After the cold war ended, around 1990, America went from being one of two superpowers, to being the global "hyperpower". The World Trade Organization aspired to create a single global market. Russia was reduced to being a source of natural resources for the German-led EU. China's one-party state was an anomaly that would inevitably politically modernize. Resistance to the global order came from a handful of rogue states - North Korea, the last true socialist state, and various Muslim countries opposed to Israel.
But change brewed under the surface. In Russia, Primakov envisioned an eastern alliance between Russia, India, and China, and Dugin sought a new ideological basis for eastern resistance to the west. On the borders of the Muslim ummah, mujahideen fought on half a dozen fronts, emboldened by the fall of the Soviet Union. China strengthened Pakistan, North Korea sold missiles to the Middle East, Pakistan spread nuclear knowledge to other Muslim countries.
The 9/11 attacks turned the American ideological hegemony into an overtly military one. Bush occupied Iraq and Afghanistan, and forced Pakistan to fight its own jihadis (the alternative being an overt Indian-American military alliance). The nuclear programs of Iran and North Korea became the center of interminable diplomatic processes. US military commands were created for every continent, and the NSA spied on the entire Earth.
Under Obama, the hegemon tried to be more inclusive. The world economy was governed by the G20, not just the G7. The president was the son of an African man, and grew up in an Asian Muslim country. He dabbled in supporting Islamist democracy in the Arab world, and made a nuclear deal with Iran. In America itself, racial (and gender) diversity became an obsession.
But none of this was enough. Russia was reborn as defender of tradition and as the armory of a multipolar world. The 9/11 terrorists, who sought for years to recreate the caliphate in Iraq, moved to Syria in the aftermath of the Arab spring, unleashing a wave of migration into Europe that overturned the center-left consensus there, in favor of right-wing nationalism. China ceased hiding its strength and announced a project of economic integration stretching across Asia. And finally, in America itself, a celebrity billionaire revealed himself as a nationalist strongman and acquired the presidency despite opposition from almost the entire media and political establishment.
Wednesday, June 13, 2018
Monday, May 21, 2018
Season of dialogue
At the highest level of the world system, the moment seems to be one of relative success for Trump and Netanyahu, and conciliatory gestures from Putin and Xi.
Putin's new administration retains "Atlanticists" like Medvedev, and he hosted Netanyahu without rancor. China has been reaching out to Japan and India; there will be a working group on Japanese participation in Belt and Road. Putin just had an informal summit with Modi (arms sales, North-South economic corridor), and will meet with Abe later this week (disputed islands).
It was the anniversary of Israel's founding and Palestine's dispossession. The US withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal (so now it sanctions Russia, Iran, North Korea), but the other parties - Iran, the European powers, Russia and China - vowed to keep it going. Israel killed Palestinian marchers at the Gaza border (and was condemned most prominently by Turkey), and bombed Iranian forces in Syria even as Netanyahu visited Russia for (world war 2) Victory Day.
The Korean leaders met. Kim Jong Un has begun to resemble just another hobnobbing world leader - two trips to China, an excursion to Singapore if the summit with Trump goes ahead.
Scattered smaller countries had their national dramas. Malaysia had its unlikely revolution, Armenia replaced a president, Iraq strengthened the nationalist Muqtada Sadr, Maduro hung on in Venezuela.
It's not new, but I have been wanting to mention the African free trade agreement concluded in late March. All the big Asian powers will want to get involved.
Putin's new administration retains "Atlanticists" like Medvedev, and he hosted Netanyahu without rancor. China has been reaching out to Japan and India; there will be a working group on Japanese participation in Belt and Road. Putin just had an informal summit with Modi (arms sales, North-South economic corridor), and will meet with Abe later this week (disputed islands).
It was the anniversary of Israel's founding and Palestine's dispossession. The US withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal (so now it sanctions Russia, Iran, North Korea), but the other parties - Iran, the European powers, Russia and China - vowed to keep it going. Israel killed Palestinian marchers at the Gaza border (and was condemned most prominently by Turkey), and bombed Iranian forces in Syria even as Netanyahu visited Russia for (world war 2) Victory Day.
The Korean leaders met. Kim Jong Un has begun to resemble just another hobnobbing world leader - two trips to China, an excursion to Singapore if the summit with Trump goes ahead.
