What the UK general election might mean for the Middle East 

Special Britain’s Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, soaked in rain, stands at a lecturn as he delivers a speech to announce July 4 as the date of the UK’s general election. (File/AFP)
Britain’s Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, soaked in rain, stands at a lecturn as he delivers a speech to announce July 4 as the date of the UK’s general election. (File/AFP)
Short Url
Updated 03 July 2024
Follow

What the UK general election might mean for the Middle East 

Labour Party leader Keir Starmer and Britain’s Prime Minister and Conservative Party leader Rishi Sunak attend a live TV debate.
  • Perceived inaction on Gaza has hung over the election contest between Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir Starmer
  • If the polls prove correct and Labour sweeps to power, analysts predict a far closer UK-Gulf relationship

LONDON: It was clear from the moment that British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak stood outside 10 Downing Street on May 22 and announced that he was calling a snap general election that the next six weeks would not go well for his ruling Conservative party.

For many, the raincloud that burst over Sunak’s head as he spoke seemed to sum up the past 14 years, which, riven by factional infighting, saw no fewer than four leaders in the eight years since Theresa May succeeded David Cameron in 2016.

Adding to the comedy of the moment was the soundtrack to the announcement, courtesy of a protester at the gates of Downing Street, whose sound system was blasting out the ’90s pop hit “Things Can Only Get Better” — the theme tune of Labour’s 1997 election victory.




Britain’s Prime Minister Rishi Sunak delivers a speech at a Conservative Party campaign event at the National Army Museum in London. (File/AP)

Headline writers were spoiled for choice. Contenders included “Drown and out,” “Drowning Street” and — probably the winner — “Things can only get wetter.” That last one was also prescient. 

In theory, under the rules governing general elections, Sunak need not have gone to the country until December. The reality, however, was that both Sunak and his party were already trailing badly in the polls and the consensus at Conservative HQ was that things could only get worse.

As if to prove the point, in one early Conservative campaign video, the British Union Flag was flown upside down. A series of mishaps and scandals followed, with some Conservative MPs found to have been betting against themselves and the party.




Former British PM Boris Johnson gestures as he endorses British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak at a campaign event in London, Britain, July 2, 2024. (Reuters)

Judging by the steady slide in support for the government, the electorate has neither forgotten nor forgiven the chaos of the Boris Johnson years, typified by the illegal drinks parties held in Downing Street while the rest of the nation was locked down during COVID-19 restrictions.

Nor has the electorate forgotten the failure to deliver on the great promises of Brexit, the shock to the UK economy delivered by the 44-day premiership of Liz Truss, and the inability of the government to control the UK’s borders — which was, after all, the chief reason for leaving the EU.

On the day the election was announced, a seven-day average of polls showed Labour had twice as much support as the Conservatives — 45 percent to 23 percent.

Compounding the government’s woes was the rise of Reform UK, the populist right-wing party making gains thanks largely to the failure of Sunak’s pledge to reduce immigration and “stop the boats” carrying illegal migrants across the English Channel.

On 11 percent, Reform had overtaken the Lib Dems, Britain’s traditional third-placed party, and the vast majority of the votes it seemed certain to hoover up would be those of disenchanted Conservative voters.

By the eve of today’s election, a poll of 18 polls carried out in the seven days to July 2 showed Labour’s lead had eased only very slightly, to 40 percent against the Conservatives’ 21 percent, with Reform up to 16 percent.




Labour Party leader Keir Starmer and Britain’s Prime Minister and Conservative Party leader Rishi Sunak attend a live TV debate, hosted by the BBC. (File/AFP)

On Wednesday, a final YouGov poll on the eve of voting predicted that Labour would win 431 seats, while the Conservatives would return to the new parliament on July 9 with only 102 MPs — less than a third of the 365 seats they won in 2019.

If this proves to be the case, Starmer would have a majority of 212, not only bigger than Tony Blair’s in 1997, but also the strongest performance in an election by any party since 1832.

