As countries are busy buying COVID-19 vaccines, a new virus strain was found in the UK around a week ago and then spread to numerous countries, forcing them to temporarily restrict flights.

The new virus strain is called VUI-202012/01 as the first mutated virus was probed in December. It is 70 percent more contagious than the old version of the virus. The new virus type was also linked with the drastic surge in the numbers of new COVID-19 cases in the UK.

The mutation is not the first time given that a new strain has appeared. A mutation called D614G was found in Malaysia last August. This mutated virus – which was first detected in Europe in February – was 10 times more dangerous than SARS-CoV-2 and caused COVID-19 with flu-like symptoms.

As COVID-19 continues to mutate, questions about the COVID-19 vaccines’ efficacy linger, even though many health experts claim vaccines are still effective in containing the mutated virus as well. 

Viral Mutation is Normal

A virus mutation is a condition where a virus changes its genetic material, which is a normal process.

Deputy Director of the Eijkman Institute in Translational Research at the Eijkman Institute, Professor David H Muljono told Kompas last August that viral mutation is inevitable as a virus adapts to survive around its receptor inside a human’s body.

Viruses must adapt in order to disguise themselves and bypass a host’s immune system. After the mutation, a body’s immune system will find it hard to detect the virus, allowing the virus stay longer and attack its host.

However, human intervention can intentionally help the mutation, aimed at weakening that virus for the vaccine development’s process.

How Effective are COVID-19 Vaccines for Stopping a Mutated Virus Strain?

New coronavirus mutation sparks a question of whether current COVID-19 vaccines can contain the virus’ new strain which is believed to be more dangerous than SARS-CoV-2.

Pfizer-BionTech and Moderna uses the latest technology called mRNA (messenger RNA). mRNA vaccines teach our body’s cell to produce protein that stimulates an immune response in our body.

While a traditional vaccine development method uses inactivated virus, such as found in the chicken pox and flu virus. One of the vaccine producers that still use this old technology is China’s Sinovac.

Pfizer-Biontech and Moderna’s vaccines have efficacy of more than 90 percent, as shown in the Phase III clinical trial. However, suppose the virus continues to mutate several times. In that case, those viruses will no longer be effective, said Dr. Taruna Ikrar, an Indonesian doctor and scientist based in the U.S. in a webinar held by Kabari Indonesia.

He elaborated that researchers are studying T cell – a part of a body’s immune system that protects us from infections and can memorize past illnesses.

Indonesian pulmonologist Erlina Burhan told TVOne that so far those COVID-19 vaccines are effective in tackling the new virus strain, yet further research is still needed as the situation is growing.

“Vaccines are still effective, but not everything as the most important thing is we implement health protocols by maintaining distance, washing hands regularly, and wearing masks,” she said.

The specialist added that the PCR and rapid antigen only detect the virus’s presence, not the mutation. A more advanced technology equipped with more costly test kits are needed to spot the mutating virus.

Novavax – one of the largest vaccine makers – stated in a release that it was actively testing its vaccine on the new UK strain.

“Development and results will take several weeks,” the release said.

Ikrar claimed that annual vaccination is the most suitable alternative for COVID-19 given that flu virus also mutates and the vaccination is held every year.

“Which vaccines should we choose? As long as the efficacy is above 50 percent, safe, and they provide longer immunity, that’s fine,” Ikrar said.

L'articolo How Effective is COVID Vaccine at Fighting the New UK Virus Strain? proviene da InsideOver.

Turkey insists that it will not cancel the purchase of Russia’s S-400 air defense missile system despite recent sanctions imposed by the US. Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu recently said the American crackdown on Turkey is “the gravest mistake.”

Turkey’s Defense

In an interview with Canal24, Cavusoglu vowed not to bow to the sanctions, saying the purchase is in line with Turkish defense regulations and claiming that the decision to buy the Russia-made weapon is because Turkey cannot produce its own defense system.

A hypothesis that the West’s defense systems could not tackle the Turkish Air Force during the failed coup in 2016 is credible according to some experts, although it needs further explanation.

The sanctions against Turkey came as no surprise, since Washington has a special restriction that results in sanctions on any countries purchasing weapons from Russia, Iran, and North Korea, called the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA). The law was passed in 2017 under the Trump administration.

The politically-motivated regulation aims to counter Russia’s influence. In 2018, the US slapped sanctions on China for buying Russia’s S-400 system and Su-35 fighter jets.

Why is the S-400 System so Important?

America’s ambassador to NATO Kay Bailey Hutchison stated in 2019 that Turkey would sacrifice a lot if it gets the S-400 system, citing data security as the primary concern. Turkey is the only NATO member that buys Russian air defense systems.

The S-400 system — or as NATO calls it the Growler — is a highly effective anti-ballistic weaponry system. It has capabilities of travelling at a maximum range of 400 kilometers and can be deployed in only five minutes according to the system’s manufacturer Almaz-Antey. Its competitor, America’s MIM-104 Patriot, has a range of just 177 kilometers in a single direction, whereas the S-400 operates in multiple directions.

In addition, the S-400 can spot and shoot down targets, including jets and drones up to 600 kilometers away according to a report in the India Times.

