember having a meeting with the Bahrainis, and the Bahrainis were quite blunt in describing the extraordinary extent of their discussions with the Israelis at that time. Now I think those things have diminished for obvious reasons, but I bet you that they come back. The other thing which I think was extraordinary about Trump's visit was these huge deals. Well, it's easy to announce deals. My question is how much of that is actually gonna happen. We should look at it in a year to two years' time to see any of these relationships are ongoing. The one that probably will go ahead because it's strategically important is the arms deal. Whether it'll amount to the value stated is another matter. But, of course, the subtext to all of this is what's happening in the negotiations with Iran and building up Saudi as a defense leader in the Middle East against the Iranian threat.
LIFTING SANCTIONS ON SYRIA
Raffini: The other interesting thing that came out of this was the decision to remove the sanctions on Syria, which US has had on the Syrian regime in some form or another since 1979, and also the meeting between Trump and al-Sharaa. And it's not something that I think Trump would have done on his own. To me, this shows the influence of Arab gulf leaders, of the Saudis, of the Emiratis, of the Qataris telling him, we need a stable Syria. They can't do this under sanctions. They need this from you and him saying, okay.
Dearlove: Yeah. I think it's fantastic. It's the most extraordinary development. And there you have Trump saying, oh, he's a tough guy. You know, he's a strong man. This is a former Al Qaeda associated terrorist leader. But it shows a good deal of diplomatic and political pragmatism. And, frankly, it's exactly what the Middle East needs to stabilize Syria. Look. The ethnic makeup in Syria is so complex. The regime is not in total control of the country, but I think this is a step forward. And the endorsement of Trump for the new Syrian regime is huge. It's massive. And it will make a difference to the stability of the country, and I think it's a courageous step for the Americans to have taken. I think you're right. He wouldn't have taken it on his own. I'm sure that MBS and others lent on him pretty heavily and said, you've gotta do this, because Syria has been such a massive problem and getting worse. And to see this actually now moving into a positive dimension where it might help the whole of the Middle East situation to stabilize. And of course, the detachment of Syria from Iran is so important too. So I was enthralled by this development because it's so unusual.
Raffini: Well, and al-Sharaa is a different interesting character too because he's not some guy who grew up in caves destitute, you know, trying to scrap it out as a freedom fighter. He's actually was more in the Bin Laden mode of someone who came from a fairly well to do family in a capital, went to college. He studied media studies, which if you watch his trajectory and the way he's played to the international press, you can see that he's very intelligent there. And so far, he's stuck to his word. Obviously, we'll have to see. But that influx of foreign investment, foreign money, it seems to me, will either make or break the regime and will have a huge impact.
Dearlove: Yeah. I think it's extraordinary, but it's certainly happened before. We've seen ANC leaders in Africa who were very associated with terrorism become respectable politicians. We've seen it happen in Ireland with Sinn Fein. You know, Sinn Fein leaders becoming mainline politicians in a parliamentary democracy. So there are precedents, and this guy is pragmatic. You're right. He's highly educated. He comes from a privileged family. He's got a sensible background. And, okay, so did Bin Laden and so did Zawahiri, the Egyptian doctor. So there are antecedents, but this guy clearly is very, very pragmatic, down to earth, and ultimately sensible. But they have had a problem, though, with the Alawite minority and those incidents in the coastal areas, and that's a sign of the dangers and the direction that Syria could go if the whole thing disintegrates. So I think that that crisis really must have impacted heavily on the leadership in Damascus. This is just what we have to avoid. And they took action. Good for them. It shows a certain maturity.
Raffini: And it is a very ethnically and culturally diverse country. You've got different languages, different religions. It's a little bit like its neighbor Lebanon. I remember when I was there at the start of the war covering it, we had driven up to the border. We went, drove up to Tripoli, Lebanon, not Libya, which is about 20 kilometers from the Syrian border. And I had said to my fixer, oh, you know, I need to make sure I cover my hair because I'm blondish and I'm very pale and I have freckles because I'd been out the sun. And I was like, what am I going to do? Like, I'm just really not going to blend in. And our fixer who was a woman said, uh-uh. We have ones that look like you too. And I said, what do you mean? She goes, the dots on your face. Which was just it was a funny anecdote, but it reminded me of the influx of different people from Europe, from The Middle East, from North Africa. It's been a melting pot for years and years and years, and it makes it culturally diverse and wonderful, but it also makes it very hard to rule. And it's gonna be a challenge for somebody who doesn't have a ton of experience.
