Raids on Islams’ third-holiest site create rifts even with Tel Aviv’s relatively friendly Middle Eastern neighbors
Israeli raids inside the Al-Aqsa mosque compound are risking a series of problematic circumstances in the region, including a breakdown in relations with Jordan, a multiple-front armed conflict with Arab neighbors, and even a threat to American influence in the Middle East.
On April 4, an Israeli raid on Al-Aqsa mosque’s Qibli prayer hall sparked international outrage, with videos of the militarized unit beating unarmed worshippers with guns and batons spreading across social media. Palestinians, whom Israel had sought to expel from the Holy Site, barricaded themselves inside and attempted to repel Israeli forces with fireworks, but were ultimately unsuccessful. The storming of the site resulted in over 400 worshippers being arrested, injured, or both, with two serious injuries inflicted. However, what followed next began to make the headlines.
In a deluge of popular outrage, Palestinians across all dividing lines took to the streets throughout the country to demonstrate and even attack Israeli vehicles. Inside the occupied West Bank, armed groups also opened fire on dozens of military checkpoints, outposts, and soldiers stationed near illegal settlements. Rockets were fired from the Gaza Strip, and the biggest rocket attack since 2006 was launched the following day from Lebanon against Israel. Then on August 9, 6 rockets were fired from Syria into the occupied Golan Heights. Israel also launched its own airstrikes at targets in Gaza, Syria, and Lebanon.
What became clear is that the strategy Hezbollah’s Secretary General, Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah, had vowed to build in 2021, had come to fruition – a multi-front military confrontation in reaction to Israeli assaults on worshippers at Jerusalem’s Holy Sites. Interestingly, the regional Arab states that have proven more friendly to Israel have remained largely silent on the rocket fire from Lebanon, Gaza, and Syria, with the exception of Jordan, whose Foreign Ministry spokesman, Sinan Al-Majali, blamed Israel for the escalation. What this likely reflects is a growing frustration on the part of Amman towards Israel’s provocative actions inside the Al-Aqsa compound.
Why US efforts to reduce Israel-Palestine tensions keep failing
The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan currently enjoys cordial relations with Israel having signed a peace treaty in 1994, making trade and diplomatic efforts between both sides possible on the scale we see today. However, the Hashemite ruler of Jordan, King Abdullah II, maintains what is known as custodianship over Jerusalem’s Holy Sites, which translates to joint security management inside Al-Aqsa mosque by the Palestinian-Jordanian Waqf. The situation at the site is that Israel’s border police operate around the periphery of the mosque, manning the gates on the outside, but inside the guards of the Waqf operate. Every time Israeli forces enter the mosque, they are supposed to coordinate with the Jordanian Waqf first, terms they have routinely violated.
In January, just days into the rule of the new Israeli government, Tel Aviv’s Security Minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, stormed the site under the protection of Israeli border police, sparking a debate in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) on the incident. Despite Israel’s pronouncements of respect for the status quo at the Holy Site, verbal sparring took place in the Security Council between Jordan’s ambassador and his Israeli counterpart, Gilad Erdan, who defended the actions of far-right minister Ben-Gvir.
The status quo inside Al-Aqsa is that the site is a mosque and hence a place of worship for Muslims, but there are special hours during the day to allow for visitors of all backgrounds. Yet, Israel allows its settler groups, as part of the Temple Mount movement, to enter the site at the expense of Muslim worshippers and to worship there, violating the status quo. Various Temple Mount movement groups receive funding from charities in the West and advocate the destruction of the mosque in order to replace it with a synagogue. Last year, 48,000 Israelis entered Al-Aqsa in this provocative way, much to the ire of Jordan. During the Holy Month of Ramadan, Israeli border forces ordered the expulsion of Muslim worshippers from the site in order to escort radical settlers into the compound, which is what actually led to the violence on April 4.
