To be said frankly, ICT is not standing here for implying any type of ‘Information and Technological objects’ but here, ICT implies Iran, China and Turkey which are the combined throat thorns for the new era of US government as well as for new US president Joe Biden. Will he be competent to challenge these regional powerhouses? This article summarized what the challenges are awaiting for Biden Government.
Already, Trump turned a bed of roses into a kittle political environment for Biden government. It is like that; Trump says in a fictional character, ‘if I die, I’ll bring you with me, no doubt’. Rhetorically, Trump had already generated a peculiar environment for Biden government where Biden must face some challenges and dissents.
ICT, however, is the most indomitable Tri-challenge for Biden government. Iran is molding its strategy by rapping and bewailing the murders of Qasem Soleimani and Mohsin Fakhrijadeh. Besides, China is scheming a new strategy and foreign policy of China-US which would be more influential than OBORI to impede the US and its former policy during the Trumpian Era. On the other side, Turkey is awaiting for seeing the ending of the Lausanne Treaty. After that, Turkey’s rising in world politics may bring a new era of ‘Thucydides Trap’ in the Eurasian region which will certainly be a concernment of any NATO members.
World politics is going through a neo-cold war especially, in the Western and Middle-East regions where the most exigent players are US, Israel, Iran, UAE and Saudi-Arabia. Many sources say that on 22nd November the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Saudi-Arabia and took participation in a meeting with MBS, if it is right, though many political high officials denied it, it would be a leading essence of traping Biden government in political angst. Targeting an aim, on 27th November, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh got assassinated which strongly gives a hint of a mastermind-plan and melancholia of Israel and its secret agency, MOSSAD. Not only Mohsen Fakhrizadeh but also more than four high officials and scientists got assassinated by MOSSAD last few years, NewYork Times and The Guardian said.
Years ago, Netanyahu addressed Mohsen Fakhrizadeh in a meeting with high officials and told that “Remember the name, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh” which clears a neat and clean concern of this assassination. Already, many political analysts foresaw that Trump is going to formulate a huge political catastrophe between the US and Iran what may be a great difficulty for Biden government. From the side of president-elect Joe Biden and some officials of Democrats, they condemned and addressed this assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the (former) chief nuclear scientist of Iran, as the contemptible killing in this juncture. “All those things, I think, are going to be very difficult”, Biden told CNN.
In the very early time of this year, on 3rd January 2020, another high-official (Major General) of Iran, Qasem Soleimani also got assassinated by Trumpian Military. No sooner had they killed Soleimani than Trump conceded this killing as the attainment of their policy which could be a key-matter for winning in the US-election 2020. Unfortunately, it played a role as a demerit of Trump government.
Coming to the power and presidency in 2016’s election, Trump withdrew from the deal of ‘Iran Nuclear Deal or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action’ which deal was a great achievement of Obama government bringing back Iran from developing nuclear weapons. What are the consequences of these events that would keep Biden in adversity in his upcoming presidency?
What is the rejoinder of Iran? No doubt that Iran got massive supports and sympathy throughout the world after losing its two most potent officials. In addition, Iran has a plus-point for backing-up its power in the middle-east region if Biden gets Iran to sign in a new ‘Nuclear Deal’ and wants Iran keeping back from developing Nuclear Arms. It would not make happy Saudi-Arabia and Israel anymore! On the other side, if Biden doesn’t, and be unable to, want Iran to sign in a new ‘Nuclear Deal’ it also might be a plus-point for Iran to develop their nuclear arms. It was an affidavit of Biden government of bringing back Iran into ‘Nuclear Deal’ but the resultant will arise after getting receipt of the antiphon of Iran’s diplomacy. Quotha, Biden must get him in a predicament!
It was 2018 when the US turned on an economic cold war, ‘US-China Trade War’, with China. Though it was a key aspect of Trump’s ‘Make America Great Again’, now, Biden also yearns for keeping this rivalry alive. Coming to the power in 2020 election, Biden clearly said that, “I am not going to make any immediate moves, and the same applies to the tariffs”. There is no suspicion that China is an economic ballgame in this concurrent world. The policy of Deng Xiaoping never dies where Xi Jinping exists and it teems OBOR, an influential economic zone-policy. Biden may lose a considerable economic interest in the eastern region if he not becomes more diplomatic than Obama and Trump.