After the polls close tonight at 10pm, there is a very good chance that Sunak may even lose his own seat, the constituency of Richmond and Northallerton, which the Conservatives have held for 114 years.

Either way, the Conservative party will be thrust into further turmoil as the battle begins to select the party’s next leader who, as many commentators are predicting, can look forward to at least a decade in opposition.




Reform UK leader Nigel Farage scratches his head as he delivers a speech during the “Rally for Reform” at the National Exhibition Centre in Birmingham. (File/AFP)

The return of Labour, a completely regenerated party after 14 years in the wilderness, is likely to be good news for Britain’s relationships in the Middle East, as Arab News columnist Muddassar Ahmed predicted this week.

Distracted by one domestic or internal crisis after another, the Conservatives have not only neglected their friends and allies in the region but, in an attempt to stem the loss of its supporters to Reform UK, have also pandered to racial and religious prejudices.

“The horrific scenes unfolding in Gaza, for example, have rocked Muslims worldwide while pitting different faith communities against one another,” Ahmed wrote.




A Palestinian boy who suffers from malnutrition receives care at the Kamal Adwan hospital in Beit Lahia in the northern Gaza Strip on July 2, 2024. (AFP)

“But instead of working to rebuild the relationships between British Muslims, Jews and Christians, the Conservative government has branded efforts to support Palestinians as little more than insurgent ‘hate marches’ — using the horrific conflict to wedge communities that ought to be allied.”

On the other hand, Labour appears determined to reinvigorate the country’s relationship with a region once central to the UK’s interests.

January this year saw the launch of the Labour Middle East Council (LMEC), founded with “the fundamental goal of cultivating understanding and fostering enduring relationships between UK parliamentarians and the Middle East and North Africa.”

Chaired by Sir William Patey, a former head of the Middle East Department at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and an ambassador to Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Sudan, and with an advisory board featuring two other former British ambassadors to the region, the LMEC will be a strong voice whispering in the ear of a Labour government that will be very open to what it has to say.




Britain’s Labour Party leader Keir Starmer speaks on stage at the launch of the party’s manifesto in Manchester, England, Thursday, June 13, 2024. (AP)

Writing in The House magazine, Sir William predicted “a paradigm shift in British foreign policy is imminent.”

He added: “As a nation with deep-rooted historical connections to the Middle East, the UK has a unique role to play in fostering a stable and prosperous region.”

The role of the LMEC would be “to harness these connections for a positive future. We will work collaboratively to address pressing global issues, from climate change to technological advancement, ensuring that our approach is always one of respect, partnership, and shared progress.”

David Lammy, Labour’s shadow foreign secretary, has already made several visits to the region since Oct. 7. In April he expressed “serious concerns about a breach in international humanitarian law” over Israel’s military offensive in Gaza.




Britain’s main opposition Labour Party Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy addresses delegates at the annual Labour Party conference in Liverpool. (File/AFP)

It was, he added, “important to reaffirm that a life lost is a life lost whether that is a Muslim or a Jew.” In May, Lammy called for the UK to pause arms sales to Israel.

In opposition, Labour has hesitated to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, but this has been a product of its own internal and domestic tensions. Starmer has brought the party back on track after years of accusations by UK Jewish activist groups that under his predecessor Jeremy Corbyn it was fundamentally antisemitic.

Whether the charges were true, or whether the party’s staunch support of the Palestinian cause was misrepresented as antisemitism, was a moot point. Starmer knew that, in the run-up to a general election, this was hard-won ground that he could not afford to lose.

Nevertheless, even as he has alienated some Muslim communities in the UK for his failure to call for a ceasefire, he has spoken out repeatedly against the horrors that have unfolded in Gaza.




A protester looks on in Parliament Square, central London, on June 8, 2024 at the end of the “National March for Gaza”. (File/AFP) 

Crucially, he has consistently backed the two-state solution, and the creation of “a viable Palestinian state where the Palestinian people and their children enjoy the freedoms and opportunities that we all take for granted.”