Israeli police storm iconic mosque
Israel claims that it acted in an appropriate manner, to secure the safety of “non-Muslim visitors” to the site. However, in reality, the raid was a political statement, using excessive force to clear the mosque of Muslims in order to facilitate the provocative entry of Israeli Temple Mount extremists. The Israeli Ministry of Public Diplomacy blamed Palestinians for barricading themselves in the Qibli prayer hall, yet, following rocket fire from Lebanon, Palestinians did it again while Israeli forces held off, apparently over fears of an escalation. Instead of violence breaking out due to worshippers stationing themselves inside the mosque when the Temple Mount groups entered, the site was peaceful and no clash erupted, proving Israel’s security rationale wrong.
Through its continued push to alter the status quo at Al-Aqsa, Israel is actively creating a rift with neighboring Jordan, as well as provoking a popular Palestinian uprising and armed attacks from Syria, Gaza, and Lebanon. If the provocations persist, especially during Ramadan, Tel Aviv could see itself isolated in the region, as no country will actively stand against actions taken in the name of defending the third-holiest site in the Islamic faith. The Jordanian parliament and the nation’s people are also outraged at their government’s relationship with Israel, placing great pressure on the leadership of Amman to act.
This all could have been avoided if Israel did not support the Temple Mount groups. More importantly, the US is looking on with great concern, as its own role in the region deteriorates and its top Middle East asset stands on the verge of an unnecessary multi-front military confrontation.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of TSFT.
You can share this story on social media!
PLEASANT MUSIC FOR YOUR CAFE, BAR, RESTAURANT, SWEET SHOP, HOME
Starting next year, China will raise its retirement age for workers, which is now among the youngest in the world’s major economies, in an effort to address its shrinking population and aging work force.
The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, the country’s legislature, passed the new policy Friday after a sudden announcement earlier in the week that it was reviewing the measure, state broadcaster CCTV announced.
The policy change will be carried out over 15 years, with the retirement age for men raised to 63 years, and for women to 55 or 58 years depending on their jobs. The current retirement age is 60 for men and 50 for women in blue-collar jobs and 55 for women doing white-collar work.
“We have more people coming into the retirement age, and so the pension fund is (facing) high pressure. That’s why I think it’s now time to act seriously,” said Xiujian Peng, a senior research fellow at Victoria University in Australia who studies China’s population and its ties to the economy.
The previous retirement ages were set in the 1950’s, when life expectancy was only around 40 years, Peng said.
The policy will be implemented starting in January, according to the announcement from China’s legislature. The change will take effect progressively based on people’s birthdates.
For example, a man born in January 1971 could retire at the age of 61 years and 7 months in August 2032, according to a chart released along with the policy. A man born in May 1971 could retire at the age of 61 years and 8 months in January 2033.
Demographic pressures made the move long overdue, experts say. By the end of 2023, China counted nearly 300 million people over the age of 60. By 2035, that figure is projected to be 400 million, larger than the population of the U.S. The Chinese Academy of Social Sciences had previously projected that the public pension fund will run out of money by that year.
Pressure on social benefits such as pensions and social security is hardly a China-specific problem. The U.S. also faces the issue as analysis shows that currently, the Social Security fund won’t be able to pay out full benefits to people by 2033.
“This is happening everywhere,” said Yanzhong Huang, senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations. “But in China with its large elderly population, the challenge is much larger.”
That is on top of fewer births, as younger people opt out of having children, citing high costs. In 2022, China’s National Bureau of Statistics reported that for the first time the country had 850,000 fewer people at the end of the year than the previous year , a turning point from population growth to decline. In 2023, the population shrank further, by 2 million people.
What that means is that the burden of funding elderly people’s pensions will be divided among a smaller group of younger workers, as pension payments are largely funded by deductions from people who are currently working.
Researchers measure that pressure by looking at a number called the dependency ratio, which counts the number of people over the age of 65 compared to the number of workers under 65. That number was 21.8% in 2022, according to government statistics, meaning that roughly five workers would support one retiree. The percentage is expected to rise, meaning fewer workers will be shouldering the burden of one retiree.
The necessary course correction will cause short-term pain, experts say, coming at a time of already high youth unemployment and a soft economy.
A 52-year-old Beijing resident, who gave his family name as Lu and will now retire at age 61 instead of 60, was positive about the change. “I view this as a good thing, because our society’s getting older, and in developed countries, the retirement age is higher,” he said.
Li Bin, 35, who works in the event planning industry, said she was a bit sad.
