India and leadership of global democracy

When compared to both its neighbours to the East and West, India has remained democratic for seven decades 

 Tuesday, 15 January 2019

After shouldering the leadership of global democracy for over seven decades, the United States is seen withdrawing from the rest of the world. The European Union is not as united as it once was with Brexit and far right movements getting more likely to take over some of its member states. Britain and France do not have the clout to assert themselves on the world stage without American backing.

The world is witnessing the end of Western leadership of democracy. This leaves a leadership vacuum. As the largest democracy in the world, leadership should naturally and rightfully go to India next.
From the West to the East

The United States has been the leader of the Free World for over seven decades but the election of Donald Trump has seen an America which has put America First over allies and its principles in many cases. America has been a hope for human rights activists and democracy advocates around the world. Today, we see an America withdrawing from its leadership role over the world.

Other Western countries like Britain and France are too weak to take on the mantle of global leadership without the backing of the United States. The European Union would have been an alternative but it does not have a centralised enough leadership to pursue a foreign policy. With Brexit, it is showing signs of division within and if other countries follow Britain’s path, we could see a breakup of the EU. Also, with far right movements getting stronger in Europe, the EU is getting weakened from within.

This leaves a leadership vacuum to lead global democracy. As the largest democracy in the world and an economy set to become the largest in the long term, India is positioned as the rightful candidate to replace Western leadership.
Democracy in India

India puts a lot of effort on its elections. The last general elections in 2014 were held in over 900,000 polling stations with over a million Government servants and over five million civilian employees working for over a week to conduct the largest elections in the world. In 2019, nearly 900 million people are eligible to vote. This is nearly four times the number of voters in the United States. The sheer scale of elections in India is huge.


When compared to both its neighbours to the East and West, India has remained democratic for seven decades. The Indian Army has remained neutral and stayed out of politics.

India has had a fair and independent elections process, an independent judiciary, a largely free media and a vibrant parliament where opposition parties are able to question the Government. The independent think tank, Freedom House continues to rank India as one of Asia’s freer nations. Though, India’s democracy has its flaws like other democracies have around the world, India’s constitution can be a model for many countries around the world.
Why should India take over?

As the largest democracy in the world, India has a moral responsibility to take over and be a global guardian of democracy. With the withdrawal of American leadership, India has an even greater responsibility. Being a leader in advocating democracy can help India gain influence around the world. This can also help India win over many allies around the world.

China has already claimed the leadership title of globalisation after America’s trade wars. India can position and brand itself as the leader of democracy. India’s membership of Quad shows India’s natural allies are other democracies. Being an advocate for democracy makes a country popular. A Pew Global Research study took a median from 25 countries surveyed and it shows 63% prefer a world led by the United States of America and only 19% prefer a world led by China. Only Russia, Tunisia and Argentina had less than one third preferring American leadership. America wins hands down in a competition with China over world leadership when asked by the rest of the world and it is linked to America’s ideology and principles.

India taking leadership in democracy can not only make India more popular than its rivals globally but also attract global investors. The World Economic Forum’s survey taken from its business elite shows that global investors are concerned about the rise of autocracy around the world. India speaking up for democracy can easily win over investors towards India as global investors prefer democracy in the countries they invest in.

Some Indians argue that India has had a policy of nonalignment, was a former colony of Britain and its economy is not big enough. Well, America too used to have a policy of isolation. America also used to be a colony of Britain and the American economy too was small when the Europeans were ruling the world before the dawn of the 20th century.
India: The next leader of global democracy

India is projected to become a massive consumer market for many countries around the world. With a population of over 1.3 billion people, trading with India can be irresistible to other nations. This can allow India to use this as soft power to promote democracy by allowing access to its consumer base with conditions. The EU uses schemes such as GSP+, where countries meeting EU requirements are given concessions and access to the lucrative EU consumer market.

Leadership of the free world does not come without a price. The United States, as leader of the free world has had to cut off ties, sanction and even go to war with countries to uphold principles.