In broader terms, Lammy has also made clear that Labour intends to re-engage with the Middle East through a new policy of what he called “progressive realism.”

Less than a week before Sunak called his surprise general election, Lammy spoke of the need for the UK to mend relations with the Gulf states, which he saw as “hugely important for security in the Middle East” and “important in relation to our economic growth missions.”

Because of missteps by the Conservative government, he added, relations between the UAE and the UK, for example, were at “an all-time low. That is not acceptable and not in the UK’s national interests (and) we will seek to repair that.”

In an article he wrote for Foreign Affairs magazine, Lammy went further.

China, he said, was not the world’s only rising power, and “a broadening group of states — including Brazil, India, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE — have claimed seats at the table. They and others have the power to shape their regional environments, and they ignore the EU, the UK, and the US ever more frequently.”

Lammy expressed regret for “the chaotic Western military interventions during the first decades of this century,” in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, which had proved to be a “recipe for disorder.”

As shadow foreign secretary, he has traveled extensively across the MENA region, to countries including Bahrain, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, the UAE, and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

All, he wrote, “will be vital partners for the UK in this decade, not least as the country seeks to reconstruct Gaza and — as soon as possible — realize a two-state solution.”

For many regional observers, Labour is starting with a clean sheet, but has much to prove.

“It is an acknowledged fact among scholars that foreign policies don’t radically change after elections,” Arshin Adib-Moghaddam, professor in global thought and comparative philosophies at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, told Arab News.

“Therefore, I don’t expect major shifts once Labour forms the government in the UK.

“That said, the composition of the Labour party and its ‘backbench’ politics are likely to shift the language and probably even the code of conduct, in particular with reference to the question of Palestine. For a Labour leader it may be that much more difficult to be agnostic about the horrific human rights situation in Gaza.”




Displaced Palestinians flee after the Israeli army issued a new evacuation order for parts of Khan Yunis and Rafah on July 2, 2024. (AFP)

For political analysts advising international clients, however, the implications of a Labour victory extend beyond the situation in Gaza.

“In an attempt to secure political longevity, the party will renegotiate key policy priorities in the Middle East,” said Kasturi Mishra, a political consultant at Hardcastle, a global advisory firm that has been closely following the foreign policy implications of the UK election for its clients in business and international politics.

“This could include calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, ending arms sales to Israel, reviving trade and diplomacy with the Gulf states and increasing the UK’s defense spending in the region,” Mishra told Arab News.

“This renegotiation is important at a time when the UK finds itself increasingly uncertain of its global position.




Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan meets with Shadow Foreign Secretary of the British Labor Party David Lammy on the sidelines of the Manama Dialogue 2023 held in Bahrain. (SPA)

“The Middle East has significant geopolitical and security implications for the West. Labour policy-makers recognize this and are likely to deepen British engagement with the region to reshape its soft power and influence.”

Mishra highlighted Lammy’s multiple trips to the region as a foretaste of a Labour’s intention to strengthen ties with the Gulf states, “which have been neglected in post-Brexit Britain. 

“Given the influential role of Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar in regional security and the potential to collaborate with them on climate mitigation and other international issues, it is clear that he will seek to forge partnerships.

“His doctrine of progressive realism combines a values-based world order with pragmatism. It is expected that he will favor personalized diplomacy, more akin to that of the UAE, India and France.”

 


American Airlines jet collides with helicopter near Washington’s Reagan Airport

American Airlines jet collides with helicopter near Washington’s Reagan Airport
Updated 10 sec ago
Follow

American Airlines jet collides with helicopter near Washington’s Reagan Airport

American Airlines jet collides with helicopter near Washington’s Reagan Airport
  • A web camera shot from Kennedy Center in Washington showed an explosion mid-air across the Potomac around 2047 ET with an aircraft in flames crashing down rapidly
  • There has not been a fatal US passenger airplane accident since February 2009, but a series of near-miss incidents in recent years have raised serious safety concerns