The S-400 can be described as one-size-fits-all weaponry, since it can be designed for short-range, medium-range, and long-range weapon systems, depending on how a user wants to set up with the system, explains Kevin Brand, a military analyst at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Which Other Countries Also Want the S-400 System?

Besides Turkey, India, China, Egypt, Algeria, and even Saudi Arabia—one of America’s closest allies—have also expressed their interest in purchasing the Russian air-defense system. In October 2018, India signed the S-400 purchasing deal worth US $5 billion, CNBC reported.

Plot Twist: Now Even Washington Wants the S-400

The US even seems to be somewhat contradicting itself after also discreetly expressing its interest in buying the S-400 system. Senate Majority Whip John Thun even considered correspondingly amending the 2021 National Defense Authorization Law that enables Washington to purchase war equipment through the US Army procurement budget.

Former Pentagon Officer Jim Towsend told Defensenews that Washington’s decision to buy S-400s is a smart way to kick Turkey out of the system, adding it would be better if such a move could force Turkey to turn back to buying American F-35s.

However, the CAATSA scheme is not generally applied to Washington’s closest allies as it will disrupt allies’ defense sovereignty, meaning that sanctions could put diplomatic ties at risk.

“The CAATSA sanctions are not designed to be punitive to a partner and ally that has got a sustainment issue or an operation or maintenance issue. We’re certainly not looking to disrupt that. Why? Well, we don’t want a partner’s sovereign defense capabilities to be degraded to put their readiness at risk,” Assistant Secretary of State for Political Military Affairs R Clark Cooper answered when asked about the U.S. would impose sanctions on India over their S-400 deal.

Turkey, India, and Egypt are among the countries that are standing up against American sanctions, since every country should have the right to bolster its defense by purchasing any military equipment it wishes.

L'articolo Why is the US Worried About Turkey’s Purchase of the Russian S-400 Defense System? proviene da InsideOver.

China will officially stop the import of solid waste starting on January 1, 2021, due to the mainland’s new “green” economic policy and environmental focus.

What’s Behind China’s Ban on Solid Waste?

Xinhua reports that the ban is the follow-up to the 2017 policy that stopped the import of 14 types of solid waste, such as a textile waste. China started purchasing solid waste in the 1980s and has been the world’s largest importer since then.

The waste import ban is not new, either. In 2019, several Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member countries returned tons of toxic waste to exporting countries such as the UK, Germany, Canada, and Hong Kong.

As BBC notes, the United States is the largest single plastic waste exporting nation, while the European Union (EU) is the biggest exporter of solid waste overall. A Greenpeace report said that 78 percent of the US plastic trash goes to countries with less advanced waste management systems such as Malaysia.

Buying and Selling Waste: All About the Money

Exporting and importing waste may sound negative and outmoded, but the reality is not that simple. As long as there is a supply of and demand for solid waste then the trade will continue. Patrick Moore, a veteran environmentalist and a former director of Greenpeace, told InsideOver that developed countries ship their waste to developing nations because companies in those countries want it.

“You cannot put a box of waste and send it if they don’t want it. The word waste is not right. If someone uses something, it is no waste. They will pay US $1 per pound for plastic waste and will create something to make money,” Moore said, adding that the word “dumping” is not correct, as developed nations sell their waste and the recycling cost is high in developed nations.

So, what about solutions?

Waste-to-Energy as a Potential Solution

Moore — who is now an independent environmentalist with Ecosense Environmental Inc. — highlights the use of unwanted combustible materials as energy, noting that this is in keeping with countries who are trying to turn to renewable energy.

“There is lot of unwanted waste — which is not good for recycling. Dirty plastic, dirty paper, pieces of woods full of nails from construction demolition. Those are perfectly good for burning and making energy, which is useful,” Moore explained.

Moore cited Japan and some countries in Europe with an advanced technology that converts waste into energy, saying that waste goes to landfill for recycling and is turned into energy.

A January 2019 report from the International Energy Agency (IEA) notes that China has the largest installed waste-to-energy capacity of any country globally, producing 7.3 gigawatts across 339 plants since the end of 2017. This sector has grown 1 GW annually in average for the past five years, representing the largest form of biodoverse energy and managing 100 million tons of solid waste per year.

The global market for waste-to-energy plants is projected to rise by 6.5 percent from 2020 to 2025. The European Union has 492 waste-to-energy plants that can generate electricity for 18 million people, while Japan has 380 waste-to-energy plants.

Waste-to-energy is more reliable than solar and wind energy as nobody can predict when the wind stops blowing and the sun stops shining. Also, solar and wind energy is more costly than waste-based energy.

“Places like hospitals need electricity 24 hours and backup power from diesel is expensive,” Moore noted.

Everybody is busy finding mistakes and making things look bad

Efforts to reduce pollution, stop killing animals, and removing toxic waste are positive ways to protect the environment and there are many worthy causes for environmentalists to get behind. However, Moore stated that some of the green movement’s campaigns are also misguided such as in the case of opposing waste-to-energy solutions.

“They are opposed to burning waste which is not suitable for recycling, coal, burning woods, resulting in the lack of support for waste-to-energy option,” Moore explained, adding that this is why there are few waste-to-energy plants in the US and Canada.