As the Pew Global Research study shows America is still the most popular country in the world, even in countries where America is considered an enemy by the governments of those countries. Assuming leadership of democracy will make India unpopular among dictators around the world but will win India the hearts of people around the world.

India's plunging inflation rate opens door to monetary easing

Customers shop inside a Best Price Modern Wholesale store, a joint venture of Wal-Mart Stores Inc and Bharti Enterprises, at Zirakpur in Punjab November 24, 2012. REUTERS/Ajay Verma/File Photo

Manoj Kumar-JANUARY 14, 2019

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India’s annual retail inflation rate dropped to an 18-month low of 2.19 percent in December, strengthening views of some economists that the central bank could ease monetary policy next month as prices for many food items fell and the nation faces a manufacturing slowdown.

Annual retail price inflation last month declined to its lowest level since June 2017, as food prices fell for third straight month, government data showed on Monday.

The outcome was lower than the 2.33 percent recorded in November and broadly in line with a 2.20 percent increase forecast by economists in a Reuters poll. The rate has now plummeted from 5.07 percent in January 2018.

The CPI figures followed release of data earlier in the day showing the annual wholesale inflation rate eased to an eight month low of 3.80 percent in December. Figures released on Friday showed that industrial output growth declined to 0.5 percent in November.

India’s economy is slowing, dragged down by reduced growth in consumer spending and weak growth in the farm sector.

The economic weakness is a problem for Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has already been struggling to meet ambitious job creation targets ahead of national elections to be held by May.

The Reserve Bank of India’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC), which mainly monitors retail inflation data and kept interest rates unchanged last month, will have leeway to soften its monetary stance at its Feb. 7 meeting, economists said.

Arun Thukral, CEO of Axis Securities, said given that inflation had trended down for the past six months, the central bank had room to ease its monetary stance to neutral initially, and then cut its benchmark repo rate by 25 basis points.

“Probably, at its February 2019 meet, RBI would mellow its stance to neutral and wait for April 2019 meet for reducing the rates,” he said.

LESS HAWKISH TONE

With inflation easing to near 2 percent, the lower end of RBI’s 2-6 percent target, there is room for the central bank to change its currently hawkish tone.

However, economists said the RBI could wait for the signal on federal spending in the annual budget to be presented on Feb. 1, as a substantial hike in spending ahead of the election could push up prices.

“Any fiscal slippage at the central or state level will have a bearing on the inflation outlook,” said Thukral, adding that the government could announce some populist measures, such as a basic income system for those in rural areas or an input support scheme for farmers and landless labourers in the budget.

Retail food prices in December were down 2.51 percent from a year earlier, compared with a 2.61 percent fall a month earlier. The figures indicate that rural incomes remain under pressure while consumers benefit from easing inflation.

Anger among farmers contributed to the defeat of Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party in three key state elections late last year.

One example of spending weakness is cars. In December, passenger vehicle sales fell 0.43 percent to 238,692 units from a year earlier, data from the Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (SIAM) showed.

Slideshow (2 Images)

Still, big moves in fuel and food costs in recent months may be masking what is happening to prices in the wider economy. Three economists spoken to by Reuters after the CPI figures were released said they on average estimated India’s core inflation rate, excluding food and fuel costs, was 5.7 percent in December, unchanged from the previous month.

Recently, cooling inflation expectations have also been driven by lower oil prices and a rupee currency that has managed to stabilise after a steep sell-off.

Crude oil prices are down more than 30 percent since Oct. 3, when they hit the highest in almost four years, and the rupee bounced nearly 6 percent after touching an all-time low of 74.48 on Oct. 11.

Additional reporting by Suvashree Dey Choudhury in MUMBAI; Editing by Martin Howell, Richard Borsuk and Peter Graff

May faces crushing Brexit defeat despite last-minute plea to MPs

Prime minister urges MPs to give her plan a second look on eve of crunch vote on withdrawal agreement
May asks parliament to ‘give this deal a second look’ – video

Heather Stewart, Jessica Elgot and Dan Sabbagh-Mon 14 Jan 2019 20.53 GMT

Theresa May appears to be on course for a crushing defeat in the House of Commons as Britain’s bitterly divided MPs prepare to give their verdict on her Brexit deal in the “meaningful vote” on Tuesday.

