Magazine

Senior adviser to the US president discusses Trump's plan for economic growth and peace in the Middle East.

US President Donald Trump's "deal of the century" - his administration's proposal for solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict - kicked into gear in Manama, Bahrain this week as officials from the region gathered for the so-called 'Peace to Prosperity' workshop.

Already, sceptics are voicing concern, saying the American side is using money to bribe the Palestinians.

The initial economic stage of the deal hopes to drum up $50bn in investment, money that primarily is expected to come from other Arab nations, principally in the Gulf.

Participants of the Manama meeting will discuss projects and conditions for investments in more detail. Then, based on the outcome of this meeting, the next step would be to fashion a political settlement that would translate financial commitments into reality on the ground in Palestine.

However, Palestinians have derided the plan as an "economy first" approach that is doomed to fail. The Palestinian Authority is arguing for a reverse order: a political settlement first, money later - an approach that would tackle the difficult questions of establishing a Palestinians state, end the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands, and allow refugees to return.

Palestinian leaders boycotted the June 25 and 26 meeting, saying the gathering circumvents a political settlement based on a two-state solution, and is an ill-fated attempt by the US administration to "liquidate" the Palestinian cause.

However, the senior adviser to the US president and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner - who has been tasked with leading the process - told Al Jazeera the reaction was "fairly predictable". He said believed the event would be a success despite the boycott, citing the presence of delegates from regional countries and a large number of international investors.

"What [the Palestinian leadership] have been saying is a lot of hot rhetoric about rejecting everything before they even see it, which is, in my opinion, not a very responsible position."

When questioned why the proposal did not want to settle some of the political questions that could stave off conflict before it pours money into infrastructure, Kushner said: "that's been the traditional thinking, and that has not worked".

"The president is not a traditional politician. He wants to do things in a different way. If we can get people through this process to look at this problem differently, to see what the future could be, then I think that could be a very very successful thing."

Outlining the Trump administration's "different" approach, he said: "What we have tried to do is help people identify what a future could look like. And hopefully we get people to all agree ... and then we get people to look at, maybe, let's commit to the future in the event that there is a peace agreement. Perhaps that will create a different condition through which people can then approach some of these political issues that have been unresolvable for a very long time."

Kushner called the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative "a great effort" but said it is not possible to solve the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict with a deal along those lines.

"I think we all have to recognise that if there ever is a deal, it's not going to be along the lines of the Arab peace initiative. It will be somewhere between the Arab peace initiative and somewhere between the Israeli position," he said.

He also defended Trump's 2017 decision to recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital, saying: "Israel is a sovereign nation; a sovereign nation has the right to determine where their capital is and America has the right to recognise the decision". He said the relocation of the embassy should not affect final-status negotiations with the Palestinians.

Kushner said that on both the Israeli and Palestinian sides, there are voices who accuse the other of having no interest in peace. But he added that peace needs to come from compromise and negotiation.

"If we want to find a pathway forward, it means that both sides need to find a place where they both feel that they can gain more than they give, and move forward and have the opportunities to live better lives," he said.

The stage is set in Miami, Florida on Wednesday for the first Democratic debate of the 2020 US Presidential Election. Twenty-five candidates currently hope to win the party’s nomination and challenge US President Donald Trump, including high-profile politicians Senator Elizabeth Warren, Senator Bernie Sanders and former Vice President Joe Biden.

The field, though, also includes upstart candidates such as South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg and self-help author Marianne Williamson, who wish to sway the party away from more established candidates.

With so many competing for the top spot, the skirmishes have already begun. New Jersey Senator Cory Booker has called out frontrunner Biden's record on civil rights. Warren and Sanders are vying for the attention of more progressive-minded democrats. And on Monday, Sanders unveiled a plan to cancel $1.6 trillion in student loan debt - one of Warren's signature issues.

In this episode, The Stream surveys the Democratic Party landscape ahead of the debate with Republican Party strategist Rina Shah, Democrat Party strategist Brad Jenkins, and Al Jazeera Correspondent Andy Gallacher.

Growing political tension in Albania is putting the country’s local elections in jeopardy and sparking violent demonstrations.

The crisis bubbled over in February when the opposition Democratic party withdrew from parliament.  Since then, opposition supporters have been protesting across Albania. Demonstrators are accusing Prime Minister Edi Rama of corruption and demand he steps down, a move that would trigger new national elections. Rama won a second four-year term in 2017.

The country’s president, Ilir Meta, had called off the June 30 elections because only the government’s ruling Socialist Party had put forth candidates.

"Having elections on June 30, 2019, without competition and without the opposition's participation - in violation of a key Copenhagen criteria for free and fair elections - would freeze the country's EU integration progress [and] undermine any prospect of opening accession negotiations," Meta told Al Jazeera’s John Psaropoulos.

Rama has vowed that elections will continue as candidates from the Socialist party continue campaigning as usual. Meanwhile, protesters have been setting fires at polling locations and destroying election materials.

On this episode of The Stream, we ask our panel - with democracy on the line, what will become of the June 30 elections?

A major defeat for Turkey's ruling party, in Istanbul's re-run of its mayoral election.

It took a quarter of a century, But Turkey's opposition finally worked out how to defeat President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Republican People's Party candidate Ekrem Imamoglu has snatched election victory for the second time, and is mayor-elect for Istanbul.

A city that's long been governed by Erdogan's AK party - the president considers it decisive in shaping Turkish politics.

And its kind of personal for him too. It's Erdogan's political base, from where he began his career as a mayor. Imamoglu is now seen by many as Erdogan's rising challenger.

He struck a positive message during his campaign with the slogan 'Everything will be fine'.