China’s import ban will primarily mean two things: it will make Beijing look good as they begin improving their energy production and make developed nations look bad — and miss out on a valuable renewable energy solution — as they continue to ship out tons of waste to other less-developed nations around the world.

L'articolo China to Ban All Import of Solid Waste in New Year proviene da InsideOver.

Five-member nations of NATO (France, Germany, Greece, the UK and Italy) have recently agreed to build a next-generation helicopter to replace the existing fleet starting in 2035. The news was announced on November 19 in a statement from the alliance.

NATO’s Next-Generation Rotorcraft Capability Program

Each participating country signed a letter of intent (LoI) to participate in the program which is called the Next-Generation Rotorcraft Capability (NGRC) program. The memorandum of understanding (MoU) is due to be signed in early 2022, and the collaboration is open to all the alliance’s members including others who wish to join on.

This collaboration comes amid the US military’s effort to develop its new medium-multirole aircraft through the Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA) competition, set to be completed by the end of 2020. 

The FLRAA will boost survival, air assault, and lethal capabilities suitable for Multi-Domain Operations in a theater such as the Indo Pacific, the US Army official website stated.

NATO’s Helicopter Fleet Will be out of Service Soon

The helicopter project indicates how the alliance urgently needs new rotorcraft as most of the NATO rotorcraft will be grounded in 2035. Therefore, the new fleet is expected to replace the aging ones-despite some design modifications in the future. The news was delivered by Col. Paul Morris, assistant head of air maneuvers for the British Army, in a recent presentation.

“The analysis suggests that’s about 1,000 airframes, and that’s not including those from the United States, that will be retired in and around that period. Operational analysis, not only says that there is a requirement to replace, but there is an enduring requirement for that capability in the medium space carriage, and high proficiency profiles,” Morris said in his presentation during the Vertical Flight Society’s 76th Annual Forum & Technology Display.

Most of the NATO medium-sized helicopters have been operating for around 40 to 60 years. Meanwhile, the latest NATO medium-sized helicopter (NH90) made its maiden flight in 1995.

Split Between the US and NATO?

Brandon Weichert – a prominent national security analyst – told InsideOver that NATO should have upgraded its medium-sized helicopters a long time ago, questioning the non-binding agreement despite the need for a medium-sized helicopter.

“I also thought it was interesting that when they made the announcement, the NATO, the may have members who did it, they, they, the Americans really weren’t involved. I mean, it was, it was left open for any NATO member to sign onto this initiative eventually, but the likes of Germany spearheaded it,” Weichert said, adding that there seems to be a growing split between Europe and the US in NATO.

“The actual agreement is instead a non-binding statement of purpose as if they were making a statement hoping that the US and other powerful partners will come in and underwriting the whole process from the get-go. So it’s very interesting that I think it indicates that only that there’s a divide amongst the European side of NATO and on ourselves in the United States.” Weichert said.

He added that the UK has world-class new aircraft carriers, but it does not have a medium-sized helicopter with such a capability to put on the Queen Elizabeth. Therefore, the UK wants NATO to build helicopters to offset the cost.

France and Germany Have Different Opinions About US Role

French President Emmanuel Macron said that Europe must be sovereign in defense, slamming German Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer’s recent statement in Politico that Europe still needs to rely on US military power in the future.

“I am in complete disagreement with the opinion article published in Politico by the German defense minister,” Macron said, adding that the US will respect its allies if they are sovereign regarding their defense decisions.

France’s intention to stay away from America’s shadow is because France is one of the only nuclear powers in Europe outside Russia with an independent military. While Germany is the continent’s economic powerhouse, Berlin is not interested in investing its resources in defense, as Weichert explained.

However, France still needs US logistical support for the former’s current operations in Mali, Weichert added. While NATO still needs the US, Washington now is focusing more on China—which is one of the world’s surging economic and military powers.

In 2017, US President Donald Trump complained that 23 out of 28 NATO members had yet to pay their defense obligations. Last June, Trump decided to pull American troops out of Germany, citing that Berlin had to pay their own military costs.

Different Priorities Among NATO members

NATO members have split over which issues should be the alliance’s top priority. While Europe’s eastern side may raise concern over Russia, the continent’s Southern part tends to focus on containing the flux of migrants to tackle terrorist attacks. While the West part may worry about climate change, Russia, and China.

Greece is also involved in an ongoing spat with fellow NATO member Turkey over the Eastern Mediterranean Sea. Even NATO members worry about Ankara’s closer ties with Russia after testing the latter’s S-400 defense system.

Is the New Helicopter Mainly Intended to Deter Russia?

This is the question that may come up to everyone’s mind, given Russia’s continuous effort to modernize its defense by focusing on laser and hypersonic weapons.

“I think that the medium-lift capability that they’re focusing on, because it’s pretty much every NATO rotorcraft needs to be upgraded and replaced. Still, it looks, it sounds like my read on it is they’re going to fixate on the medium-lift capability because yes, if there was something with Russia to erupt, they would need to be able to transport NATO forces, you know, rather rapidly,” Weichert said. “And the medium-lift capability allows them to do that. So yes, it does look like they’re focusing, they’re starting to say, Hey, Russia is, is a priority.”