To be mentioned, the military power rivalry between China and the USA in the Indo-Pacific region is a hotter issue than the existing economic rivalry. China is much more concerned with this in the military and security aspect though many pundits say that China only concerned with its economic stamina. It was Trump in the previous period who, had a good relation with Modi and India, got much supports that would be incompatible in Biden’s Era. Moreover, India will not give up on its strength in the Indo-Pacific region and it will be a magnanimous confederate of Biden government rather than developing good relation with China.
Till now, the United States is the leader of the “Indo-Pacific Strategy” but it also brings another consequence that China will attempt to strengthen its power in this Indian Ocean region, ‘Thucydides Trap’ says like that. But, the favor and interest of India will destine the outcome and upshot.
Populism, Nationalism even Ultra-nationalism, nothing is out of the basket of Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s domestic and foreign policy which flows a utopian pan-Turkism movement in this Eurasian region.
After the WWI, a series of treaties and especially, Lausanne Treaty of 1923 gave so many positive and negative consequences to Kemal Ataturk and its modern and secular Turkey. There were not only Montreux Convention of 1936 but also many other treaties and pacts which gave Turkey so much power in the Bosporus and Cyprus region though these series of treaties abolished the strong caliphate system of Turkey, following the output of First World War.
Nicholas J. Spykman, a major contributor of Political Geography and a political scientist of USA, told that “The Rimland contains the Heartland and whoever controls the Rimland, eventually controls the World Island and thus he controls the world”. And the inferring rimland is nothing but the Eurasian region, nowadays Turkey (in a major way), Russia, and Greece. Geopolitically, as a Eurasian country, Turkey is staying in a good stance and benefited zone. In this aspect, the US is more agitated with its naval power in (with) Greece and Cyprus rather than having concerned with any other matter.
However, Turkey has an amiable alliance of China, Russia, Pakistan and Malaysia. Though Pakistan and Malaysia are not countable in the military perspective, Russia is assisting Turkey a lot. Even, Turkey has many military deals with Russia what may be a great concern for the USA. Pointing out the win of Azerbaijan in Nagorno-Karabakh, we can assume that the wining of Turkey and Russia both.
As a NATO member, Turkey may rise in any time which would be, a bone of contention with France, Greece but France and Greece never bear with this and, a matter of solace for the USA and Biden. Letting doubt aside, after the ending of the Lausanne Treaty, Turkey will revamp its oil business, proliferate its military power and economic reign. So, Biden would be more technical for keeping balance with this Eurasian ballgame.
On the whole, president-elect Mr Biden has bunches of gathered political experiences and he has the wit to deal but he and his diplomacy should be more prudent and keen-witted than that of the time of his vice-presidency. Along with Iran, China and Turkey, many other states and eastern-western regions should be considered to balance the power. More powerful plans than the Marshall Plan and Truman Doctrine of Containment would be taken by Biden’s government in this advanced era of politics otherwise it would make a collision of political multi-polarity.
Sea Breeze 2021: U.S. is worryingly heading closer to conflict with Russia in the Black Sea
On July 10th, the 2021 iteration of the joint military exercise, Sea Breeze, concluded in the Black Sea. This exercise, which began on June 28th was co-hosted by the Ukrainian Navy and the United States Navy’s Sixth Fleet. According to the U.S. Navy, the annual Exercise Sea Breeze consists of joint naval, land, and air trainings and operations centered around building increased shared capabilities in the Black Sea.
This year’s Sea Breeze included participation from 32 countries, including NATO members and other countries that border the Black Sea, making it the largest Sea Breeze exercise since its inception in 1997. All other countries bordering the Black Sea were included in participating in the joint drills, except Russia.
Russia’s exclusion from these exercises is not unsurprising, due to its current tensions with Ukraine and its historical relationship with NATO. However, it signals to Moscow and the rest of the world that the NATO views Russia as an opponent in a future conflict. At the opening ceremony of Sea Breeze 2021 in Odessa, it was made clear that the intention of the exercise was to prepare for future conflict in the region when the Defense Minister of Ukraine, reported that the drills “contain a powerful message – support of stability and peace in our region.”
These exercises and provocations do anything but bring peace and stability to the region. In fact, they draw the United States and NATO dangerously close to the brink of conflict with Russia.
Even though Sea Breeze 2021 has only recently concluded, it has already had a marked impact on tensions between NATO countries and Moscow. U.S. Navy Commander Daniel Marzluff recently explained that the Sea Breeze drills in the Black Sea are essential deterrents to Russian assertions in region. However, these drills have consisted of increasingly provocative maneuvers that ultimately provoke conflict in the region.