WASHINGTON: An American Airlines regional passenger jet and a US Army Black Hawk helicopter crashed into the Potomac River after a midair collision near Reagan Washington National Airport on Wednesday night, officials said.
The Washington Post said multiple bodies had been pulled from the water. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas said on social media that “we know there are fatalities,” though he did not say how many.
An American Airlines source told Reuters that 60 passengers, along with two pilots and two crew members were scheduled to be on the flight. Three soldiers were aboard the helicopter, a US official said.
There has not been a fatal US passenger airplane accident since February 2009, but a series of near-miss incidents in recent years have raised serious safety concerns.
NBC reported that four people had been pulled alive from the Potomac River.
A web camera shot from the Kennedy Center in Washington showed an explosion mid-air across the Potomac around 2047 ET with an aircraft in flames crashing down rapidly.
The US Federal Aviation Administration said a PSA Airlines regional jet collided midair with the helicopter while on approach to Reagan.
PSA was operating Flight 5342 for American Airlines, which had departed from Wichita, Kansas, according to the FAA.
Police said multiple agencies were involved in a search and rescue operation in the Potomac River, which borders the airport.
Dozens of police, ambulance and recuse units, some ferrying boats, staged along the river and raced to positions along the tarmac of Reagan airport. Live TV images showed several boats in the water, flashing blue and red lights.
The airport said late on Wednesday that all takeoffs and landings had been halted as emergency personnel responded to an aircraft incident.
The National Transportation Safety Board said it was gathering more information on the incident.
American Airlines said on social media that it was “aware of reports that American Eagle flight 5342, operated by PSA, with service from Wichita, Kansas (ICT) to Washington Reagan National Airport (DCA) has been involved in an incident.”
American Airlines said it would provide more information as it became available to the company.
Over the last two years, a series of near-miss incidents have raised concerns about US aviation safety and the strain on understaffed air-traffic-control operations.
FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker stepped down on Jan. 20 and the Trump administration has not named a replacement — or even disclosed who is running the agency on an interim basis.
The last deadly major crash involving a commercial airliner in the US was in 2009, when 49 people aboard a Colgan Air flight crashed in New York state. One person also died on the ground.


An aircraft is down near Washington’s Reagan Airport, and takeoffs and landings are halted

An aircraft is down near Washington’s Reagan Airport, and takeoffs and landings are halted
Updated 30 January 2025
Follow

An aircraft is down near Washington’s Reagan Airport, and takeoffs and landings are halted

An aircraft is down near Washington’s Reagan Airport, and takeoffs and landings are halted

ARLINGTON, Virginia: An aircraft went down near Ronald Reagan National Airport on Wednesday night, and all takeoffs and landings have been halted, according to the airport and law enforcement.
Multiple helicopters, including those from the US Park Police and the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department and US military, were flying over the scene of the incident in the Potomac River. D.C. Fire and EMS said on X that fireboats were on the scene.
Washington, D.C., police said on the social platform X that multiple agencies are conducting a search and rescue effort in the Potomac River after an aircraft crash.
Video from an observation camera at the nearby Kennedy Center shows two sets of lights consistent with aircraft appearing to join in a fireball.
The airport said emergency personnel were responding to “an aircraft incident on the airfield.”
No other details were immediately available.


Trump issues orders to promote school choice, end “anti-American” teaching

Trump issues orders to promote school choice, end “anti-American” teaching
Updated 30 January 2025
Follow

Trump issues orders to promote school choice, end “anti-American” teaching

Trump issues orders to promote school choice, end “anti-American” teaching
  • Order prioritizes federal funding for school choice programs
  • Second order aims to block federal funding related to “gender ideology or discriminatory equity ideology” in schools