More Comprehensive Dialog is Necessary

The alliance should narrow its gap among its members to modernize their military capabilities and discuss which issues to be prioritized first.

“Everything is too centralized. Some members are more capable than others. If you worry about Russia’s invasion, I think it is about time we have a real discussion. What country can fight against Russia’s invasion?” Weichert wrapped up the interview, adding that the Turkey issue can be one of the thorniest ones that NATO members should focus on.

L'articolo How Many NATO Members Does it Take to Build a Helicopter? proviene da InsideOver.

On Sunday, November 15 Iran and Iraq held talks to strengthen military cooperation between both countries who fought a bitter war in the 1980s.

The Recent Iran-Iraq Meeting

Iraqi Defense Minister, Jouma Anad, made a two-day visit to Tehran on Saturday, November 14 to meet with Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces Major General Mohammad Hossein Baqeri. Both worked to prepare a document on military cooperation which they will sign next week.

Anad and Bageri discussed several defense-related issues, such as a planned military exercise and enhancing security at common borders. Baqeri is optimistic the cooperation will strengthen Iraq’s military capability in combating terrorism, claiming that the US is sparking terrorism in the country that has long been Iran’s geopolitical enemy. 

Such an agreement will likely increase Iran’s influence in Iraq. Tehran’s Iraqi role already rose in importance when a Shi’ite leader took over in Iraq after toppling Saddam Hussein in 2003.

Understanding the Iran-Iraq War

On September 22, 1980, the war erupted when Iraqi troops invaded Iran’s oil-producing province of Khuzestan. The attack occurred one year after Iran ousted their US-backed monarch the Shah, marking the birth of Islamic revolution.

It is estimated the Iran-Iraq war claimed around 1.5 million lives. Even though many analysts argued that the contested Shatt Al-Arab River boundary triggered the war between both nations, other experts have different opinions about the war’s roots, since it involves several aspects, including the US and other parties’ intervention.

The war also cannot be separated from the regime change which occurred in both countries, as Williamson Murray and Kevin M. Woods in the book entitled the Iran-Iraq War: A Military and Strategic History (2014). In Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini came to power to overthrow the Shah Reza Pahlevi regime. In the same year, Saddam Hussein and the Baath Party succeeded in forcing then-President Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr to resign.

A truce ended the war without a winner in 1988 and both countries normalized diplomatic ties on August 16, 1990, when the peace accord was signed.

Post-War Iran-Iraq Relations

The US invasion of Iraq in 2003 pushed the Iraqi government further into the arms of Iran as it began to rely on cheap Iran construction materials. Under Saddam Hussein, Iran’s goods were widely smuggled through the border, a Euronews report revealed.

Iran also needs Iraq since it is a key export destination due to the US sanctions that have crippled Iran’s economy.

“Iranian companies are looking for somewhere full of consumers, as you can’t grow your sales in Iran now because things are tough,” explained Esfandyar Batmanghelidj of Bourse & Bazaar, a news and analysis website supporting business diplomacy with Iran.

Iran’s Influence in Iraq Politics

In November of last year, a US-based media published cables from Iranian intelligence showing Iran’s sizable influence in Iraq politics. In 2019, mass demonstrations in Iraq sparked by corruption and economic hardship ­turned into anti-Iran protests as rioters targeted Iran-related buildings.

No Iraqi politicians can be a prime minister without Tehran’s approval one of the cables revealed. Adil Abdul Mahdi— former Iraqi Prime Minister who resigned last May — was then considered a figure both Tehran and Washington accepted.

“According to one of the leaked Iranian intelligence cables, Mr. Mahdi, who in exile worked closely with Iran while Saddam Hussein was in power in Iraq, had a “special relationship with the I.R.I.” — the Islamic Republic of Iran — when he was Iraq’s oil minister in 2014,” the document stated.

What are Tehran’s Plans for Iraq?

This year’s military cooperation deal comes amid the UN decision to lift the arms embargo on Iran — which the US opposes. Previously in 2017, Iran and Iraq also inked a military accord, raising Washington’s concern given Iran’s role in Syria and Yemen.

This deal will pave the way for Iran’s defense equipment sale to Iraq, given that Iran continues to build up its weaponry despite the sanctions.

Iraq has been Iran’s main customer of Iran’s weapons. In 2014, Iraq’s procurement of Iran’s arms reached US$ 10 million, including anti-tank missiles, communication systems, sniper refiles, and many more, as Business Insider reported.

Furthermore, Iran plans to build its helicopters and sell them to Iraq, Islamic Republic of Iran Army Aviation (IRIAA) Commander Brig.-Gen. Yousef Ghorbani stated earlier this month.

“The Iraqi side was very willing to buy our parts and install night-vision systems on helicopters,” Ghorbani said after the meeting with the Iraqi Air Force.

Interestingly, Iran has also maintained a fleet of US-made helicopters since the 1970s. Now, Tehran has ambitions to produce its own, aiming to become one of the region’s military powerhouses and reduce imports from other countries.