But is that really true?

The dominance of Turkey's AK party'is put to the test in Istanbul's re-run of its mayoral election.

Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan has always been very aware that what happens politically to Turkey's second city, could have a major and lasting impact on his own political future.

The city's crucially important as the nation's business hub. But it dealt a blow to the president's ruling Justice and Development AK party, during mayoral elections in March.

The ruling AK party contested that result over counting irregularities, and Turkey's electoral board upheld that complaint.

So Turkish voters have gone back to the polls. Many say they're concerned about unemployment and a rising cost of living.

Erdogan's critics blame him for the economic recession, and the vote is seen as a referendum on his policies.

So what does this mean for the country's democracy?
And for President Erdogan himself?

''The world is watching'' - that is the chant on the streets of Hong Kong as images of mega-protests are beamed around the globe.

Two million people in a territory of seven million went out to stop the passage of a controversial law that would allow suspected criminals to be extradited to mainland China.

But even though the extradition bill was suspended, the black-clad, helmet-wearing protesters haven't stopped their demonstrations.

Global news outlets have covered the movement's additional demand that Hong Kong's Beijing-backed leader, Carrie Lam, to resign and their accusations against police for using undue force against protesters.

"Hong Kong's situation has been taken up by the international media, almost uniformly ... saying that Hong Kong is being threatened. They say this is a David and Goliath story," says Einar Tangen, a political and economic affairs commentator.

When Britain handed Hong Kong back to China in 1997, the "one country, two system" framework that came into force promised citizens a "high degree of autonomy for 50 years" - which explains the lack of an extradition treaty with mainland China.

But critics say there have been plenty of signs that Beijing is already influencing politics and the state of the media in Hong Kong.

"It's not just about the bill but about China's attitude towards press freedom and its understanding of judicial independence," says Shirley Yam of the Hong Kong Journalists Association. "Several journalists and editors from Hong Kong have been harassed or even sentenced to jail by mainland authorities with charges that have nothing to do with their reports."

According to Yuen Chan, a Senior Lecturer at the City University of London, "We've seen creeping self-censorship, we've seen businesses withdrawing their advertising under pressure from needing to do business with China. So, all those things are very real threats. But at the same time, compared to the press in mainland China, the Hong Kong media is far more vibrant, is out there exposing scandals and people are very proud of that. And the fact that the media can report on these demonstrations is very important to the people of Hong Kong."

Yet, regardless of the extensive international news coverage, state-run news outlets in mainland China either ignored the demonstrations or echoed the party line, claiming that there's a Western conspiracy at play.

"Some people ... have really been completely brainwashed into thinking that all these protests are initiated by 'foreign influences'. But that's just ridiculous. Like two million people on the street ... of course, that is not true and, but that's what they're trying to tell the public in China," says Denise Ho, singer and pro-democracy activist.

The numbers on the streets of Hong Kong are considerably higher than the 2014 mass protests over proposed electoral reforms, because the stakes have grown larger with the passage of time.

The city-state is now five years closer to losing what autonomy it has - the remnants of a democracy, the semblance of a free media - five years closer to 2047 and direct rule by Beijing.

If Hong Kong were in control of its own future, those two million people on the streets would amount to real political power, a force to be reckoned with.

But it's not. And there is a country of 1.4 billion people next door and a government in Beijing that, like the media that the state controls, is treating Hong Kong's protests as a non-story.

Donald Trump says he was about to strike Iran after the downing of a US drone, then backed off, fearing loss of lives.

The United States called off a military strike on Iran at the last minute.

It's a move that might not sit well with regional allies.

Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Israel want President Donald Trump to keep up its tough stance against Tehran.

But is Trump serious about carrying out an attack against Iran?

Or is he just ramping up pressure?

And is there room for diplomacy?

On The Listening Post this week: As Hong Kongers come out in millions, China seeks to downplay the protests. Plus, the B-scheme films - movies of South Africa's apartheid era.

Covering the Hong Kong protests
"The world is watching" - that is the chant on the streets of Hong Kong as images of mega protests are beamed around the globe.

Two million people in a territory of seven million went out to stop the passage of a law that would allow suspected criminals to be extradited to mainland China.

We examine the dissonance between the coverage of the protests in Hong Kong and mainland China, as well as the effect the bill could have on journalists in the Special Administrative Region.

There's an intense debate in Washington about how to deal with Tehran following the downing of a U.S. drone.
 
A tense standoff between the U.S. and Iran, following the downing of an American surveillance drone in the Strait of Hormuz.

Iranian state television has been showing what it says is drone wreckage retrieved at sea.

American media say President Donald Trump ordered air strikes against military targets in Iran - but then later changed his mind.

Congressional leaders were briefed on the incident and called for a robust response, but they also told the president to act with caution.

So what does this mean for an already tense region?

''My son, who is nearly six years old now, has never seen his father’s face.''

Farzeena Akhter is one of hundreds of people in Bangladesh who are bereft as they await news of loved ones who went missing in mysterious circumstances. Mothers, fathers, siblings and children represented by Mayer Daak (Mothers' Call) have long sought answers from Bangladesh’s government on the whereabouts of those who are missing, but in most cases find they are screaming into a void as days turn to months and years.

Most families blame state agencies for the enforced disappearance of their relatives. Members of the political opposition and activists make up the majority of those missing.

A report released in April by the International Federation for Human Rights says civil society groups have documented 507 cases of enforced disappearances in Bangladesh from the beginning of 2009 to the end of 2018, during which time the Awami League of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's has held continuous office.

We'll consider the impact of these disappearances on loved ones left behind and what the apparent targeting of the political opposition means for democracy in Bangladesh.