With Downing Street all but resigned to losing by a significant margin, Guardian analysis pointed to a majority of more than 200 MPs against the prime minister.

Labour sources said that unless May made major unexpected concessions, any substantial margin against her would lead Jeremy Corbyn to call for a vote of no confidence in the government – perhaps as soon as Tuesday night. But since Conservative MPs are unlikely to offer Corbyn the backing he would need to win a no-confidence vote, he would then come under intense pressure to swing Labour’s weight behind a second referendum.

Cabinet ministers have not yet been told how May plans to keep the Brexitprocess on track if her deal is defeated – and they remain split on how she should proceed. Leavers are convinced that the prime minister should return to Brussels and press for fresh concessions, while remainers hope she will seek a compromise with Labour.

On Monday, May issued one final call to parliament to back her, urging MPs to “take a second look” at her deal and stressing that it was the only option on the table that could deliver an “orderly” exit from the EU.

But there was little evidence of movement after her speech. Few MPs were convinced by clarifications of the withdrawal agreement included in an exchange of lettersbetween the prime minister and the EU council president, Jean-Claude Juncker, published on Monday, which May conceded did not go as far as some MPs had hoped.

With defeat for May all but inevitable, backbenchers led by the former Tory minister Nick Boles were hoping to seize the agenda in parliament and force the government to seek a softer, Norway-style Brexit deal.

And on Monday the Commons Speaker, John Bercow, was forced to bat away questions from loyal Tory MPs suggesting he was willing to facilitate a backbench takeover. “I have no intention of taking lectures in doing right by parliament from people who have been conspicuous in denial of and, sometimes, contempt for it,” he said. “I will stand up for the rights of the Commons and I won’t be pushed around by agents of the executive.”

There is growing speculation at Westminster that whichever course May pursues, she will be forced to announce that she will ask the EU27 to extend article 50. The prime minister refused to rule out doing so categorically on Monday, saying only that she didn’t believe it should be necessary.

“We’re leaving on 29 March. I’ve been clear I don’t believe we should be extending article 50 and I don’t believe we should be having a second referendum,” May said. “We have an instruction from the British people to leave and it’s our duty to deliver on that, but I want to do it in a way that is smooth and orderly and protects jobs and security.”

There are increasing fears in Whitehall that time is running out to put in place all the complex legislation necessary either to implement the withdrawal agreement – or, conversely, to prepare for no deal.

May addressed MPs of her own party on Monday night at the backbench 1922 Committee. The prime minister gave no indication of any plan B in what was described as a low-key, reflective meeting, but urged her party to support her deal to ensure that Brexit goes ahead and to keep Corbyn out of No 10.
Nadhim Zahawi, a junior minister, said that Alistair Burt, a Foreign Office minister and remainer, had told MPs that he now accepted the result of the referendum and urged Brexiters in his party, who were on the winning side, to do the same.

Brexiters leaving the meeting said their minds had not been changed. Steve Baker said: “She skilfully engineered her speech to ensure there were laughs in all the right places by not mentioning the deal.”
Just four Labour MPs have declared publicly that they could vote for May’s Brexit deal: Ian Austin, John Mann, Jim Fitzpatrick and Kevin Barron.

Corbyn urged his MPs to hold their nerve, addressing a packed meeting of the parliamentary Labour party on the eve of the vote. The Labour leader said the prime minister had comprehensively failed to scare his MPs into voting for her deal. “Theresa May has attempted to blackmail Labour MPs to vote for her botched deal by threatening the country with the chaos of no deal,” he said. “I know from conversations with colleagues that this has failed. The Labour party will not be held to ransom.”