“It’s three years less of play time. I had originally planned to travel around after retirement,” she said. But she said it was better than expected because the retirement age was only raised three years for women in white-collar jobs.
Some of the comments on social media when the policy review was announced earlier in the week reflected anxiety.
But of the 13,000 comments on the Xinhua news post announcing the news, only a few dozen were visible, suggesting that many others had been censored.
Moscow’s envoy to the UN has reiterated where the Kremlin’s red line is
Granting Kiev permission to use Western-supplied long-range weapons would constitute direct involvement in the Ukraine conflict by NATO, Russia’s envoy to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, has said.
Moscow will treat any such attack as coming from the US and its allies directly, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday, explaining that long-range weapons rely on Western intelligence and targeting solutions, neither of which Ukraine is capable of.
NATO countries would “start an open war” with Russia if they allow Ukraine to use long-range weapons, Nebenzia told the UN Security Council on Friday.
“If such a decision is made, that means NATO countries are starting an open war against Russia,” Moscow’s envoy said. “In that case, we will obviously be forced to make certain decisions, with all the attendant consequences for Western aggressors.”
Putin issues new warning to NATO
“Our Western colleagues will not be able to dodge responsibility and blame Kiev for everything,” Nebenzia added. “Only NATO troops can program the flight solutions for those missile systems. Ukraine doesn’t have that capability. This is not about allowing Kiev to strike Russia with long-range weapons, but about the West making the targeting decisions.”
Russia considers it irrelevant that Ukrainian nationalists would technically be the ones pulling the trigger, Nebenzia explained. “NATO would become directly involved in military action against a nuclear power. I don’t think I have to explain what consequences that would have,”he said.
The US and its allies placed some restrictions on the use of their weapons, so they could claim not to be directly involved in the conflict with Russia, while arming Ukraine to the tune of $200 billion.
Multiple Western outlets have reported that the limitations might be lifted this week, as US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and British Foreign Secretary David Lammy visited Kiev. Russia has repeatedly warned the West against such a course of action.
‼️🇷🇺🏴☠️ President's Response on the Potential Use of NATO Long-Range Weapons Against Russia
"This would mean that NATO countries, the United States, and European nations are at war with Russia. And if that is the case, considering the fundamental shift in the nature of this… pic.twitter.com/UO03dRUl44
Beijing maintains a conservative economic agenda in its relations with the continent, while finding it increasingly difficult to avoid a political confrontation with the West
The ninth forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) and the FOCAC summit held in Beijing on September 4-6 marked a significant phase in Africa’s relations with its global partners in the post-Covid era. China is the last major partner to hold a summit with African nations following the end of the pandemic; Africa summits were held by the EU and the US in 2022, and by Russia in 2023. The pandemic, coupled with rising global tensions, macroeconomic shifts, and a series of crises, underlined Africa’s growing role in the global economy and politics – something that China, which has undergone major changes (both internal and external) as a result of the pandemic, is well aware of.
It is clear that the relationship between China and Africa is entering a new phase. China is no longer just a preferential economic partner for Africa, as it had been in the first two decades of the 21st century. It has become a key political and military ally for many African countries. This is evident from China’s increasing role in training African civil servants and sharing expertise with them, as well as from several initiatives announced at the summit, including military-technical cooperation: officer training programs, mine clearing efforts, and over $100 million which China will provide to support the armed forces of African nations.
In the political arena, however, Beijing is proceeding very cautiously and the above-mentioned initiatives should be seen as the first tentative attempts rather than a systematic strategy.
While China strives to avoid political confrontation with the West in Africa and even closely cooperates with it on certain issues, it is becoming increasingly difficult to do so. Washington is determined to pursue a policy of confrontation with Beijing in Africa – this is evident both from US rhetoric and its strategic documents.
Dirty tactics: How the US tries to break China’s soft power in Africa
A “divorce” between China and the West is almost inevitable. This means that Chinese companies may lose contracts with Western corporations and won’t have access to transportation and logistics infrastructure. Consequently, China will need to develop its own comprehensive approach to Africa, either independently or in collaboration with other global power centers.