The Iran-Iraq military deal is likely to mark a further strengthening of Iran’s influence in Iraq, which has been waning for some time. It should also serve as a caution of Iran’s resurgence into a regional military power despite sanctions pressure.  

L'articolo New Iran-Iraq Military Agreement Strengthens Tehran’s Influence proviene da InsideOver.

Three terrorist attacks have hit Saudi Arabia in the last few days. The first saw a Saudi man stab a security official at the French consulate in Jeddah, followed by an attack on a non-Muslim cemetery during a Remembrance Day commemoration attended by several European diplomats in Jeddah  on November 11. Then on November 12 the Saudi Embassy in the Hague came under an armed attack. The attempted assault took place in the morning, and resulted in several bullets being found lodged in the building.

Macron’s Recent Statements on Islam are Being Blamed for the Violence

All these attacks come following controversial statements made by French President Emmanuel Macron stating that Islam is a religion in a crisis and defending the display of satirical cartoons of the Prophet Muhammed as allowable under freedom of expression.

Macron’s remarks triggered protests in Muslim countries around the world. Some Muslims have also decided to boycott famous French beauty and fashion products such as Lancome, Garnier, and Channel. 

The incidents in Saudi Arabia are a particular headache for the wealthy kingdom which is set to host a virtual G-20 summit later this month.

ISIS Claims Responsibility for Jeddah Attack

The Islamic State claimed to be behind the attack on the Nov. 11 Remembrance Day ceremony, saying that the explosion was a protest against Macron’s statements related to the cartoon.

The terror attacks in Saudi Arabia can be seen from several perspectives given the planned withdrawal of US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan paved the way ISIS to make a comeback, Yusran, an international relations expert at Indonesia’s Budi Luhur University, told InsideOver.

“ISIS admittedto  being behind the attack, showing that the group is not finished yet in the Middle East. The sleeping cell is waking up again,” Yusran said. 

Despite slamming the attack on religious symbols, Saudi prince Mohammed bin Salman has also condemned extremism, vowing to combat extremists with “iron fists.”

Saudi Arabia and Wahabbism

Saudi Arabia is often associated with its ultra-conservative brand of Wahhabist Sunni Islam. The kingdom – home to Islam’s holiest sites of Mecca and Medina – has been known for years for financing terrorist-related groups.

A document from the US Treasury revealed that Riyadh has financed terrorist groups through a charity organization. In 2003, a senior US treasury official called Saudi Arabia an epicenter for the terrorist group Al Qaeda.

The Need for Dialog is Increasing

The call for dialogue to bridge the misunderstanding between Muslim nations and France regarding the definition of freedom of expression has mounted since last month’s beheading of a French school teacher who used the cartoon of Muhammad that was published in the satirical outlet Charlie Hebdo as part of his lesson.

Tunisia and Qatar proposed a Western-Islamic conference to minimize misunderstanding and tackle obstacles following the terror attacks, AFP reported.

The conference aims to end the stigma that Islam is a religion of terror and will be focused on emphasizing that such an attack has nothing to do with Islam. No further details about the proposed conference have been provided.

The cartoon of Muhammad and satirical depictions of other religious figures are fairly accepted in secular countries with laws that separate church and state such as France. 

However, Muslim nations see it as completely unacceptable blasphemy, raising questions about whether France needs to redefine its liberal values as stated in the Constitution.

Beware of Fake News

The anti-France sentiment is prone to the widespread of misleading or false news on social media platforms. One of the most widely-shared fake news items is an article about the alleged retirement of French soccer star Paul Pogba from France’s national team due to Macron’s statement on Islamist terrorism. The news was untrue. 

The Manchester United midfielder filed a lawsuit against the UK-based Sun for using his name in the fake news. The former Juventus star – who led France to clinch its second World Cup title in 2018 by scoring a crucially-important goal – condemned all forms of violence but also made it clear he is tired of irresponsible media outlets that print inaccurate information in order to cause a stir and get clicks. 

As the need for dialog continues it is important to avoid even further provocation by approaching social media posts and reports with a skeptical eye.

L'articolo What’s Next After Recent Terror Attacks in Saudi Arabia? proviene da InsideOver.

Democratic candidate Joe Biden won the recent US presidential election after the world waited for the counting process with bated breath. The former vice-president under Barack Obama defeated incumbent Donald Trump by gaining 290 electoral votes.

The big question now is who Biden will pick for key positions in his administration. Previously, Biden promised that his cabinet would be the most diverse, consisting of individuals from various backgrounds, from more people of color to greater representation of America’s LGBT community.

“Men, women, gay, straight, center, across the board, Black, white, Asian—it really matters that it looks like the country because everyone brings a slightly different perspective,” the 77-year old said in April.

Will Susan Rice be the Next Secretary of State?

The choice for Secretary of State will be the most anticipated given America’s impact on the rest of the world and the important role played by its head diplomat. Former national security adviser and ambassador to the United Nations (UN) Susan Rice has been predicted to replace Mike Pompeo as upcoming Secretary of State.

Rice is a veteran diplomat who sparked controversy because over the way she handled the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012-when she was Washington’s ambassador to the UN. Rice falsely claimed that an American movie that insulted Islam triggered the attack, snubbing the allegation the militant groups might have been behind the incident.