President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed executive orders to promote parental choice in school selection and end federal funding for curricula that he called the “indoctrination” of students in “anti-American” ideologies on race and gender.
The two directives, which come a week after Trump was sworn into his second term of office, are in keeping with his campaign promise to remake the country’s education system in line with a rigorous conservative agenda that Democrats say could undermine public schools.
The first order directs the Department of Education to issue guidance on how states can use federal education funds to support “choice initiatives,” without providing further details.
“It is the policy of my Administration to support parents in choosing and directing the upbringing and education of their children,” the president said in the order. “Too many children do not thrive in their assigned, government-run K-12 school.”
His second directive aims to stop schools from using federal funds for curriculum, teacher certification and other purposes related to “gender ideology or discriminatory equity ideology.”
“In recent years, however, parents have witnessed schools indoctrinate their children in radical, anti-American ideologies while deliberately blocking parental oversight,” it reads.
Trump and his allies throughout the campaign have accused public schools of teaching white children to be ashamed of themselves and their ancestors due to the country’s history of slavery and discrimination against people of color.
The second order, without evidence, claims that teachers have been “demanding acquiescence” to concepts of “white privilege” or “unconscious bias” and thereby promoting racism and undermining national unity.
The executive order will have a “chilling effect” on subjects related to race and ethnicity in schools, said Basil Smikle Jr., a political strategist.
“I would imagine that it would restrict the kind of reading materials that are even available to students outside of the classroom,” he said.
Although that order does not invoke the term “critical race theory” by name, it employs the language often used by CRT opponents to criticize teaching about institutional racism.
A once-obscure academic concept, the theory has become a fixture in the fierce US debate over how to teach children about the country’s history and structural racism. An academic framework most often taught in law schools but not in primary and secondary schools, it rests on the premise that racial bias — intentional or not — is baked into US laws and institutions.
Conservatives have invoked the term to denounce curricula they consider too liberal or excessively focused on America’s history of racial discrimination. Supporters say understanding institutional racism is necessary to address inequality.
Christina Greer, an associate professor of political science at Fordham University, said the order came as no surprise.
“As a candidate, he said there was radical indoctrination of students,” she said. “He’s making sure to frighten students and educators across the country so they can’t teach the real history of the United States.”
It was not clear how the order issued on Wednesday would affect how the history of race relations is taught in American schools. During his inaugural address last week, Trump criticized education that “teaches our children to be ashamed of themselves — in many cases, to hate our country.”

SCHOOL CHOICE

The first order also directs the US Department of Education to prioritize federal funding for school choice programs, a longstanding goal for conservatives who say public schools are failing to meet academic standards while pushing liberal ideas.
Many Democrats and teachers’ unions, on the other hand, say school choice undermines the public system that educates 50 million US children.
Federal test scores released by the National Assessment of Educational Progress on Wednesday underscored the challenge faced by educators in the wake of widespread learning loss during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The scores showed that one-third of eighth graders tested below NAEP’s “basic” reading level, the most in the test’s three-decade history, while some 40 percent of fourth-graders also fell below that basic threshold.
That executive order also directs US states on how they could use block grants to support alternatives to public education, such as private and religious schools.
US education is primarily funded via states and local taxes, with federal sources accounting for about 14 percent of the funding of public K-12 schools, according to Census data.
Trump’s order could affect some $30 billion to $40 billion in federal grants, estimated Frederick Hess, an education expert at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute.
“This stuff is directionally significant,” said Hess, adding that Trump’s directive represented “the most emphatic support for school choice we’ve ever seen at the federal level.”
The first order also calls for allowing military families to use Pentagon funds to send their children to the school of their choosing. It also mandates that Native American families with students in the Bureau of Indian Education be allowed to use federal funds in selecting their schools.
A number of Republican-leaning states have in recent years adopted universal or near-universal school choice policies, paving the way for vouchers or other methods that allocate taxpayer funds for homeschooling or private tuition.
Josh Cowen, a professor of education policy at Michigan State University, said that Trump’s executive order is aimed at sending “an aggressive statement about his position on vouchers” even if his power to reallocate funds is limited.
Cowen said the bigger potential financial impact on education lies with a bill reintroduced in Congress this week that would create a federal school voucher program with an estimated $10 billion in annual tax credits. 