These drills have done anything but act as a deterrent for conflict in the Black Sea. In response to the Sea Breeze drills, Russia conducted its own drills in the Black Sea, including the simulation of firing advanced missile systems against enemy aircraft. As the Black Sea is of utmost importance to Russia’s trade and military stature, it follows that Russia would signal its displacement if it perceives its claims are being threatened.
Sea Breeze followed another rise in tensions in the Black Sea, when just a week prior to the beginning of the exercise, a clash occurred between Russia and Britain. In response to the British destroyer ship, the HMS Defender, patrolling inside Crimean territorial waters, Russia claimed it fired warning shots and ordered two bombers to drop bombs in the path of the ship. When asked about the HMS Defender, Russian President Vladimir Putin described the ship’s actions as a “provocation” that was a “blatant violation” of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Putin also went on to claim that Moscow believes U.S. reconnaissance aircraft were a part of the operation as well. Despite this, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson responded with a denial of any wrongdoing.
Russia’s actions to provocations by the United States-led Sea Breeze and interaction with the HMS Defender in the Black Sea signal its resolve to retaliate if it feels as its sovereignty and its territorial claim on Crimea is being impeded on. Despite Russia signaling its commitment to defending its territorial claims in the Black Sea, the United States still willingly took actions during Sea Breeze that would bring the United States closer to a clash with Russia.
Provoking conflict in the Black Sea does not align with the national security interests of the United States. In fact, it only puts the United States in the position to be involved in a costly clash that only would harm its diplomatic relationships.
As Russia has signaled its commitment to its resolve and scope of its military response in a possible conflict, any potential conflict in the Black Sea would be costly for the United States. Over the past few years, Russia has increased the size and capabilities of its fleet in the Black Sea. Two of these improvements would especially pose a challenging threat to the U.S. and NATO – Russia’s drastically improved anti-access/area-denial capabilities and its new Tsirkon hypersonic cruise missile. This would mean any conflict in the Black Sea would not be a quick and decisive victory for U.S. and NATO forces, and would instead likely become costly and extensive.
A conflict with Russia in the Black Sea would not only be costly for the U.S. and its allies in the region, but could irreparably damage its fragile, but strategically valuable relationship with Russia. If the United States continues to escalate tensions in the Black Sea, it risks closing the limited window for bilateral cooperation with Russia that was opened through increased willingness to collaborate on areas of common interests, as evidenced by the recent summit that took place in Geneva. After a period of the highest levels of tension between the U.S. and Russia since the Cold War, this progress made towards improving bilateral relations must not be taken for granted. Even if the U.S. and NATO’s maneuvers in the Black Sea do not ultimately materialize into a full-scale conflict with Russia, they will most likely damage not just recent diplomatic momentum, but future opportunities for a relationship between the two powers.
In such a critical time for the relationship between the United States and Russia, it is counterproductive for the United States to take actions that it can predict will drive Russia even further away. Entering into a conflict with Russia in the Black Sea would not only engage the U.S. in a costly conflict but would damage its security and diplomatic interests.
Maximizing Biden’s Plan to Combat Corruption and Promote Good Governance in Central America
Authors: Lauren Mooney and Eguiar Lizundia*
To tackle enduring political, economic and security challenges in the Northern Triangle countries of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, the Biden administration is attempting to revitalize its commitment to the region, including through a four-year, $4 billion plan submitted in a bill to Congress.
In its plan, the White House has rightly identified the root causes of migration, including limited economic opportunity, climate change, inequality, and violence. Systemic corruption resulting from the weak rule of law connects and entrenches the root causes of migration, while the increased devastation brought about by climate change exacerbates economic hardship and citizen insecurity.
The renewed investment holds promise: previous foreign assistance in the Northern Triangle has shown results, including by contributing to a reduction in the expected level of violence. As the Biden Administration finalizes and begins implementing its Central America strategy, it should include three pillars—rooted in lessons learned from within and outside the region—to maximize the probability that the proposed spending in U.S. taxpayer funds has its intended impact.
First, the Biden administration should deliver on its promise to make the fight against corruption its number one priority in Central America by supporting local anti-graft actors. The sanctions against officials which the United States is considering are a step in the right direction, but lasting reform is best accomplished through a partnership involving regional or multilateral organizations. Guatemala’s international commission against impunity (CICIG) model was relatively successful until internal pushback and dwindling U.S. advocacy resulted in its dismantlement in 2019. Though Honduras’ equivalent was largely ineffective, and El Salvador’s recently launched version is marred by President Bukele’s campaign against judicial independence, there is room for learning from past mistakes and propose a more robust and mutually beneficial arrangement. The experience of Ukraine shows that while external engagement is no silver bullet in eliminating corruption, the role of foreign actors can lead to tangible improvements in the anti-corruption ecosystem, including more transparent public procurement and increased accountability for corrupt politicians.