Corbyn said May would “only have herself to blame” for two years of negotiating with her divided cabinet and backbenchers, rather than opening dialogue with Brussels, trade unions, businesses and parliament. “The Tory party’s botched deal will be rejected by Parliament. We will then need an election to have the chance to vote for a government that can bring our people together and address the deep-seated issues facing our country,” he said.

A Labour source said MPs “won’t have to wait very long” for a confidence vote to be called but that would be the sole decision of Corbyn rather than the shadow cabinet. “Jeremy will choose the moment,” the source said. However, the source said that should the vote be lost, it would not mean an immediate endorsement to campaign for a second referendum.

“The composite identifies a public vote as one of the options; it doesn’t say it’s the preferred option or the default option. Obviously we will judge how to deal with the options and get the best result for the country on the basis of what happens in parliament,” the source said.

The Brexit select committee chair, Hilary Benn, was under pressure on Monday night to withdraw a no-deal amendment, tabled before Christmas, that some MPs feared could limit the scale of the government’s defeat.

Downing Street declined to say whether it could support an amendment tabled by the backbencher Andrew Murrison, chairman of the Northern Ireland select committee, aimed at putting a formal end date on the Irish backstop. Such a sunset clause would be likely to run into trouble in Brussels, with the EU27 adamant that the backstop must apply “unless and until” an alternative arrangement is in place that avoids the need for a hard border.

But the amendment’s supporters believe it will strengthen the PM’s hand if she returns to Brussels in search of fresh concessions after Tuesday. They also hope that if it passes, it could help limit the scale of the government defeat.

Governments have been defeated by a margin of more than 100 votes only three times in the last century, according to professor Philip Cowley, of Queen Mary University of London – all of those during the minority Labour administration of 1924.

The House of Lords had its own vote on the government’s Brexit deal on Monday evening, rejecting it by a thumping 321 votes to 152 – a majority of 169. Labour’s leader in the Lords, Baroness Angela Smith, called it “a vote for common sense”.

UK finance chief warns of no-deal Brexit ‘catastrophe’ for banking indusry

Helia Ebrahimi-14 Jan 2019Economics Correspondent

A no-deal Brexit would create a “1930s-style contraction” according to the head of UK Finance, which represents banks and financial services.

A no-deal Brexit would create a “1930s-style contraction” according to the head of UK Finance, which represents banks and financial services.

In an exclusive interview, Stephen Jones told Channel 4 News that:

• Crashing out of the EU would be a “catastrophe” for the banking industry
• There would be huge problems for small businesses getting loans
• Mortgage and car finance markets would likely seize up
• There is a real risk of no-deal happening by accident

Asked what he was most worried about, Mr Jones said: “A no-deal Brexit on 29 March, where we crash out of European Union, is a catastrophe. It’s a social catastrophe, it’s an economic catastrophe. And by implication it is a catastrophe for the industry I represent, the banking industry.

“This is about jobs, this is about people not being able to pay their mortgages, not being able to pay back their loans, and that’s really bad news and it’s an outcome we can avoid.”

“It is a credit crunch of types,” he added.

“I don’t wish to be labelled a doom-monger – and our industry’s job is to cope with whatever circumstances are thrown at us, as best we can – but If our economy contracts by ten per cent, that’s 1930s style contraction. That is a massive increase in credit card losses, mortgage losses, vehicle loan losses.”

“I am worried about this happening if we crash out without a deal,” he said. “I think there is a real risk of no-deal happening by accident … if the prime minister’s deal is voted down, we are in totally uncharted territory.”

The UK Finance boss said he backs “a solution that avoids a No Deal Brexit,” but he admitted Theresa May’s deal is “not a great deal”.

“There’s an awful lot of money being paid for a political declaration, which quite frankly is not worth the paper it is written on,” he said.

Asked if Brexit has diminished London’s position in the world, Mr Jones said: “Yes, it will be diminished in my view.”

