Frankly Speaking: What a Trump foreign policy might look like

Short Url
Updated 11 November 2024
Follow

Frankly Speaking: What a Trump foreign policy might look like

Frankly Speaking: What a Trump foreign policy might look like
  • Former US ambassador and current senior fellow at the Middle East Institute outlined his expectations for the Middle East and beyond
  • Robert Ford appeared on the “Frankly Speaking” show as Republican President-elect Donald Trump prepared to take the reins of power

DUBAI: Donald Trump’s imminent return to the White House after a resounding victory in the Nov. 5 election is set to reshape America’s foreign policy. Since it comes at a time of unprecedented tension and uncertainty in the Middle East, regional actors are closely watching for signs of how a new Republican administration might wield influence and power.

In a wide-ranging interview, Robert Ford, a veteran American diplomat with extensive Arab region experience, outlined his expectations for the Middle East and beyond, indicating that it is important to set expectations for what can be achieved. 

Middle East conflicts, especially those in Gaza and Lebanon, have dominated the international conversation since a deadly Hamas-led attack on Israel on Oct. 7 last year sparked a devastating Israeli military retaliation. “With respect to President-elect Trump’s promises to end wars, I don’t think he can end a war in a day,” Ford said on “Frankly Speaking,” the weekly Arab News current affairs show.

“I don’t think he can end a war in a week, but he can push for negotiations on the Ukraine war. And with respect to the war in Gaza and the war in Lebanon, he has an ability to influence events. (But) I am not sure he will use that ability.”

Ford noted that there is little support within the Republican Party for a two-state solution to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, making it unlikely that the incoming Trump administration will pressure Israel on this issue. 




Robert Ford, a veteran American diplomat with extensive Middle East experience, outlined to Frankly Speaking host Katie Jensen his expectations for the Middle East and beyond following the election of Donald Trump as US President. (AN Photo)

“The American Republican Party, in particular, has evinced little support for the establishment of a Palestinian state over the past 15 years. There is no (faction) in the Republican Party exerting pressure for that,” he said. 

In fact, he pointed out, “there are many in the Republican Party who back harder line Israeli politicians who reject the establishment of a Palestinian state.” 

In the current political climate, when there is strong Arab-Islamic unity over the Israeli invasion of Gaza and the consequent high civilian death toll, recognition of a Palestinian state has become a matter of priority for regional actors. Saudi Arabia has been leading efforts to boost international cooperation to reach a two-state solution. In September, the Kingdom’s government formed a global alliance to lead efforts aimed at establishing a Palestinian state.

Ford, who is a current senior fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington, believes that any push for progress on this issue will likely come from Gulf leaders. “The only people who will have influence with President Trump personally on this are in fact leaders in the Gulf. And if they make Palestine a priority, perhaps he will reconsider, and I emphasize the word ‘perhaps’,” he said.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is keen on normalizing ties with Saudi Arabia, but the Kingdom has made it very clear that normalization will be off the table unless it sees the recognition of a Palestinian state.

“The first thing is I would imagine that the incoming Trump administration will ask the Saudi government whether or not it is still insistent on a Palestinian state — or at least concrete measures toward a Palestinian state — as part of a package deal involving a US-Saudi defense agreement,” Ford told Katie Jensen, the host of “Frankly Speaking.”

“I think the Trump people would rather not have any kind of Saudi conditionality regarding Palestine as part of that agreement, because, in large part, the Israelis won’t accept it.” 

The US has long been the largest arms supplier to Israel. Last year, after Israel began its assault on Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups, it asked the US for $10 billion in emergency military aid, according to a New York Times report. The Council on Foreign Relations, an independent US-based think tank, estimates that the US has provided at least $12.5 billion in military aid to Israel since last October.

Trump has reportedly told Netanyahu that he wants the war in Gaza, which so far has claimed more than 43,400 Palestinian lives, most of them civilians, to finish by the time he takes office in January. Does that mean a Trump administration will put pressure on the Israeli leader to wrap up the war?




Trump waves as he walks with former first lady Melania Trump at an election night watch party at the Palm Beach Convention Center, Wednesday, Nov. 6. (AP)

Ford ruled out the possibility of a reduction in US supply of weapons to Israel. “It’s extremely unlikely that, especially in 2025, President Trump and his team will impose an arms embargo on Israel,” he said. 

Ford expects Trump’s well-known disdain for foreign aid to affect US assistance for Israel in the long term, but without the use of reductions as a threat. 