In tandem with direct diplomatic pressure and helping stand up CICIG-like structures, the U.S. can harness lessons from prior anticorruption efforts to fund programs that address other aspects of graft in each country. This should involve empowering civil society in each country to monitor government compliance with anti-corruption laws and putting pressure on elected officials to uphold their commitments. While reducing impunity and improving transparency might not automatically persuade Central Americans to stay, better democratic governance will allow the three Northern Triangle nations to pursue policies that will end up expanding economic opportunities for residents. As Vice President Harris recently noted, any progress on addressing violence or food insecurity would be undermined if the environment for enabling corruption remains unchanged.
Second, the United States should support local initiatives to help reverse the deterioration of the social fabric in the region by expanding access to community decision-making. Given the high levels of mistrust of government institutions, any efforts to support reform-minded actors and stamp out corruption at the national level must be paired with efforts to promote social cohesion and revitalize confidence in subnational leaders and opportunities. In the Northern Triangle countries, violence and economic deprivation erode social cohesion and undermine trust in democratic institutions. The U.S. government and practitioners should support civic efforts to build trust among community members and open opportunities for collective action, particularly in marginalized areas. A key component of this is expanding sociopolitical reintegration opportunities for returning migrants. In so doing, it is possible to help improve perceptions of quality of life, sense of belonging, and vision for the future. While evidence should underpin all elements of a U.S. Strategy for Central America, it is particularly important to ensure social cohesion initiatives are locally-owned, respond to the most salient issues, and are systematically evaluated in order to understand their effects on migration.
Lastly, the U.S. should take a human-rights based approach to managing migration and learn from the pitfalls associated with hardline approaches to stem migration. Policies rooted in a securitized vision have a demonstrable bad record. For example, since 2015, the European Union undertook significant measures to prevent irregular migration from Niger, including by criminalizing many previously legitimate businesses associated with migration and enforced the imposition of legal restrictions to dissuade open and legal migration. Not only did this violate freedom of movement and create adverse economic consequences, but it also pushed migration underground, with individuals still making the journey and encountering significant threats to their lives, security and human rights.
A welcome realignment
Acknowledging the role of push factors is key to responding to migration effectively. Most importantly, putting political inclusion and responsive governance at the center is critical for ensuring vulnerable populations feel rooted in their community. A more secure, prosperous, and democratic Central America will pay dividends to the United States not only in terms of border security, but also in the form of improved cooperation to tackle global challenges, from climate change to the rise of China.
*Eguiar Lizundia is the Deputy Director for Technical Advancement and Governance Advisor at IRI
Sinophobia grows in Argentina: The relations still the crucial one
Since COVID-19 came up in Wuhan, China followed by the growth of anti-sentiment China especially in Argentina. In late November 2020, the crowds happened in the capital of Argentina, Buenos Aires that involved the two Chinese entrepreneurs who have a supermarket chain and the customers speak loudly if the owners spread COVID-19 pandemic. According to a recent article, the slogan of ‘China out’ is available to speak up against the government.
At the same time, the Representative of the United States expressed similar concerns over the increasingly close relationship between China and Argentina, which come on top of attacks against Chinese immigrants whose country is blamed for the COVID-19 pandemic. The US also concerns that ‘the close relationship’ would limit Argentina’s economic autonomy.
Despite the troubles and the response from the US, the Argentine government still has incredible ties with China on several sides such as economic, military, and politics.
Economic side is crucial with Chinese government. Since President Xi introduced the ambitious project, Belt and Road Initiative, he imagined it can lift China’s economy. One of the developing countries and a member of G20, Argentina. During 2005-2019, Argentina received a maximum investment from China $ 30.6 billion, which accounted for 39 per cent of total Chinese investment in South America. Besides, the Chinese corporations also gave the proposal to build 25 industrial pig farms in Argentina, which will significantly increase pork exports to China. The project involving investment of $3.8 billion, is expected to generate annual production of 900,000 tons amounting to $2.5 million in annual exports.