Scattered smaller countries had their national dramas. Malaysia had its unlikely revolution, Armenia replaced a president, Iraq strengthened the nationalist Muqtada Sadr, Maduro hung on in Venezuela.
It's not new, but I have been wanting to mention the African free trade agreement concluded in late March. All the big Asian powers will want to get involved.
Thursday, April 26, 2018
Two summits and a red line
The summit between North and South Korea is to take place today. I won't try to predict the immediate outcomes. I will say that long ago, I read a Tom Clancy novel in which some South Korean generals were said to relish the North's nukes, as the property of a unified Korea. My point is just that the strengths of north and south are complementary - military and economic - and if they worked together, they would suddenly be a major power, even one to rival Japan.
At the same time, Modi and Xi are meeting in Wuhan, somewhat unexpectedly. Last year the Doklam border crisis was resolved in time for the BRICS summit in China. This year, India has revived participation in the Indo-Pacific "quadrilateral" of America, Australia, India, and Japan, that is widely seen as a counter to expanding Chinese influence; but in June, there is a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization - formerly centered on China and Russia, recently expanded to include India and Pakistan. So once again, an upcoming summit provides a reason for pragmatic conciliation between the two sides.
Indian hawks are upset, they consider this weakness from Modi (at a time when the Indian media and the Congress party are also agitating against Modi's party as anti-woman and anti-Muslim). As for China, one doesn't hear criticism of Xi, but he did just have a phoney "trade war" with Trump in which China made concessions as well as imposing counter-tariffs. So both powers have their issues to navigate right now.
Obama's 2015 nuclear deal with Iran - his big attempt to fix things in the Middle East, that was immediately followed by the Russian intervention in Syria - is considered in question, first on May 12, later in July. The crux of the deal was that economic sanctions against Iran would be ended, if Iran allowed verifiable restrictions on its nuclear program.
Trump has been establishing his own "red lines". He is generally not interested in regime change. He wants US forces out of Syria (though perhaps to be replaced by Arab and Turkish forces under the control of the emerging "Sunni NATO"). But he was willing to bomb the Syrian chemical weapons infrastructure. So we may say that he retains America's status as a protector of Israel, and the key issue is WMDs in Syria and Iran.
At the same time, Modi and Xi are meeting in Wuhan, somewhat unexpectedly. Last year the Doklam border crisis was resolved in time for the BRICS summit in China. This year, India has revived participation in the Indo-Pacific "quadrilateral" of America, Australia, India, and Japan, that is widely seen as a counter to expanding Chinese influence; but in June, there is a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization - formerly centered on China and Russia, recently expanded to include India and Pakistan. So once again, an upcoming summit provides a reason for pragmatic conciliation between the two sides.
Indian hawks are upset, they consider this weakness from Modi (at a time when the Indian media and the Congress party are also agitating against Modi's party as anti-woman and anti-Muslim). As for China, one doesn't hear criticism of Xi, but he did just have a phoney "trade war" with Trump in which China made concessions as well as imposing counter-tariffs. So both powers have their issues to navigate right now.
Obama's 2015 nuclear deal with Iran - his big attempt to fix things in the Middle East, that was immediately followed by the Russian intervention in Syria - is considered in question, first on May 12, later in July. The crux of the deal was that economic sanctions against Iran would be ended, if Iran allowed verifiable restrictions on its nuclear program.
Trump has been establishing his own "red lines". He is generally not interested in regime change. He wants US forces out of Syria (though perhaps to be replaced by Arab and Turkish forces under the control of the emerging "Sunni NATO"). But he was willing to bomb the Syrian chemical weapons infrastructure. So we may say that he retains America's status as a protector of Israel, and the key issue is WMDs in Syria and Iran.
Thursday, April 12, 2018
In and around Syria
A year ago, the Trump administration said it would not seek to overthrow Assad; there was a chemical weapons incident; and America bombed a Syrian airbase.
This week, Trump said American troops would be out of Syria soon; there was another chemical weapons incident; and this time, it was Israel who bombed a Syrian base.
So, at times when the American government says it will reduce its involvement in Syria... either the Syrian army uses that moment to terrorize its remaining opponents by using chemical weapons; or the Syrian rebels try to draw America back in, by martyring a few dozen civilians in a fake chemical weapons incident.