“I think regrettably it has, particularly in a European context. London as the European financial centre appears to most us to be – frankly – quietly – over. We’ll do our best to retain what we can, within the context of what’s negotiated, no-deal or a deal. But Frankfurt and Paris will become much more important financial centres in a European context.”

He also said the banking industry could do more to bridge social divides, saying: “There’s no question that the social costs of austerity and frankly the lack of benefit for the so-called boom times leading up to the credit crisis accruing to London and the South East are a real factor that has driven Brexit and something that we as a country and perhaps we as industry need to try and help heal.

“There’s no question in my mind that the psyche of we’re not being listened to by those Londoners and that the benefit of the boom economy in London hasn’t accrued to the rest of the country is something that has fed through to the Brexit vote.”

Shutdown

President Maithripala Sirisena had already demonstrated an amazing proclivity and tons of enthusiasm to be an avid fan and disciple of US President Donald J. Trump

Tuesday, 15 January 2019

A phrase that does not have much meaning with the rest of the world yet an integral part of the American political way of life. A distinct dysfunction of a working democracy in that. A default mechanism that works wholly and totally against the people. If you are a federal worker you’ll find yourself working without being paid.

How can this term be associated with a working democracy? Uncle Sam supposedly the champion for people’s rights depriving lawful wages for his people, how ironic? A true democracy labours assiduously to fulfil the needs and wants of the people yet we hear of these inbuilt closures and cessations that essentially impede true action orientation towards the people.

Ivan Simmons, an Illinois resident and working for the Federal Government, has not been paid for almost three weeks now. He works for the National Museum as a “Closing” clerk.

We are being told that a government shutdown in the United States of America occurs when Congress fails to pass sufficient appropriation bills or  resolutions to fund federal government operations and agencies, or when the President refuses to sign into law such bills or resolutions. Wow? A president refuses to sign? Essential employees are still required to work without pay until the government reopens. Most governments of the world including Sri Lanka consider themselves democratic, at least in name. As per its much taunted and lauded academic definition one would assume such governments postulate a sincere predilection towards the wellbeing of the people, right? Wrong?

In a democracy, people are sovereign at least academically that’s how it’s defined and taught. Supposedly the highest form of political authority. Power we are told flows from the people to the leaders of government, who hold power only temporarily, let me repeat only temporarily.

The above represents an ideal. The greatest irony of all is that most democracies of the world especially those in the third world are in eternal shutdown and its people have no clue. There is an ever deepening and widening chasm between the people and their elected representatives. The reality of democracy in these countries is deceptive if not demoralising.  Every executive minute unutilised, improperly utilised or under-utilised vis-à-vis fulfilling the needs of the people is a definite shutdown plain and simple.


Sri Lanka emerges as the classical example. A doctor works hard for his patients, a lawyer works hard for his client. These are defining professional attributes. A politician is elected out of the many who show up for a much nobler purpose. And when he/ she squanders, dissipates and prostitutes an entire system, making it profusely questionable and placing it to great disrepute this tantamounts to a blockade, drag and impedance which constitutes an unofficial shutdown.

Short-​termism has become embedded in the political and business culture of modern democracies. By design all politicians have relatively short political horizons and this is worse in Sri Lanka; they find their official and expected duties  interrupted by precious time abuse and misuse by way of  conspiracy, connivance, counterplotting, contending, combative sports and of course the never ending elections. As a consequence there is hardly any substance emerging from deliberations, signs of a perpetuating shutdown.

Politicians naturally drawn to focus their efforts on seducing their electorates with short-​term sweeteners and nocuous doosras keep the mob busy with inebriating laced intoxicants, they’ll continue to chant “jayaweeva” till the cows come home.

A political impasse was triggered on 26 October and a possible culmination of the shutdown was witnessed. What ensued was unprecedented. President Maithripala Sirisena said he would not reinstate Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister even if he was able to prove his majority in Parliament. “I will not appoint Ranil Wickremesinghe as prime minister in my lifetime. Even if they have a majority, I have told them not to propose him as I won’t appoint him as prime minister.”