“I do think that President Trump does not particularly like foreign aid. He views foreign aid as an expenditure of American money and resources that he would rather keep in the US,” he said. 

“So, over the long term, and I stress the word ‘long term,’ I could imagine that President Trump might look for ways to begin to reduce the annual American assistance to Israel, which is over $4 billion in total. 

“But I don’t think he would do that in a way that is used as a threat against Israel. It’s much more likely it would be part of a Trump measure to reduce foreign aid to a lot of countries, not only Israel.”

The Middle East’s second major conflict, between Israel and Hezbollah, has been raging for 13 months now in Lebanon, taking a toll of 3,000 lives, including combatants, and displacing 1.2 million people from the country’s south. In Israel, 72 people, including 30 soldiers, have been killed by Hezbollah attacks and 60,000 people have been displaced during the same period.

The war shows no signs of ending: Israel says it is carrying out new operations targeting Hezbollah infrastructure across Lebanon and in parts of Syria, while Hezbollah continues to launch dozens of rockets into northern Israel.

Ford sees potential for early US involvement in discussions on Lebanon “fairly early in the administration,” adding that the engagement would begin through a family connection between Trump and Lebanon.

Although he does not think Lebanon is high on the incoming administration’s agenda, he finds “it is interesting that there is a family connection between President-elect Trump and Lebanon.”

“The husband of one of his daughters is connected to Lebanon, and his daughter’s father-in-law,” Ford, said referring to Massad Boulos, a Lebanese-American businessman whose son Michael married Tiffany Trump two years ago and who acted as a Trump emissary to the Arab American community during the election campaign.

“Because Trump operates very much with family, and we saw that in the first administration — first Trump administration — supposedly this Lebanese American gentleman, businessman, may be involved in some discussions.”

Ford also noted that “Israeli success against Hezbollah and against Iran has made the Hezbollah and Iranian side more flexible in their positions,” adding that “it might be easier to reach an agreement on ending the war in Lebanon than, for example, it will be in Gaza.” 

Moving on to Syria, Ford, who served as the US ambassador in Damascus from 2011 to 2014, said while the country “is very low on President Trump’s priority list,” Trump might pull the remaining American troops out.

The US is reported to have a military presence of approximately 900 personnel in eastern Syria and 2,500 in Iraq as part of the international coalition against Daesh. The troops in Syria serve various purposes: helping prevent the resurgence of Daesh, supporting Washington’s Kurdish allies and containing the influence of Iran and Russia — both of which also have a military presence in Syria.

“I think it more likely than not that President Trump will withdraw the remaining American forces in Syria, which numbers somewhere around 1,000,” Ford said, adding that the president-elect might also “withdraw the American forces that are now in Iraq as part of the international coalition against Daesh.” 

He added that Trump “may, perhaps, accept a bilateral relationship, military relationship with Iraq afterward,” but Syria remains “low on his priority list.”

Ford also thinks it is “impossible” for Syrian President Bashar Assad to abandon his alliance with Iran, against which the new Trump administration is expected to reapply “maximum pressure.” 

“The Iranians really saved him (Assad) from the Syrian armed opposition in 2013 and 2014 and 2015,” he said. “There is no alternative for President Assad to a continued close military relationship with Iran.”

He added: “I’m sure President Assad is uncomfortable with some of the things which Iran is doing in Syria and which are triggering substantial Israeli airstrikes. But to abandon Iran? No, that’s difficult for me to imagine.”

He said to expect the Syrian leader to trust Gulf Arab governments more than he would trust the Iranians would be “a big ask.”

When it comes to US policy toward Iran, Ford expects the new Trump administration to return to the “maximum pressure” policy. “For a long time, the Biden administration ignored Iranian sales of petroleum to Chinese companies. ... But the Trump administration is certainly going to take more aggressive action against Chinese companies that import Iranian oil and other countries,” he said.




Demonstration by the families of the hostages taken captive in the Gaza Strip by Hamas militants during the Oct. 7 attacks, calling for action to release the hostages, outside the Israeli Prime Minister's residence in Azza (Gaza) Street in central Jerusalem last month. (AFP)

“It’s highly unlikely that the Trump administration is going to accept that Iraq imports and pays for Iranian energy products, such as electricity and natural gas.”

Ford sees the Trump team as split into two camps: the extreme conservatives, who want regime change in Tehran, and the isolationists, who oppose the US entering a war with Iran.

“There is a camp of extreme conservatives, many of whom actually do favor attempting regime change in Iran. They won’t use the words ‘regime change’ because the words have a bad air, a bad connotation in the US now, but they are, in effect, calling for regime change in Iran,” he said. 