Now that this has happened twice, I do not see any other possibilities.
Trump has tweeted that a price must be paid, but not necessarily right away. So I think that for a while we will just see verbal condemnation from him.
Meanwhile, the Syrian army is in control of the city where the attack occurred. It was the last stronghold of the Islamist opposition. So they have a territorial victory, even if they must now deal with a new storm of condemnation and more, from the West.
America and Russia are on opposite sides here. To some extent, Israel and Turkey are in the middle. Reportedly, Netanyahu criticized Trump for wanting to get out of Syria, and has also told Putin that Israel will not allow Iran to use Syria as a base against Israel. Erdogan has said that Russia is in the wrong for supporting Assad, but America is in the wrong for supporting Syrian Kurds.
The Saudi crown prince has been touring America and Europe, and has their support in his war against Iranian-backed forces in Yemen.
This week, Trump said American troops would be out of Syria soon; there was another chemical weapons incident; and this time, it was Israel who bombed a Syrian base.
So, at times when the American government says it will reduce its involvement in Syria... either the Syrian army uses that moment to terrorize its remaining opponents by using chemical weapons; or the Syrian rebels try to draw America back in, by martyring a few dozen civilians in a fake chemical weapons incident.
Now that this has happened twice, I do not see any other possibilities.
Trump has tweeted that a price must be paid, but not necessarily right away. So I think that for a while we will just see verbal condemnation from him.
Meanwhile, the Syrian army is in control of the city where the attack occurred. It was the last stronghold of the Islamist opposition. So they have a territorial victory, even if they must now deal with a new storm of condemnation and more, from the West.
America and Russia are on opposite sides here. To some extent, Israel and Turkey are in the middle. Reportedly, Netanyahu criticized Trump for wanting to get out of Syria, and has also told Putin that Israel will not allow Iran to use Syria as a base against Israel. Erdogan has said that Russia is in the wrong for supporting Assad, but America is in the wrong for supporting Syrian Kurds.
The Saudi crown prince has been touring America and Europe, and has their support in his war against Iranian-backed forces in Yemen.
Wednesday, March 14, 2018
Russia and China
One of Trump's early advisors was a fellow called Carter Page who gave a talk about how Russia, China, and America have complementary economic strengths and could work together. He was one of the early victims of the "Russiagate" witch-hunt.
It seems to me that Russia has abandoned any hope for economic synergy with America for now, in favor of negotiation over more elemental strategic matters.
First, Putin gave a state-of-the-nation speech in which he announced new nuclear weapon delivery systems meant to nullify missile defense (like a nuke torpedo and a nuke-bearing cruise missile), and explicitly said that this is meant to make the west negotiate.
Then, a few days later, a Russian traitor - a military-intelligence officer who had spied for the British - was nerve-gassed in the UK. This was an audacious and extreme step to take, and I now interpret it as deterrence. Britain is where the biggest concentration of Russian defectors, double agents, and oligarch oppositionists is found. Russia is saying, do not work for the enemy, now more than ever, or we will kill you.
Meanwhile, ExxonMobil abandoned a trillion-dollar oil deal with Rosneft, and now Trump has replaced Secretary of State Tillerson, the former ExxonMobil CEO, with Pompeo, who had been heading up the CIA.
Tillerson, with his business background, would have been a good chief diplomat to make an economic grand bargain with Russia. But it seems that the resistance from the American security establishment, and their allies in the media, has finally rendered that impossible. So instead, we're going to have strategic hardball, over North Korea, Iran, and perhaps NATO.
There has also been reporting in western media that Xi Jinping is now "president for life". I wish to present my own interpretation of this, which owes a lot to history as presented by "spandrell".
In China since the 1990s, it has been a political principle that the same person should hold the three offices of power, head of state, head of party, head of the military. First that was Jiang Zemin (but Deng Xiaoping was the power behind the throne), then it was Hu Jintao (but Jiang remained the real power), now it is Xi Jinping.
But Xi is a more transformational leader than Jiang or Hu. He is now officially regarded as a paramount leader, the first since Mao and Deng. He is overseeing China's shift from building up its strength and playing along with the American world order, to using that strength in order to assert a different ideology and build an alternative order.