Rohingya refugees stranded on boat off Indonesia

Rohingya refugees stranded on boat off Indonesia
Updated 30 January 2025
Follow

Rohingya refugees stranded on boat off Indonesia

Rohingya refugees stranded on boat off Indonesia
  • Authorities block migrants from disembarking at tourist beach ‘in case they escape’

JAKARTA: At least 75 Rohingya refugees including four children were stranded aboard a migrant boat off the coast of western Indonesia on Wednesday after authorities blocked them from landing at a tourist beach.

Security officers prevented the Rohingya from disembarking at Leuge beach in Aceh province and ordered them to stay aboard the boat. Police were deployed to monitor the beach, while local residents took photos of the boat and provided the refugees with food.
“For now, they are not allowed to disembark, considering today is a public holiday. Many tourist activities are taking place ... there are concerns that they might blend in with the crowd and escape,” local official Rizalihadi said.
“The temporary policy is for them to remain on the boat while waiting for representatives from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Organization for Migration to arrive.”

The Muslim minority Rohingya are persecuted in Myanmar, and thousands risk their lives each year on long and dangerous sea journeys to Malaysia or Indonesia.


Meta agrees to pay $25 million to settle lawsuit from Trump after Jan. 6 suspension

Meta agrees to pay $25 million to settle lawsuit from Trump after Jan. 6 suspension
Updated 30 January 2025
Follow

Meta agrees to pay $25 million to settle lawsuit from Trump after Jan. 6 suspension

Meta agrees to pay $25 million to settle lawsuit from Trump after Jan. 6 suspension

WASHINGTON: Meta has agreed to pay $25 million to settle a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump against the company after it suspended his accounts following the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, according to three people familiar with the matter.
It’s the latest instance of a large corporation settling litigation with the president, who has threatened retribution on his critics and rivals, and comes as Meta and its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, have joined other large technology companies in trying to ingratiate themselves with the new Trump administration.
The people familiar with the matter spoke on the condition of anonymity Wednesday to discuss the agreement. Two people said that terms of the agreement include $22 million going to the nonprofit that will become Trump’s future presidential library and the balance going to legal fees and other litigants.
Zuckerberg visited Trump in November at his private Florida club as part of a series of technology, business and government officials to make a pilgrimage to Palm Beach to try to mend fences with the incoming president. At the dinner, Trump brought up the litigation and suggested they try to resolve it, kickstarting two months of negotiations between the parties, the people said.
Meta also made a $1 million donation to Trump’s inaugural committee and Zuckerberg was among several billionaires granted prime seating during Trump’s swearing-in last week in the Capitol Rotunda, along with Google’s Sundar Pichai, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, who now owns the platform X, formerly known as Twitter.
Ahead of Trump’s inauguration, Meta also announced that it was dropping fact-checking on its platform — a longtime priority of Trump and his allies.
Trump filed the suit months after leaving office, calling the action by the social media companies “illegal, shameful censorship of the American people.”
Twitter, Facebook and Google are all private companies, and users must agree to their terms of service to use their products. Under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, social media platforms are allowed to moderate their services by removing posts that, for instance, are obscene or violate the services’ own standards, so long as they are acting in “good faith.” The law also generally exempts Internet companies from liability for the material that users post.
But Trump and some other politicians have long argued that X, formerly known as Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms, have abused that protection and should lose their immunity — or at least have it curtailed.
The Meta settlement comes after ABC News agreed last month to pay $15 million toward Trump’s presidential library to settle a defamation lawsuit over anchor George Stephanopoulos’ inaccurate on-air assertion that the president-elect had been found civilly liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll.
The network also agreed to pay $1 million in legal fees to the law firm of Trump’s attorney, Alejandro Brito.
The settlement agreement describes ABC’s presidential library payment as a “charitable contribution,” with the money earmarked for a non-profit organization that is being established in connection with the yet-to-be-built library.
The Wall Street Journal was first to report on the settlement.