“I acknowledge that there were some words and phrases I uttered on Sunday, Sept. 16, that I wish I could restate with more precision, less certitude, or not have said at all. None of them materially changed the substance of what I said, but they offered fodder for my critics to pick at,” she wrote in her memoir Tough Love in 2019.

Former US President Barack Obama later appointed Rice to be National Security Adviser, a position that does not need Congressional approval.

Other candidates are Obama’s former deputy secretary of state Anthony Blinken — who served as Biden’s foreign policy advisor — and career diplomat William Burns, who once was also Obama’s deputy secretary of state.

Restoring ‘American Values’ Overseas

Bureaucrats play a vital role in formulating and preserving all policies, including foreign policy. Therefore, core principles are not expected to shift whoever becomes the POTUS.

However, everything changed under Trump as he tended to make decisions unilaterally such as US withdrawal from several crucial agreements including the Paris Climate Accord. 

“I can’t tell what Biden’s foreign policy will look like, but he is expected to restore American values. The U.S. under Trump does not seem to care about other countries’ prosperity,” said University of Indonesia International Relations Professor Hikmahanto Juwana.

“Also, Trump shocked the world with his unpredictable acts. He pulled out from the Iran nuclear deal, wanted to leave the World Health Organization (WHO), and moved the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Last but not least, Trump did not want to listen to bureaucrats. He sacked anyone he wanted, tweeted openly about everything,”  Juwana said in an interview with InsideOver.

How Interventionist Will Biden Be?

It is feared that Biden’s foreign policy will be more interventionist because of the support he has received from senior military officials. Juwana did not elaborate furthermore on such a premise.

“We can’t predict yet about whether Biden’s policy will be interventionist or not. However, at least those retired officials see that Biden will be more cooperative with the Congress, that’s my opinion so far,” he commented.

John J.Farmer, Jr, director of Rutgers University-New Brunswick’s Eagleton Institute of Politics, echoed similar sentiments when commenting on the impact of the US election on the use of presidential power.

“If Biden is elected then, given his history in the Senate, we may see more of an attempt to work more collaboratively with Congress, at least initially. There will always be tension between the president and Congress. Still, his legislative background may enable him to work with Congress to a greater extent than Bush, Obama or Trump,” Farmer told Newswise a day before the election.

Investors are Waiting for Biden’s Economic Team

Biden’s victory sent a positive signal to the market, with hopes that the new POTUS will focus on recovering the domestic economy hit by the pandemic as well as ease trade tension and boost global cooperation.

Several female candidates are reportedly being closely considered for Treasury Secretary, namely Lael Brainard (the Fed Governor), former Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren, and former Fed boss Janet Yellen. Another candidate being considered is formr deputy Treasury Secretary Sarah Bloom Raskin, according to Marketwatch.

Bernie Sanders for Labor Secretary?

Once one of Biden’s rivals in the presidential primary, Senator Bernie Sanders will reportedly be tapped for the post of Labor Secretary in a Biden admin. 

The Vermont-based senator-is an experienced politician who has been fighting for labors rights and social welfare for decades. The nomination of the elderly social democratic senator sounds good news for American workers affected by the pandemic.

While the Labor Department does not create a policy, it has flexibility in interpreting and implementing existing law, as Jacobin mag explained. For example, former Labor Secretary Robert Reich successfully implemented the Family and Medical Leave Act and increased minimum wage under the Bill Clinton administration.

How Many Republicans Will be in Biden’s Cabinet?

Past presidents such as Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama involved candidates from the opposing parties in their cabinets. However, as such a tradition was over during the Trump administration, it is feared that a Republican candidate’s inclusion will create a rift within the Democratic Party.

If Republicans control the Senate, it is unlikely for Biden to put progressive politicians such as Warren and Sanders in his cabinet, Norm Ornstein, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, told USATODAY.

The Democratic party advocates issues such as labor protection, human rights, and environmental conservation. Therefore, activists hope that Biden will include progressive politicians with a renowned reputation in those areas in the cabinet.

Tapping a candidate from an opposition party is familiar as a sign of unity in the Cabinet. However, Biden is now facing a divided Republican party: those who support and oppose Trump as Matt Bennett, executive vice president of public affairs at the centrist think tank Third Way, recently warned.

“You get the downside of having someone in your Cabinet that’s not aligned with you ideologically and alienates the left, without getting the upside of bipartisanship,” Bennett told Politico. :Does nominating a Never Trumper really bring people together?” 

L'articolo Joe Biden’s Choices for His Upcoming Administration and What they Mean proviene da InsideOver.

Donald Trump’s 2016 election victory shocked many. The billionaire had no political background and introduced an anti-immigration policy and other controversial issues during the campaign.

After four years in office, Trump has slammed numerous international agreements and taken bold steps by quitting the Iran nuclear deal signed in 2015 (JCPOA) and pulling out from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, a Cold War treaty meant to terminate the US and Russia (then the Soviet Union) short-range and medium-range missile stock. Trump pulled out after accusing Russia of violating the agreement.

Despite his controversies, numerous countries will be severely hit if Trump loses in this November’s election.