“I should hasten to add that they don’t know what would replace the Islamic Republic in terms of a government.” 

According to Ford, the second camp “is a more, in some ways, isolationist camp. J.D. Vance, the vice president-elect, would be in this camp; so would American media personality Tucker Carlson, who’s a very strong Trump supporter and who has influence with Trump. 

“They do not want to send in the American military into a new war in the Middle East, and they don’t advocate for a war against Iran.”

Ford’s own sense of Trump, from his first administration and from recent statements, is that “he, too, is very cautious about sending the US military to fight Iran.”

Similarly, the Trump team is divided when it comes to the Ukraine war, according to Ford, so it will take some time “for Trump himself to make a definitive policy decision.”

“There are some, such as former Secretary of State Michael Pompeo, who are very firm supporters of the Ukrainian effort against Russia. Others, like Vance, are not.”

The second reality regarding Ukraine, Ford said, is that Trump himself is skeptical about the value of NATO, or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

“I cannot imagine that he will be enthusiastic in any way about Ukraine joining NATO. That will at least address one of Moscow’s big concerns,” he said. “The third point I would make: The Americans may propose ideas. But the American ideas about, for example, an autonomous region in eastern Ukraine or freezing the battle lines.”

He added: “I’m not sure that (Ukrainian President Volodymyr) Zelensky is going to be enthusiastic about accepting them. I’m not sure the Europeans will be enthusiastic about accepting them. And therefore, again, the negotiation process could take a long time.”

On who might advise Trump on Middle East policy after he moves into the White House in January, now that Jared Kushner, the former senior adviser and Trump’s son-in-law, has announced he does not plan to join the administration this time, Ford said Trump places a very high regard on loyalty to him personally.

“People such as Richard Grenell, who was his acting director of national intelligence, and Pompeo pass that kind of loyalty test,” he said. (On Sunday, Trump announced he would not ask Pompeo or former primary opponent Nikki Haley to join his second administration.)

“Trump’s agenda this time is massive change in the Washington federal departments among the employees. And he will trust loyalists … to implement those deep changes — the firing of thousands of employees,” Ford said. “We will see a very different kind of Trump foreign policy establishment by the time we arrive in the year 2026-2027.”

 

 

 


Europe posts record year for clean energy use as Trump pulls US toward fossil fuels

Europe posts record year for clean energy use as Trump pulls US toward fossil fuels
Updated 6 sec ago
Follow

Europe posts record year for clean energy use as Trump pulls US toward fossil fuels

Europe posts record year for clean energy use as Trump pulls US toward fossil fuels
  • With another 24% of electricity in the bloc coming from nuclear power, nearly 3/4 of EU's electricity is considered clean energy
  • In contrast, economic giants China and the US still get nearly 2/3 of their energy from carbon-polluting fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas

A record 47 percent of the European Union’s electricity now comes from solar and other renewables, a report Thursday said, in yet another sign of the growing gap between the bloc’s push for clean energy and the new US administration’s pursuit of more fossil fuels.
Nearly three-quarters of the EU’s electricity doesn’t emit planet-warming gases into the air — with another 24 percent of electricity in the bloc coming from nuclear power, a report released by the climate energy think tank Ember found. This is far higher than in countries like the United States and China, where nearly two-thirds of their energy is still produced from carbon-polluting fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas. Around 21 percent of the US’s electricity comes from renewable sources.
Experts say they’re encouraged by Europe’s fossil fuel reductions, particularly as the US looks set to increase its emissions as its new president pledges cheaper gas prices, has halted leases for wind projects and pledged to revoke Biden-era incentives for electric vehicles.
“Fossil fuels are losing their grip on EU energy,” said Chris Rosslowe, an energy expert at Ember. In 2024, solar power generated 11 percent of EU electricity, overtaking coal which fell below 10 percent for the first time. Clean wind power generated more electricity than gas for the second year in a row.
Green policies and war drive clean energy growth

