Six weeks ahead of the US presidential elections and we are seeing a global campaign supporting the American liberal establishment to hinder the re-election of President Donald Trump.
It is a repeat of the 2016 scenario, complete with a smear campaign and allegations of Russian interference in election ads. This week, the British left-wing paper, The Guardian, citing an obscure former model, published an account of sexual harassment allegations against Trump dating back to 1997 in New York.
Timing of the report aside, it begs the question: Why has this woman remained silent for 27 years? Why did she not add her voice to the chorus of women who came forward four years ago from every direction, each of them - as the late Lebanese actress Mary Munib said in a black and white comedy film - “throwing her blame” on the Republican candidate at the time “and the accusations were baseless,” ending with his successful election in 2016?
A success that the liberal establishment and the deep state has not forgiven, with the laws and regulations tilting the balance in their favor.
The earthquake caused by Trump’s election four years ago in the balance of globalization and the international market system, ending the control of the minority, prompted the elite that monopolizes the public opinion industry to continue, throughout his administration, to leave no stone unturned in search of any shred of hearsay to damage the reputation of the Republican president.
As for the accusations published two days ago, even the simplest of minds can understand that they were intended to smear Trump’s image with American voters, in support of his rival, Democratic candidate Joe Biden, particularly with the poll numbers being so close between the two. The question is, which candidate would be a better president for many different stakeholders?
The first being us here in Britain, and the second is with regard to the readers of “Al-Sharq al-Awsat” and their interests.
The two are in fact related, as Britain is the oldest historical friend of the Arabs, especially in political matters. Our economic interests are also aligned in relation to trade and global markets.
So, let everyone ask themselves: Which of the candidates’ policies will have a positive effect on these areas? The other questions we can ask ourselves are related to peace and global and regional security strategy.
For our readers, these last questions may be easier to answer, if judged according to the old dictum ‘Actions speak louder than words.’
Putting aside the slogans and emotional outbursts that dominate the way many in the Middle East think and operate, let us compare Trump’s working record with the policies of his predecessor, Barack Obama. Because Biden, by all appearances, is following in the footsteps of President Obama.
Obama, who pushed the countries of the West to sign the nuclear deal with Iran, excluded the Arab Gulf countries - who are threatened by Iran - from being represented in these negotiations.
The nuclear deal strengthened the position of the Islamic Republic as it released frozen funds back into the economy. These are the funds that Iran uses to finance and support extremist organizations, foment trouble in the region, and obstruct peace efforts.
Trump put an end to the farce of the Iran nuclear deal, and stipulated linking it to the political dimensions to curtail the threat of Iran to its Arab neighbors.
The Democratic Party’s policy adopted by Joe Biden is the exact opposite, and would unleash Iran anew to threaten the Gulf region and the security of the Middle East region.
This is in addition to the Obama administration’s track record of favoring and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, whose rule was rejected by Egypt and the rest of the region.
Trump’s administration does not ascribe to the usual practices nor adhere to the bureaucratic hierarchy of the institution, and it maintains a tense relationship with press and public opinion-making institutions.
The administration is subject to deliberate provocations from a press that has abandoned the pretense of neutrality, and we see it playing a role - whether deliberate or coincidental - supporting the interest of the monopolies that are threatened by President Trump’s re-election.
Despite these apparent negative factors, economic necessity and world peace make it imperative that the British, the Arabs and those whose interests lie in the success of global market economies, make every effort to support Trump, at the very least to prevent Biden from damaging the region and the global economy.
Trump’s policies over the past three years have led to an economic upswing, because he believes in opening up market competition and cutting bureaucratic red tape.
A Biden presidency, on the other hand, would turn the economic clock back to the depression of the Obama era. It will no doubt be easier to reach a trade agreement with the United States under Trump.
America is the largest trading partner for British exports, and here the trade balance tilts in Britain’s favor, unlike with the EU where the balance tilts the other way.
Biden is following the lead of Obama, who eschewed proper diplomatic protocol during his visit in 2016, threatening British voters that they’d be sent to the back of the queue if they did not vote to remain in the European Union.
And now, Britain is having trouble reaching an agreement as European negotiators continue to move the goalpost.
There is another threat posed by Biden’s election. He believes - whether intentionally or naively - the absurd propaganda of the lobby supporting the Irish Republican movement in America.
This erroneous narrative is that proceeding with Brexit as scheduled at the end of the year, instead of agreeing to Brussels’ conditions that go against Britain’s national interests, would lead to the resumption of the IRA’s terrorist campaigns, detonating bombs in stores and markets as it did for years before the Good Friday Agreement.
Besides these highly exaggerated allegations that are used by the European negotiations team against Britain, it is expected that under the influence of the Irish movement lobby in the United States, Biden would be subject to Irish pressure.
The convergence of the Democrats and the EU, and their preference for Britain to remain a member, will make reaching a trade agreement with the United States after Brexit subject to conditions dictated by the Republican movement in Dublin, as well as the European Commission in Brussels that wants to make an example out of the British people an example to deter any future attempts by other nations to replicate Brexit.
It would be easier and more advantageous for Britain to sign a trade agreement with a Republican administration headed by Trump that would be easily passed by a Republican majority Congress.
This agreement would also be better for global trade movement, rather than the monopoly imposed by the EU.
It would also be better for Arab countries, who in turn suffer from trade restrictions imposed by the EU: let’s not forget the exorbitant tariffs imposed by Brussels on petroleum products exported from Arab countries to protect European refineries.
If American laboratories manage to develop an effective vaccine for Coronavirus in the coming week, this could help Trump’s chances with re-election.
And while the pandemic has hurt the economies of Western democracies across the board, the US economy, with Trump’s reforms, will bounce back faster than the economies of European countries that support his opponent.
- Adil Darwish is an Egyptian political commentator, correspondent for the Westminster Parliament and Downing Street, and historian specializing in Middle Eastern politics.