North Korea

Despite the failure to find peace at their three summits, ongoing sanctions, and North Korea’s missile testings, Pyongyang would prefer Trump to Biden, who has vowed not to meet with North Korea’s Kim Jong-Un unless the young leader offers a concession.

Biden is expected to adopt his former boss (then US President Barack Obama) policy called “strategic patience” by refusing to meet with the North Korean leader unless Kim has something to offer or the regime slowly collapses.

Arry Bainus, an international relations professor at Padjajaran University, Bandung, Indonesia, appreciated Trump’s courage to meet face to face with Jong-Un.

“Regardless of the summit’s results, at least Trump is willing to hold talks face to face with Jong-Un. They can express what’s on their minds,” Bainus told InsideOver two days before the final debate of U.S. presidential candidates.

Even though Jong-Un has tested missiles several times, Bainus claimed that the tension in the region was not that worrying thanks to the summit regardless of the outcome.

Trump and Jong-Un met three times (2018 in Singapore and 2019 in Vietnam and the demilitarized zone). Those summits faltered due to both countries’ different views on denuclearization.

The US wants a total ban on nuclear arsenals while North Korea wants a gradual economic embargo lift.

China

Trump accused China of conducting unfair trade practices. Then he imposed a stricter tariff on imported goods from China, triggering the trade dispute between the world’s two biggest economies.

However, China would benefit from Trump’s ongoing presidency, given the billionaire’s unilateral decision to quit several international agreements. Trump’s exit from international treaties and organizations paves the way for China to exert its global influence.

If Biden wins, Bainus said the tension might focus on China’s alleged repressive act on Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang Province and Tibet, as Democrats presidents often talk more about human rights issues.

Russia

Russia has been accused of being behind Trump’s unexpected win in 2016. Even though US-Russia ties have experienced some highs and lows (such as the demise of the INF), at least there is a positive side from the relationship under Trump.

Russia and the US have agreed on each other’s proposals to extend the New START treaty after Moscow expressed its willingness to freeze its warheads.

“I would expect the US to align more closely to the EU and be more hostile to Russia. This would be consistent with the nation’s stance toward the end of the Obama Administration,” said Marc Joffe, a senior policy analyst at reason.org, in an e-mail interview with InsideOver.

Russia has been hit by sanctions several times, from the annexation of Crimea (2014), the meddling in the U.S. election (2016), and the allegations that Moscow was behind the poisoning of a former Russian agent and his daughter (2018).

Saudi Arabia and Israel

Saudi Arabia and Israel will likely suffer if Trump loses the upcoming election as Biden will reactivate the JCPOA, the Iran deal signed under the Obama administration. This deal is strongly opposed by both Israel and Saudi Arabia. 

In addition, Biden may decide to focus on human rights issues such as the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi which shocked the world in October 2018. Turkey and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) reports claimed that Saudi’s Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) was involved in the killing.

Foreign Policy Unlikely to be Biden’s Focus

If Biden wins, Joffe predicted that the 78-year-old politician will focus more on domestic issues as the US is dealing with the increase in the new numbers of coronavirus cases.

“Also I think there will not be much focus on foreign policy in 2021. The US is preoccupied with the coronavirus and the economic dislocations it has caused. Biden has an aggressive domestic agenda, which will take a lot of work to implement.”

“The situation is very different from 2009 when Democrats were elected, in part, because voters were unhappy with the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars,” Joffe explained. “Now that the US has fewer troops in these theaters and takes far fewer casualties, interest in foreign policy issues is much less.”

L'articolo Which Countries Will be Most Affected if Trump Loses Next Week’s Election? proviene da InsideOver.

Russia finally agreed to restrict its nuclear warheads for a year as the offer for the New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) treaty, which expires in February 2021.

“Russia proposes to extend the New START Treaty by one year and is ready, together with the United States, to make a political commitment to ‘freeze’ the number of nuclear warheads held by the parties for this period,” the statement said. 

The Kremlin is committed to strictly implementing such a proposal as long as there will be no extra demands from Washington, as Russia’s Foreign Ministry added.

The White House welcomed Russia’s last-minute offer and said it is ready to agree with Moscow.

“The United States is prepared to meet immediately to finalize a verifiable agreement. We expect Russia to empower its diplomats to do the same,” US State Department Spokesperson Morgan Ortagus stated on Tuesday.

How Many Warheads do the US and Russia Have Currently?

According to data from the SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) yearbook 2019, the US has 6,185 warheads, while Russia has 6,500. All warheads include the deployed and other warheads-refers to the stored and reserved ones awaiting dismantlement.

The New START: What You Need to Know

The New START is a treaty that restricts the numbers of deployed warheads up to 1,550 and 700 dispatched missiles and bombers, all below the Cold War limit.

Then-US President Barack Obama and then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed the pact in 2010. In comparison, the first treaty was inked in July 1991, five months before the breakup of the Soviet Union.

The pact also covers an aggregate limit of 800 deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers, and heavy bombers for nuclear arsenals, NTI reported.

The New START is the only nuclear-related treaty left between the U.S. and Russia after the termination of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF), signed in 1987 and eliminate both countries’ ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and missile launchers within range of 500-1,000 kilometers.