Dearlove: When I went to Syria with Blair, well, I went with him in his party, but the Syrian intelligence people took me around the Christian churches in Damascus. You forget the diversity and the extraordinary history of the country, and they were very proud to sort of show me the bits that still existed and the bits that were still functioning. I mean, churches where people still worshiped. So it's a fascinating and extraordinary place. But my god, in those days, was it difficult? Was it sinister? Was it problematic? Very, very creepy indeed. But that dimension seems to be, well, let's say submerged. I'm sure it's still there. But there is hope for the country.
REFUGEE STATUS AND SOUTH AFRICA
Raffini: The other decision I wanna ask you about is the American government's decision to grant refugee status at a time when they are expelling refugees to the point where they're talking about reneging TPS, which is that temporary protective status for the Afghans who fled and were brought to America on US planes. The US government is arguing the situation has gotten much better and they should go home. At the same time, they are importing white South African families at cost to the taxpayer, setting them up in The US with sponsors because they say that they are living in an untenable situation and have been persecuted for their Christian faith. What are your thoughts on this?
Dearlove: I think it's more about forcible land acquisition. And if you are familiar with the situation in South Africa, the ANC, well, of course, you have a rather extraordinary situation now because you have a coalition government, which isn't totally dominated by the ANC. But the ANC has a pretty bad record at requisitioning Afrikaner owned land, and the Afrikaners have been treated pretty badly. I think the case that Trump is making at the moment is an exaggerated one, and probably the influence of Musk giving his South African origins is important in this particular instance. But all I would say, maybe putting the other side of the coin, is that some of the Afrikaner families have had a very, very rough treatment. And there has been this mass settlement of their lands by tribal groups who've just moved into their legally owned farms and just taken them over with there's been no ability to challenge this in the court system. So there are two sides to this extraordinary situation, but I think it's been exaggerated and just something that Trump has fancifully taken on. And, you know, bear in mind, we actually have a lot of South African refugees in The UK who came here because they find it very difficult to settle in to a country which was discriminating against them. So we maybe have more familiarity with this than you would do in The United States.
Raffini: The issue this opens up for the administration potentially is a legal one because they are going to court saying the country is in a state of national emergency. It is under invasion. That's why they've invoked this Alien Enemies Act that The US cannot take on any more immigrants. It is denying refugee status for people from war torn conflict zones, South Sudan, Syria, Gaza, of course, and again, Afghan refugees. At the same time, it is importing people who they say are living in an untenable position. So lawyers I've talked to are saying this could be an issue for the Trump administration and court when this all ends up at the Supreme Court because they're undercutting their own argument about why they have to get rid of due process, why they're disregarding habeas corpus because the country is in the state of emergency, but it can't be a state of emergency only for non white people. And that's frankly what it looks like at this point.
Dearlove: Yeah. Well, that's interesting. And we've had a similar situation in The UK, but it doesn't have that legal potency whereby we're admitting Hong Kong Chinese who've been given, if they have the right type of Hong Kong passports they're open to resettlement in The UK. And of course, from The UK's point of view, this is a highly educated, highly entrepreneurial, interesting group who the country is keen to have. But at the same time, the government, the big issue, you know, is illegal immigration struggling with numbers cut back. But at the same time, and we've had the same issues The United States have over Afghan refugees too, particularly those who work for the armed forces and therefore whose lives are in danger from the Taliban. I'm not sure in The UK you would get the legal challenge because we haven't invoked the sort of laws that you mentioned about state of war.
Raffini: The Hong Kong issue has sort of slipped through without people much talking about it. Alright. I think that'll do it for us this week. Obviously, there's a lot more to talk about, but we'll be doing that in our episodes as the weeks progress. Thank you, Sir Richard, and our listeners. We're gonna be back this Thursday with our regularly scheduled programming. It's gonna be a conversation with my colleague Kate McCann and former defense secretary of The UK Ben Wallace. Of course, be sure to follow us on all our socials and subscribe to our YouTube for exclusive content like explainers and interviews with world leaders. I'm Christina Raffini. I'm Sir Richard Dearlove. Thanks for listening, everybody. See you next time.