An important sign of the growing confrontation between the US and China in Africa was the signing of a trilateral memorandum of understanding between China, Tanzania, and Zambia regarding the reconstruction of the Tanzania-Zambia Railway (TAZARA), which was originally built by China in the 1970s. If it is expanded, electrified, and modernized, TAZARA has the potential to become a viable alternative to one of the key US investment projects in the region: the Lobito Corridor, which aims to enhance logistics infrastructure for exporting minerals (copper and cobalt) from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Zambia by modernizing the railway from the DR Congo to the Angolan port of Lobito.
In inland regions such as Eastern Congo, transportation infrastructure plays a crucial role in the process of mineral extraction. Considering the region’s shortage of rail and road networks, even a single non-electrified railway line leading to a port in the Atlantic or Indian Ocean can significantly boost the operation of the mining sector and permanently tie the extraction and processing regions to specific markets.
It appears that China’s initiative holds greater promise compared to the US one, particularly because Chinese companies control major mines both in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Zambia. This gives them a clear advantage in working with Chinese operators and equipment, facilitating the export of minerals through East African ports. Overall, this indicates that East Africa will maintain its role as the economic leader on the continent and one of the most integrated and rapidly developing regions for imports.
A former colonial European power returns to Africa. What is it after now?
The highlight of the summit was China’s pledge to provide $50 billion to African countries over the next three years (by 2027). This figure echoes the $55 billion commitment to China made by the US (for 3 years) at the 2022 US-Africa Summit and the $170 billion that the EU promised to provide over seven years back in 2021. Consequently, leading global players allocate approximately $15-20 billion annually to Africa.
In recent years, there has been noticeable growth in such promises. Nearly every nation is eager to promise Africa something – for example, Italy has pledged $1 billion annually. However, these large packages of so-called “financial aid” often have little in common with actual assistance, since they are typically commercial loans or corporate investments. Moreover, a significant portion of these funds is spent in the donor countries (e.g. on the procurement and production of goods), which means that they contribute to the economic growth of African nations in a minimal way.
As for China, it will provide about $11 billion in genuine aid. This is a substantial amount which will be used for developing healthcare and agriculture in Africa. Another $30 billion will come in the form of loans (roughly $10 billion per year) and a further $10 billion as investments.
The overall financial framework allows us to make certain conclusions, though it’s important to note that the methodology for calculating these figures is unclear, and the line between loans, humanitarian aid, and investments remains blurred. In terms of investments (averaging around $3 billion per year), Beijing plans to maintain its previous levels of activity – in recent years, China’s foreign direct investments (FDI) have ranged from $2 billion to $5 billion annually. Financial and humanitarian aid could nearly double (from the current $1.5 billion-$2 billion per year) while lending is expected to return to pre-pandemic levels (which would still be below the peak years of 2012-2018).
Can Africa seize control of its own energy?
China’s economic plan for Africa seems to be quite conservative. It’s no surprise that debt issues took center stage during the summit. During the Covid-19 pandemic, macroeconomic stability in African countries deteriorated, which led to challenges in debt repayments and forced Africa to initiate debt restructuring processes assisted by the IMF and the G20. Starting in 2020, a combination of internal and external factors led China to significantly cut its lending to African countries – from about $10-15 billion down to $2-3 billion. This reduction in funding has triggered economic reforms in several African countries (e.g. Ghana, Kenya, and Nigeria), which have shifted toward stricter tax and monetary policies. While promises to increase lending may seem like good news for African nations, it’s likely that much of this funding will go toward interest payments on existing obligations and debt restructuring, since China wants to ensure that its loans are repaid.
Despite China’s cautious approach to Africa, its interaction with the continent will develop as a result of external and internal changes affecting both Africa and China. Africa will gradually become more industrialized and will reduce imports while the demand for investments and local production will increase. China will face demographic challenges, and its workforce will decrease. This may encourage bilateral cooperation as some production facilities may move from China to Africa. This will most likely concern East African countries such as Ethiopia and Tanzania, considering China’s current investments in their energy and transportation infrastructure. Additionally, with Africa’s population on the rise and China’s population declining, Beijing is expected to attract more African migrant workers to help address labor shortages.