It’s remarkably astounding that a man who couldn’t have gone much further than a senior cabinet minister was enthroned in the highest seat of the land with the help of the UNP, unceremoniously pulls out the rapier from the holster and pursues to chop the head of the very man who was instrumental in putting him there. Let me remind that gratitude is an embedded and enshrined trait of a practicing Buddhist.

In the last decade the Sri Lankan political arena had burgeoned to a mega titillating soap opera. Instead of serving the people corrupt politicians had formed a tight knit cabal and carved this de facto shutdown. Their modus operandi quite clear. They want to save themselves from possible incarceration hence subverting the process as much as possible both within and without the parliament and by extending credence to none-issues, non-existent phantoms they think they’ll survive. They possibly will.

Democracy – letting people choose leaders who govern them as the best way, the only legitimate way, to ensure the well-being of a country is no longer a source of inspiration for millions around the world. Intriguing line from John Adams, America’s second president still continue to reverberate and intrigue people. “Remember, democracy never lasts long,” Adams wrote. “There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”

President Donald J. Trump has already put the noose around his neck and it’s only time before someone kicks the stool. President Maithripala Sirisena had already demonstrated an amazing proclivity and tons of enthusiasm to be an avid fan and disciple of Donald J. Trump.

Trump denies working for Russia, calls past FBI leaders ‘known scoundrels’

Two days after avoiding directly answering whether he had ever worked for Russia, President Trump on Jan. 14 told reporters he never had. (The Washington Post)

By John Wagner and Karoun Demirjian-January 14 at 1:58 PM

President Trump on Monday flatly denied that he worked for Russia, and he called FBI officials who launched a counterintelligence investigation to determine whether he did “known scoundrels” and “dirty cops.”

Trump’s comments to reporters as he left the White House came in response to reports that an FBI investigation that was opened after Trump fired then-Director James B. Comey in May 2017 included a component to determine whether the president was seeking to help Russia.

“I never worked for Russia,” Trump said as he prepared to leave for an event in New Orleans, adding: “Not only did I never work for Russia, I think it’s a disgrace that you even asked that question because it’s a whole big fat hoax. It’s just a hoax.”

[FBI’s investigation of Trump included a counterintelligence inquiry]

During a television appearance Saturday night, after the counterintelligence component of the Trump investigation was first reported by the New York Times, Trump called a question whether he had ever worked for Russia “insulting” but did not directly answer it.

On Monday, he did not equivocate and also attacked Comey and others in the FBI responsible for the investigation of possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential campaign.

President Trump talks to reporters as he walks to Marine One to depart the White House in November. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

That investigation is being conducted by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, who was appointed after Trump fired Comey.

“He was a bad cop and he was a dirty cop,” Trump said of Comey.

The president also attacked former acting FBI director Andrew McCabe as “a proven liar and was fired from the FBI.” McCabe made the decision to open the counterintelligence component of the investigation of Trump.

Trump also pointed to “bias” shown by former FBI agent Peter Strzok and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, two employees who were having an affair and exchanged derogatory texts about Trump.

Speaking more broadly of FBI leadership at the time, Trump said “the people doing that investigation were people that have been caught that are known scoundrels. They’re ... I guess you could say they’re dirty cops.”

Dodging a question on U.S. intelligence on Jan. 14, President Trump slammed “dirty cops” who he claimed started the election meddling probe. (The Washington Post)

Trump and Comey have sparred repeatedly, particularly since the release of a book last year by Comey that describes Trump’s presidency as a “forest fire” and portrays the president as an ego-driven congenital liar.

McCabe was fired last year, and a grand jury is weighing possible charges against him for allegedly misleading investigators in a leak probe.

Trump also sought Monday to play down a Washington Post report over the weekend that he had gone to extraordinary lengths to conceal details of his conversations with Russian President Vladi­mir Putin. Those included at least one occasion, in 2017 in Hamburg, when Trump took possession of the notes of his own interpreter and instructed the linguist not to discuss what had happened with other administration officials.