Illustration courtesy of EMBER

One reason for Europe’s clean power transition moving at pace is the European Green Deal, an ambitious policy passed in 2019 that paved the way for climate laws to be updated. As a result of the deal, the EU made their targets more ambitious, aiming to cut 55 percent of the region’s emissions by the end of the decade. The policy also aims to make Europe climate neutral — reducing the amount of additional emissions in the air to practically zero — by 2050.
Hundreds of regulations and directives in European countries to incentivize investment in clean energy and reduce carbon pollution have been passed or are in the process of being ratified across Europe.
“At the start of the Deal, renewables were a third and fossil fuels accounted for 39 percent of Europe’s electricity,” Rosslowe said. “Now fossils generate only 29 percent and wind and solar have been driving the clean energy transition.” The amount of electricity generated by nuclear energy has remained relatively stable in the bloc.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has also spurred the move to clean energy in Europe. Gas prices skyrocketed — with much of Europe’s gas coming from Russia becoming unviable — forcing countries to look for cheaper, cleaner alternatives. Portugal, Netherlands and Estonia witnessed the highest increase in clean power in the last five years.
Europe cements its place as a clean energy leader
The transition to clean power helped Europe avoid more than $61 billion worth of fossil fuel imports for generating electricity since 2019.
“This is sending a clear message that their energy needs are going to be met through clean power, not gas imports,” said Pieter de Pous, a Brussels-based energy analyst at European think tank E3G. De Pous said the EU’s origins were “as a community of coal and steel because those industries were so important,” but it is now rapidly becoming a “community of solar and wind power, batteries and smart technologies.”
Nuclear growth in the bloc, meanwhile, has slowed. Across the European Union, retirements of nuclear plants have outpaced new construction since around the mid-2000s, according to Global Energy Monitor.
As President Trump has pulled the United States out of the Paris Agreement aimed at curbing warming and is pursuing a “drill, baby, drill” energy policy, Rosslowe said the EU’s leadership in clean power becomes all the more important. “It’s about increasing European energy independence, and it’s about showing this climate leadership,” he said.
On Tuesday, EU chief Ursula von der Leyen said: “Europe will stay the course, and keep working with all nations that want to protect nature and stop global warming.”
 


Pentagon is sending up to 1,500 active duty troops to help secure US-Mexico border

Pentagon is sending up to 1,500 active duty troops to help secure US-Mexico border
Updated 36 min 54 sec ago
Follow

Pentagon is sending up to 1,500 active duty troops to help secure US-Mexico border

Pentagon is sending up to 1,500 active duty troops to help secure US-Mexico border
WASHINGTON: The Pentagon said Wednesday it has begun deploying 1,500 active duty troops to help secure the southern border in the coming days, putting in motion plans President Donald Trump laid out in executive orders shortly after he took office to crack down on immigration.
Acting Defense Secretary Robert Salesses said the Pentagon will provide military aircraft to support Department of Homeland Security deportation flights for more than 5,000 detained migrants and the troops will assist in the construction of barriers.
The number of troops and their mission may soon change, Salesses said in a statement. “This is just the beginning,” he said.
It remains to be seen if they will end up doing law enforcement, which would put American troops in a dramatically different role for the first time in decades.
The active duty forces will join the roughly 2,500 US National Guard and Reserve forces already there. There are currently no active duty troops working along the roughly 2,000-mile border.
Personnel started moving to the border earlier Wednesday, according to a military official briefing reporters on the condition of anonymity to provide additional details on the deployment. The troops will include 500 Marines from Camp Pendleton in California, and the remainder will be Army.
Troops have done similar duties in support of Border Patrol agents in the past, when both Trump and former President Joe Biden sent active duty troops to the border.
Troops are prohibited by law from doing law enforcement duties under the Posse Comitatus Act, but that may change. Trump has directed through executive order that the incoming secretary of defense and incoming homeland security chief report back within 90 days if they think an 1807 law called the Insurrection Act should be invoked. That would allow those troops to be used in civilian law enforcement on US soil.
The last time the act was invoked was in 1992 during rioting in Los Angeles in protest of the acquittal of four police officers charged with beating Rodney King.
The widely expected deployment, coming in Trump’s first week in office, was an early step in his long-touted plan to expand the use of the military along the border. In one of his first orders on Monday, Trump directed the defense secretary to come up with a plan to “seal the borders” and repel “unlawful mass migration.”
“This is something President Trump campaigned on,” said Karoline Leavitt, White House press secretary. “The American people have been waiting for such a time as this — for our Department of Defense to actually implement homeland security seriously. This is a No. 1 priority for the American people.”
On Tuesday, just as Trump fired the Coast Guard commandant, Adm. Linda Fagan, the service announced it was surging more cutter ships, aircraft and personnel to the “Gulf of America” — a nod to the president’s directive to rename the Gulf of Mexico.
Trump said during his inaugural address on Monday that “I will declare a national emergency at our southern border. All illegal entry will immediately be halted, and we will begin the process of returning millions and millions of criminal aliens back to the places in which they came.”
Military personnel have been sent to the border almost continuously since the 1990s to help address migration. drug trafficking and transnational crime.
In executive orders signed Monday, Trump suggested the military would help the Department of Homeland Security with “detention space, transportation (including aircraft), and other logistics services.”
There are about 20,000 Border Patrol agents, and while the southern border is where most are located, they’re also responsible for protecting the northern border with Canada. Usually agents are tasked with looking for drug smugglers or people trying to enter the country undetected.
More recently, however, they have had to deal with migrants actively seeking out Border Patrol in order to get refuge in America — taxing the agency’s staff.
In his first term, Trump ordered active duty troops to the border in response to a caravan of migrants slowly making its way through Mexico toward the United States in 2018. More than 7,000 active duty troops were sent to Texas, Arizona and California, including military police, an assault helicopter battalion, various communications, medical and headquarters units, combat engineers, planners and public affairs units.
At the time, the Pentagon was adamant that active duty troops would not do law enforcement. So they spent much of their time transporting Border Patrol agents to and along the border, helping them erect additional vehicle barriers and fencing along the border, assisting them with communications and providing some security for border agent camps.
The military also provided Border Patrol agents with medical care, pre-packaged meals and temporary housing.
It’s also not yet clear if the Trump administration will order the military to use bases to house detained migrants.
Bases previously have been used for that purpose, and after the 2021 fall of Kabul to the Taliban, they were used to host thousands of Afghan evacuees. The facilities struggled to support the influx.
In 2018, then-Defense Secretary Jim Mattis ordered Goodfellow Air Force Base in San Angelo, Texas, to prepare to house as many as 20,000 unaccompanied migrant children, but the additional space ultimately wasn’t needed and Goodfellow was determined not to have the infrastructure necessary to support the surge.
In March 2021, the Biden administration greenlighted using property at Fort Bliss, Texas, for a detention facility to provide beds for up to 10,000 unaccompanied migrant children as border crossings increased from Mexico.
The facility, operated by DHS, was quickly overrun, with far too few case managers for the thousands of children that arrived, exposure to extreme weather and dust and unsanitary conditions, a 2022 inspector general report found.