"spandrell" says that the abolition of term limits on head of state (this is what western media has called "president-for-life") is meant to tell corrupt officials that they can't just wait for Xi to pass from the scene; the campaign against corruption (part of the larger plan) is here to stay. But I would also emphasize that it's just one element of that larger political transformation.
It seems to me that Russia has abandoned any hope for economic synergy with America for now, in favor of negotiation over more elemental strategic matters.
First, Putin gave a state-of-the-nation speech in which he announced new nuclear weapon delivery systems meant to nullify missile defense (like a nuke torpedo and a nuke-bearing cruise missile), and explicitly said that this is meant to make the west negotiate.
Then, a few days later, a Russian traitor - a military-intelligence officer who had spied for the British - was nerve-gassed in the UK. This was an audacious and extreme step to take, and I now interpret it as deterrence. Britain is where the biggest concentration of Russian defectors, double agents, and oligarch oppositionists is found. Russia is saying, do not work for the enemy, now more than ever, or we will kill you.
Meanwhile, ExxonMobil abandoned a trillion-dollar oil deal with Rosneft, and now Trump has replaced Secretary of State Tillerson, the former ExxonMobil CEO, with Pompeo, who had been heading up the CIA.
Tillerson, with his business background, would have been a good chief diplomat to make an economic grand bargain with Russia. But it seems that the resistance from the American security establishment, and their allies in the media, has finally rendered that impossible. So instead, we're going to have strategic hardball, over North Korea, Iran, and perhaps NATO.
There has also been reporting in western media that Xi Jinping is now "president for life". I wish to present my own interpretation of this, which owes a lot to history as presented by "spandrell".
In China since the 1990s, it has been a political principle that the same person should hold the three offices of power, head of state, head of party, head of the military. First that was Jiang Zemin (but Deng Xiaoping was the power behind the throne), then it was Hu Jintao (but Jiang remained the real power), now it is Xi Jinping.
But Xi is a more transformational leader than Jiang or Hu. He is now officially regarded as a paramount leader, the first since Mao and Deng. He is overseeing China's shift from building up its strength and playing along with the American world order, to using that strength in order to assert a different ideology and build an alternative order.
"spandrell" says that the abolition of term limits on head of state (this is what western media has called "president-for-life") is meant to tell corrupt officials that they can't just wait for Xi to pass from the scene; the campaign against corruption (part of the larger plan) is here to stay. But I would also emphasize that it's just one element of that larger political transformation.
Thursday, February 22, 2018
Syria 2018
A Dawn editorial remarks that there has been fighting on three fronts in Syria: the Syrian armed forces are attempting to capture one of the last rebel strongholds, Turkey is besieging Syrian Kurds, and Israel and Syria exchanged hostilities after an Iranian drone entered Israel. I don't know what it adds up to, but my feeling is that increasingly, the Middle East is Russia's problem - that a slow American retreat in the region connects Obama and Trump, perhaps motivated by the success of fracking within America.
Sunday, December 10, 2017
America, Russia, India
Trump declared that the American embassy in Israel would be moved to Jerusalem. All the Arab and Muslim countries protested. But I feel like I don't understand exactly what is at stake for them. Were they hoping for a different final status for Jerusalem? Does this American move decrease their negotiating power somehow?
At the same time, Putin announced that he will run in Russia's 2018 elections. Everyone expects him to win. But I have a feeling he won't complete his term in office. The Prime Minister is supposed to be next in the line of succession, so will competition for that position become the real struggle in Russian politics?
A columnist for SAAG suggests an "Indo Pacific Treaty Organization" on the model of NATO, in order to contain China and China's allies. It has a kind of historical plausibility. But for now, India plays both sides - it's in BRICS (which subsumed the older IBSA), and in the "Quadrilateral" with Japan, Australia, and America.
At the same time, Putin announced that he will run in Russia's 2018 elections. Everyone expects him to win. But I have a feeling he won't complete his term in office. The Prime Minister is supposed to be next in the line of succession, so will competition for that position become the real struggle in Russian politics?
A columnist for SAAG suggests an "Indo Pacific Treaty Organization" on the model of NATO, in order to contain China and China's allies. It has a kind of historical plausibility. But for now, India plays both sides - it's in BRICS (which subsumed the older IBSA), and in the "Quadrilateral" with Japan, Australia, and America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)