Asked if he would be willing to share the interpreter’s notes, Trump did not directly answer, instead saying “it was actually a very successful meeting” in which he and Putin discussed “many subjects.”

“I have those meetings one-on-one with all leaders including the president of China, including prime minister of Japan,” Trump said. “We have those meetings all the time. No big deal.”

Democrats led by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) began huddling Monday about how to determine what took place with the interpreter’s notes and whether to compel her testimony.

Engel’s staff is also working with Democratic leaders on the House Intelligence Committee, where chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) attempted last year to subpoena the testimony, before Democrats were in the majority.

“The Republicans on our committee voted us down,” Schiff said via Twitter Sunday, of his attempt to subpoena the interpreter. “Will they join us now? Shouldn’t we find out whether our president is really putting ‘America first’?”

A spokesman for Schiff declined to comment further. A spokesman for Engel said that he sees a subpoena as a tool of last resort – not just for the interpreter’s testimony, but for everything regarding investigations and oversight of the executive branch.

It is not clear what the timeline will be for the panels to make a decision, or whether Engel’s panel will ultimately be the one to compel the interpreter’s notes or testimony regarding what happened to them.

Devlin Barrett contributed to this report.

Israeli opposition leader made secret visit to UAE

Avi Gabbay. (Laliv G / Wikimedia Commons) 

Tamara Nassar Power Suits 10 January 2019

Leader of the Israeli Labor Party Avi Gabbay secretly visited the United Arab Emirates in December and met with senior government officials, Israel’s Channel 10 reported.

The visit last month comes among a series of recent steps by Arab regimes to embrace Israel.

Gabbay arrived in the UAE capital Abu Dhabi on 2 December on a commercial flight from Amman, accompanied by Portuguese-Israeli journalist Henrique Cymerman.

Cymerman was reportedly involved in the talks, which focused on Trump’s so-called peace plan and Iran.

While Gabbay is nominally the leader of the opposition to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s hard-right government, he shares many of its stridently anti-Arab views and supports Israeli colonization of the occupied West Bank.

Israel and the UAE have no formal diplomatic ties, but their covert collaboration dates back to the 1990s.

More recently, their alliance has been moving from the shadows into the open.

Gabbay met with Arab leaders

The visit was reportedly arranged by a Moroccan citizen with ties to UAE officials, who secured formal invitations for Gabbay and Cymerman to visit the country.

Gabbay returned to Israel on 4 December and met with Mossad director Yossi Cohen to brief him on what was discussed.

The Mossad is Israel’s notorious spying and assassination agency.

“The same Moroccan mediator has organized several meetings between Gabbay and senior figures in the Arab world,” Israel’s Channel 10 stated.

The channel added that Gabbay met with King Abdullah of Jordan and Palestinian political analyst Hussein Agha, who managed a channel of secret talks between Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas and Netanyahu between 2012 and 2014.

Will Netanyahu go to Riyadh?

Saudi Arabia has been paving the way for normalization between Arab states and Israel, with a mutual enmity towards Iran at the core of this warming relationship.

The Saudi-Israeli embrace has become even tighter in recent months, as Israel has lent its political and diplomatic muscle to shore up international support for Mohammad bin Salman, the Saudi crown prince and de facto ruler directly implicated in the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi.

“Don’t be surprised if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu soon visits Saudi Arabia to meet with Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman,” a Wall Street Journal article stated this week, floating a clear trial balloon.

In October, Netanyahu visited Oman and met its ruler Sultan Qaboos, a step that the Gulf state would not likely have taken without Saudi blessing.

Kuwait’s hesitance

Meanwhile, Kuwaiti journalist Fajer Alsaeed called for full Arab normalization with Israel on her Twitter account.