South Sudan orders temporary ban on social media over violence in neighboring Sudan

South Sudan orders temporary ban on social media over violence in neighboring Sudan
Updated 23 January 2025
Follow

South Sudan orders temporary ban on social media over violence in neighboring Sudan

South Sudan orders temporary ban on social media over violence in neighboring Sudan
  • Many South Sudanese have been angered by footage from Sudan that purports to show killings by militia groups of South Sudanese in Gezira state

JUBA, South Sudan: South Sudanese authorities on Wednesday ordered telecoms to block access to social media for at least 30 days, citing concerns over the dissemination of graphic content relating to the ongoing violence against South Sudanese in neighboring Sudan.
The temporary ban, which could be extended to up to 90 days, will come into force at midnight Thursday, according to a directive from the National Communication Authority, NCA, to telecom companies stressing that the measure was necessary to protect the public.
“This directive may be lifted as soon as the situation is contained,” the NCA said. “The contents depicted violate our local laws and pose a significant threat to public safety and mental health.”
Many South Sudanese have been angered by footage from Sudan that purports to show killings by militia groups of South Sudanese in Gezira state. South Sudanese authorities imposed a dusk-to-dawn curfew on Jan. 17 after a night of retaliatory violence during which shops owned by Sudanese traders were looted.
Moussa Faki Mahamat, chairperson of the African Union Commission, condemned “the brutal killings of South Sudanese nationals” in Sudan and urged restraint.
Civil war in Sudan has created a widening famine and the world’s largest displacement crisis. Fighting between forces loyal to rival military leaders exploded in the capital, Khartoum, in April 2023 and has since spread to other areas.
The conflict has been marked by atrocities, including ethnically motivated killing and rape, according to the UN and rights groups.
 