Even captured by COVID-19 that caused an economic and health crisis, the government has several agreements within China. At least, Argentina has 15 infrastructure projects on the list that can be presented to Chinese corporations. The projects that Argentina prioritizes for investment from China are the rehabilitation plan of the San Martín Railway system, improvements to the Roca Railway line, infrastructure works on the Miter and Urquiza railway, and the redefinition of the Belgrano Cargas railway network.
A Marco Press reported Chinese government and Argentine government discussed the possibility of selling to Argentina the Sino-Pakistan’s resultant force, JF-17 fighter jets. In the history of both countries noted it was not the first time to have an arms deal. In 2015, the two countries signed a deal for Argentina’s purchase of several weapons systems. Estimated at US$1 billion, the deal included warships, armoured vehicles and fighter jets. These agreements were signed during the presidency of Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner (2008–2015), the left-wing and Peronist leader who built close ties with China. Despite, the retired right-leaning, Mauricio Macri in 2015 having cancelled these projects, the Peronist government in 2019 tried to revive it.
In late May 2021, The Argentinian government have announced an Ascention Technologies SA will have a collaboration with China’s counterpart, Satellite Hard to install a satellite ground station at an industrial park, The Southern city of Rio Gallegos. But before, since 2017, Argentina also hosted a Chinese military-run space station in Neuquen province. The facility signed between the PRC and the prior government of Cristina Fernandez, is largely operated by Chinese military personnel.
The station’s location and known dish characteristics appear consistent with China’s need for facilities in the hemisphere capable of continuously tracking objects in space, in support of its lunar and planetary space program. While the telescope facility does not have an overtly military purpose, the head of the U.S. Southern Command has mentioned it as an item of concern, as it is conceivably capable of intercepting signals from American or other overflying satellites, or supporting other Chinese strategic missions.
The Chinese space radar telescope is not, however, the only instance of China collaboration with Argentina on issues related to space. Great Wall Industrial Corporation has helped to build and launch 13 satellites for the commercial Argentine company Satellogic. Additionally, the state satellite company ARSAT also maintains commercial service contract relations with Chinese-based firms.
The several relations led by the Argentine government depend on China’s potensial. Instead of the protests that have grown up in Argentina, the government needs to upgrade their economic growth. But, for some reasons, the government should set an alarm if China steps up their acceleration. Besides, the government should be careful and must have more consideration to Chinese firms because the West analysts have stated that China’s foreign policy has an unseen reciprocal, the debt-trap. It had been proven that Sri-Lanka’s port, the Hambantota, went to the China side.
Sea Breeze 2021: U.S. is worryingly heading closer to conflict with Russia in the Black Sea
On July 10th, the 2021 iteration of the joint military exercise, Sea Breeze, concluded in the Black Sea. This exercise,...
Russian Foreign Ministry sees elements of show in “Navalny poisoning”
Russian Foreign Ministry’s press secretary Maria Zakharova has yet again dwelled with her usual sarcasm on last year’s reports about...
Partnership with Private Sector is Key in Closing Rwanda’s Infrastructure Gap
The COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic has pushed the Rwandan economy into recession in 2020 for the first time since 1994, according...
Carbon Market Could Drive Climate Action
Authors: Martin Raiser, Sebastian Eckardt, Giovanni Ruta* Trading commenced on China’s national emissions trading system (ETS) on Friday. With a...
10 new cities chosen for World Economic Forum circular economy initiative
The World Economic Forum’s Scale360° initiative announced today the 10 city-based hubs joining its Circular Shapers programme. Scale360° leverages innovation...
A New Era in US-Jordan Relations
King Abdullah of Jordan is the first Arab leader who met American President Joe Biden at the White House. The...
Reusing 10% Will Stop Almost Half of Plastic Waste From Entering the Ocean
It is possible to prevent almost half of annual plastic ocean waste by reusing just 10% of our plastics products....
International Law3 days ago
Syrian Refugee Crisis: A Critical Analysis Concerning International Law
Intelligence3 days ago
Afghan issue can not be understood from the simplistic lens of geopolitical blocs
Economy2 days ago
Entrepreneurialism & Digitalization: Recovery of Midsize Business Economies
Americas3 days ago
Sinophobia grows in Argentina: The relations still the crucial one
Middle East2 days ago
Greater Middle East may force China to project military power sooner rather than later
Africa3 days ago
Former South African president is pursuing a treasonous strategy
Americas2 days ago
Maximizing Biden’s Plan to Combat Corruption and Promote Good Governance in Central America
Europe2 days ago
Anti-Macron protests underline classism, as corona protesters and gilets jaune join forces