The US halted the treaty in early 2019, citing that Russia had violated the deal and the pullout aimed at China’s military build-up in the Pacific. Russia followed suit then, and Washington formally quit the agreement on August 2, 2019.

What’s Behind the Extension?

The world greeted Russia’s last-minute decision to freeze its warheads after a tough negotiation with relief.

“Why did Russia agree? In my opinion, the process cannot be separated from the U.S. effort to include China in the treaty. However, China refused to join in (as it has a smaller number of warheads than Russia and the U.S.). China’s exclusion is a part of the negotiation, too (as Russia supports China),” Yusran, international relations expert at Indonesia’s Budi Luhur University, told InsideOver. 

A closer relationship between the US under President Donald Trump and Russia is one reason why both countries have agreed on each other’s proposals.

“Russia allegedly played a role in helping Trump to win the election four years ago. In my opinion, the New START extension can be part of the effort to boost Trump’s electability ahead of the election in November,” Yusran added.

Former White House

Officials and Arms Control Experts Cast Doubt on Agreement’s Verification

Arms control experts and former White House officials questioned the agreement’s inspection protocol as it takes time to negotiate the detail on how the inspection and verification are implemented.

“It would be very, very difficult to verify such an agreement without an intrusive inspection protocol, and … there are a lot of serious questions whether you could negotiate such a protocol in two weeks,” Frank Rose, a Brookings Institution analyst and former Obama administration official, told Reuters.

One of the major achievements from the New START is the treaty simplifies the verification without sacrificing any vital information, equipped with the most progressive verification system for counting warheads.

The new START introduces verification of actual and updated numbers for the first time, Union of Concerned Scientists explained.

The most important thing is what will happen after one year.

L'articolo Why Did Russia Agree to Freeze its Number of Nuclear Warheads? proviene da InsideOver.

Former White House National Security Advisor John Bolton recently warned that North Korea is more dangerous than ever due to Pyongyang’s recent progress in its nuclear capabilities.

North Korea Unveils Powerful New Missile

North Korea recently introduced its latest intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) during the military parade on the 75th anniversary of the Workers’ Party last weekend. South Korea has raised concerns over its neighbor’s multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) as it could target them in an attack.

North Korea’s latest missile could be interpreted by the US as a sign to boost its missile defense systems in South Korea. Also, the military parade will prompt the Trump administration — or whoever wins the upcoming presidential election — to re-think the best way to negotiate with the communist state after the three previous summits (2018 in Singapore, February 2019 in Hanoi, and June 2019 after the G-20 summit) failed to produce results. 

‘Monster’ ICBM Missile and North Korea’s Arsenal

The military parade that displayed North Korea’s latest “monster” missile drew widespread international attention. The ICBM was carried out by a transporter erector launcher (TEL) and paraded around Kim Il Sung Square in Pyongyang. The TEL has 22 wheels, indicating that the ICBM is the largest North Korea has ever had.

In addition to the ICBM, North Korea also unveiled a submarine-launched ballistic missile called Pukguksong-4. Pyongyang has two types of ICBMs: the Hwasong-13 that can travel up to 5,500 km and the Hwasong-14 with a range of 10,058 km.

The Hwasong-15 — which North Korea usually relies on — was carried out by the 18-wheeled TEL. In other words, the latest ICBM is around 25 percent bigger than the Hwasong-15 which already has a considerable range of 12,874 km.

North Korea has also tested the Hwasong-14 which can reach 10,000 kilometers if launched with a maximum trajectory. With such a specification, the Hwasong-14 could be the first ICBM that could be used to hit a target as far as New York City.

Several experts have assessed these missile capabilities but vary on whether or not they can actually hit numerous targets simultaneously.

“What North Korea has shown us, what appears to be a new liquid-fueled ICBM that seems to be a derivative of what was tested back in late 2017 — known as the Hwasong-15 — is much bigger and clearly more powerful than anything in the DPRK’s arsenal,” explained Harry Kazianis, senior director of Korean studies at the Washington DC-based Center for the National Interest.

What Should Washington Do?

North Korea’s latest military showdown has disappointed the US and South Korea, given that both Pyongyang and Washington have yet to produce a concrete result from the three meetings between North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and US President Donald Trump. 

Secretary of Defense Mark Esper said that North Korea’s missile is a serious threat to global security and stability. Close US allies Japan and South Korea have also expressed their discontent publicly.

Trump and Kim have failed to produce a concrete result from the three meetings. However, efforts are still underway to bring North Korea to the negotiating table. Current US National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien said he hopes that there will be a negotiation with North Korea after the upcoming US election on November 3.

Sanctions relief could be one of the options taken by the White House to achieve peace with North Korea as well as refraining from conducting military exercises in the peninsula and increasing civil society participation. As the US election is approaching, some experts are wondering what such a policy could look like.

“Paradoxically, the next president is going to be more free to take a different approach than any past administration, so if we can make some better choices in this space I am actually pretty hopeful about where we can end up,” said Van Jackson, a senior lecturer in international relations at Victoria University of Wellington.

L'articolo How Dangerous is North Korea? proviene da InsideOver.