Trump administration freezes many health agency reports and online posts

Trump administration freezes many health agency reports and online posts
Updated 23 January 2025
Follow

Trump administration freezes many health agency reports and online posts

Trump administration freezes many health agency reports and online posts
  • Shutting down public health communication stops a basic function of public health

The Trump administration has put a freeze on many federal health agency communications with the public through at least the end of the month.
In a memo obtained by The Associated Press, acting Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services Dorothy Fink told agency staff leaders Tuesday that an “immediate pause” had been ordered on — among other things — regulations, guidance, announcements, press releases, social media posts and website posts until such communications had been approved by a political appointee.
The pause also applies to anything intended to be published in the Federal Register, where the executive branch communicates rules and regulations, and the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention scientific publication.
The pause is in effect through Feb. 1, the memo said. Agencies subject to the HHS directive include the CDC, the National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug Administration — entities that fight epidemics, protect the nation’s food supply and search for cures to diseases.
HHS officials did not respond to requests for comment on the pause, which was first reported by The Washington Post. Four federal health officials speaking on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the issue confirmed the communication pause to the AP.
A former HHS official said Wednesday that it’s not unusual for incoming administrations to pause agency communications for review. But typically, officials working on the president’s transition team have the process for issuing documents running smoothly by inauguration day.
“The executive branch is a hierarchy,” said Steven Grossman, who now consults for food and drug companies, in an email. “Whether stated publicly or not, every new administration wants important commitments and positions to wait until new teams are in place and some semblance of hierarchy restored.”
A pause is reasonable as a changing executive branch takes steps to become coordinated, said Dr. Ali Khan, a former CDC outbreak investigator who is now dean of the University of Nebraska’s public health college.
“The only concern would be is if this is a prelude to going back to a prior approach of silencing the agencies around a political narrative,” he added.
During his first term, President Donald Trump’s political appointees tried to gain control over the CDC’s MMWR journal, which had published information about the COVID-19 pandemic that conflicted with messaging from the White House.
Fink wrote in her memo that some exceptions would be made for communications affecting “critical health, safety, environmental, financial or nation security functions,” but that those would be subject to review. The FDA on Tuesday and Wednesday posted notices about warning letters sent to companies and a drug safety notice.
A consumer advocacy group said the communications pause could still threaten public safety.
Americans depend on timely information from the CDC, the FDA and other agencies to avoid foodborne illnesses and stay aware of other health issues, said Dr. Peter Lurie, president of the Center for Science in the Public Interest.
“When it comes to stopping outbreaks, every second counts,” Lurie said in a statement. “Confusion around the vaguely worded gag order is likely to lead to unnecessary delay in publishing urgent public alerts during active outbreaks.”
He was echoed by Dr. Jeffrey Klausner, a University of Southern California public health expert.
“Local health officials and doctors depend on the CDC to get disease updates, timely prevention, testing and treatment guidelines and information about outbreaks,” Klausner wrote in an email. “Shutting down public health communication stops a basic function of public health. Imagine if the government turned off fire sirens or other warning systems.”


Swiss prosecutors examine complaints against Israel president

Swiss prosecutors examine complaints against Israel president
Updated 23 January 2025
Follow

Swiss prosecutors examine complaints against Israel president

Swiss prosecutors examine complaints against Israel president
  • The Swiss Keystone-ATS news agency reported that one of the complaints came from an NGO called Legal Action Against Genocide

GENEVA: Swiss prosecutors said Wednesday they were examining several complaints against visiting Israeli President Isaac Herzog, as reports suggested NGOs were accusing him of “incitement to genocide” in Gaza.
The Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland (OAG) confirmed it had received “several criminal complaints” against Herzog, who was at the World Economic Forum in the Swiss resort of Davos this week.
“The criminal complaints are now being examined in accordance with the usual procedure,” the OAG said in an email sent to AFP, adding that the office was in contact with Switzerland’s foreign ministry “to examine the question of the immunity of the person concerned.”
It provided no details on the specific complaints filed.
The Swiss Keystone-ATS news agency reported that one of the complaints came from an NGO called Legal Action Against Genocide.
The NGO was calling for Herzog to be prosecuted “for incitement to genocide and crimes against humanity,” the news agency said.
The complaint, it said, deemed he had played “an active role in the ideological justification of genocide and war crimes in Gaza, by erasing all distinction between the civilian population and combatants.”
Israeli officials have repeatedly denied allegations of war crimes and genocide, accusing Hamas of using civilians as human shields.
Herzog spoke at Davos on Tuesday and held meetings on Wednesday morning but it was unclear if he was still in Switzerland.
Complaints were also filed against him when he attended the Davos meeting a year ago but the OAG refrained from opening an investigation that time, Keystone-ATS reported.
The war in Gaza was sparked by Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack, the deadliest in Israeli history, resulted in the deaths of 1,210 people, mostly civilians, according to an AFP tally of official Israeli figures.
It sparked a war that has levelled much of Gaza and, according to the health ministry in the Hamas-run territory, killed more than 47,100, a majority of them civilians, figures the United Nations has said are reliable.