فجر السعيد 

✔@AlsaeedFajer

أتوقع السنه الميلاديه الجديده 2019. سنه خير وأمن وأمان... وبهذه المناسبه السعيده أحب أقولكم بأني أؤيد وبشده التطبيع مع دولة #إسرائيل والإنفتاح التجاري عليها وادخالد رؤس الأموال العربيه للإستثمار وفتح السياحه وبالذات السيحه الدينيه الاقصى وقبة الصخره وكنيسة القيامه

563

11:50 AM - Dec 31, 2018

“I expect the new year 2019 to be a good, safe one. And on this happy occasion I would like to tell you that I strongly support normalization with the state of Israel and opening trade with it, investing Arab capital in it and opening tourism, in particular religious tourism to the al-Aqsa mosque, the Dome of the Rock and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre,” Alsaeed tweeted.

Her tweet was celebrated by Israel’s Arabic-language propaganda Twitter account:

إسرائيل بالعربية

✔@IsraelArabic

نرحب بدعوتك فجر الشجاعة @AlsaeedFajer التي تنطلق عن ايمان بالصواب ورؤية منطقية وواقعية في مشهد متغير واهلا بالتوجهات السلمية من كل شعوب المنطقة، فبالتعاون المشترك مع اسرائيل ستجني الشعوب العربية الخير والبركة. مع اطيب التمنيات #سنة_جديدة_سعيدة

فجر السعيد 

✔@AlsaeedFajer

أتوقع السنه الميلاديه الجديده 2019. سنه خير وأمن وأمان... وبهذه المناسبه السعيده أحب أقولكم بأني أؤيد وبشده التطبيع مع دولة #إسرائيل والإنفتاح التجاري عليها وادخالد رؤس الأموال العربيه للإستثمار وفتح السياحه وبالذات السيحه الدينيه الاقصى وقبة الصخره وكنيسة القيامه

151

6:46 AM - Jan 1, 2019

Alsaeed’s support for normalization with Israel is nothing new.

She has even tweeted in defense of Israel’s attacks on Gaza in the past.

The Kuwaiti government, however, does not seem to share Alsaeed’s views.

Kuwait recently refused to co-host the FIFA World Cup with Qatar in 2022 for reasons that relate to the attendance or participation of Israeli nationals in the championship.

The head of the Kuwait Football Federation, Sheikh Ahmad al-Yousef, said that it would be difficult to apply some of the main conditions of FIFA in Kuwait.

The most important of these conditions is to allow all nationalities, including Israeli ones, to enter the country and issue them visas on arrival, al-Yousef said according to Kuwaiti media.

Israeli business in Qatar

Meanwhile, two Israeli chefs are set to open restaurants in Qatar as part of a secret project, Israeli publication Mako reported.

Israeli chef Yonatan Roshfeld will open a restaurant at the Marriott Hotel in Doha, and British-Israeli chef Yotam Ottolenghi will open another in the same area.

Qatar and Israel also have no formal diplomatic ties, but the small Gulf state has been warming up to Israel in an apparent attempt to escape its regional isolation led by Saudi Arabia.

It has done so by inviting right-wing Americans and key leaders of Israel’s Washington lobby for all-expenses-paid junkets to Doha, including pro-Israel propagandist Alan Dershowitz and the head of the Zionist Organization of America Morton Klein.

Qatar donated $250,000 to the Zionist Organization of America and another extreme pro-Israel organization that funds senior Israeli military officers to go on propaganda tours.

Security cooperation

Meanwhile, Egyptian ruler Abdulfattah al-Sisi revealed recently that Israel and Egypt have been cooperating on security in the Sinai peninsula more than ever before.

“The Air Force sometimes needs to cross to the Israeli side. And that’s why we have a wide range of coordination with the Israelis,” al-Sisi, who came to power in a 2013 military coup, said on the CBS program 60 Minutes.

Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula was occupied by Israel in 1967 but Israel later withdrew under the terms of the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty.

Israel also captured the West Bank and Gaza Strip and the Syrian Golan Heights during the 1967 War and occupies them to this day.

Senior Republicans are urging the Trump administration to recognize Israel’s illegal annexation of the occupied Golan Heights.