The Russian invasion of Ukraine, on February 24, 2022, will be remembered among the 21st century’s pivotal events, a turning point in world history.

There is no aspect of today’s international relations and global economy that has not been touched by the conflict and the reactions it has provoked. Barely three decades after the Berlin Wall collapse, a Cold War 2.0 is looming with a global geopolitical realignment affecting world trade, supply chains, and financial networks.

The renowned French anthropologist and historian, Emmanuel Todd, has even claimed that World War III began; he also added that the leaderships involved show a worrisome “nihilistic vertigo”.

The conflict is perceived in Moscow as existential for Russia. However, there are indications that it could be existential for Western democracies as well. NATO’s Secretary General has even claimed that the real risk is not an escalation but a victory of Russia.

Whoever will prevail will get a bigger voice in dictating the future world order rules; particularly, if will continue to be under the exclusive US leadership or will move towards an authentic multipolar setting.

After this conflict, nothing could be the same again; but for transatlantic relations, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has been a real panacea.

In 2019, then US President, Donald Trump, threatened to withdraw the United States from NATO if its other members had not increased their military spending. He was followed by the French President, Emmanuel Macron, who argued that “What we are witnessing is NATO brain death” and that “America’s ally is turning its back on strategic issues.”

In the summer of 2021, then, US, and NATO, ruinously withdrew from Afghanistan. The humiliating exit from Kabul raised serious doubts about the Alliance and it stirred strong transatlantic tensions.

Today the situation has reversed, and NATO members should thank Vladimir Putin’s reckless decision for that. If one were to think of a celebratory moment of the revived transatlantic relation, nothing would do better than a bust of the Russian leader provocatively placed inside the North-Atlantic Council great hall in Brussels with the inscription “The man who saved the Atlantic Alliance” underneath.

Today NATO and the EU are cohesively confronting Russia in Ukraine by providing massive economic and military aid, and the strongest sanctions ever imposed to Moscow. The latter include the end of all Russian oil and gas supplies to Europe, the freezing of as much as $350 billions of Russian funds deposited in Western banks, as well as a significant increase of European countries’ military spending. Germany alone announced a huge and unprecedented €100 billion increase. If NATO further eastward enlargement towards Ukraine has been momentarily stopped, the one towards Northers Europe appears successful with the forthcoming entry of Finland and, if Turkey will consent, Sweden.

President Biden’s brave visit to Kiev on February 20th has been the iconic moment of such sequence of successes.

It should not go unnoticed, however, that the war has triggered reactions which go far beyond the European continent and the transatlantic partnership.

Last May, the Atlantic Alliance launched its new Strategic Concept by claiming that: “The Russian Federation is the most significant and direct threat to Allies’ security and to peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic area… [and to] the rules-based international order. “

China has now been included in the Concept for the first time by emphasizing that: “[its] stated ambitions and coercive policies challenge our interests, security, and values… It strives to subvert the rules-based international order… The deepening strategic partnership between the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation…attempts to undercut the rules-based international order…”   

It was a radical political evolution. If Russia was Europe’s main energy supplier, China is still the EU’s top trading partner, not to mention that it is the United States’ too.

Both NATO and the EU have then embraced not only America’s stance towards Russia, but also its growing concern about China. It is all built upon Biden Administration’s narrative that has framed nowadays geopolitical moment as the inflection point of an epic confrontation between democracies and autocracies.

To confront Russian and Chinese autocracies, the renewed transatlantic partnership is even ready to stomach an increased, dangerous, coordination between Moscow and Beijing, unprecedented since the heights of the Cold War in the1950s and 1960s. NATO and the EU, apparently, are also giving up to the globalization as we have known it for the last three decades. Traditional energy and supply chains are changing or are re-considered, trade routes are re-oriented and words like near-shoring, re-shoring and de-coupling are now frequently used in the economic and trade jargon. 

While the whole outcome and cost of this geopolitical shift are still uncertain, there is no doubt that Europe has already borne the higher price.

The diversification of energy supplies from Russia is presenting hefty bill for European consumers and for their economies’ competitiveness. Sanctions against Russia, and those looming against China, risk putting all supply chains under significant stress and to disrupt a quite fruitful trade relationship. Among this policy shift unintended consequences, there are also higher inflation and raising interest rates. Both could radically change the last four decades economic patterns.

The Chip Act adopted by Biden Administration last October, to stop the selling of semiconductors to China, might trigger a major technological war which could somehow hobble the ongoing Fourth Industrial Revolution, not to mention the rising tensions about Taiwan.

The so-called IRA (Inflation Reduction Act) recently adopted by Washington to boost the green energy transition is creating strong commercial tensions with the Brussels.

Unfortunately, despite all Western predictions, sanctions have not yet brought Russia to its knees. According to the IMF, in 2024 the Russian economy is even predicted to grow by 2,1%, more than Germany and United Kingdom. 

Furthermore, the sanctions against Moscow have been adopted only by the Western democracies and few other Asian like-minded countries.

The strengthened transatlantic bond, then, has not been matched by a similar increased world leadership of the so-called Global West. Western democracies’ long-held belief that the world revolves around them is challenged. A different world is taking shape. Although confusely, the so-called Global Rest appears on the rise and developing its own geopolitical consciousness. An increasing number of emerging economies are perceiving themselves as alien from many western narratives, visions, and policies, as well as from the tightly Western-led global financial system. De-globalization is looming, and de-dollarization too.

A global poll published on February 22^nd has confirmed previous assessments. To a large extent, Global Rest seems believing that “US and European support for Ukraine is driven by the desire to protect Western dominance”. In other words, it would have nothing to do with defending democracy and Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

A long list of countries – mostly Global West’s traditional partners – are showing disaffection towards the US-led rules-based world order that since 1945 has been shaping global politics. Algeria, Argentina, Egypt, Indonesia, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, just to name a few, perceive such order as biased, sometimes hypocrite, and often imbued with double standards; its rules seem formally valid for all but a few selected Western countries. These emerging economies are queuing to join what appears to be the vanguard of the Global Rest, the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), the G7’s real global alter ego.

No doubt that Russia has been effectively isolated from the Global West; no doubt either that the transatlantic partnership has been strongly reinforced. However, there are also discomforting indications that the Global West appears more and more isolated from the Global Rest. Prevailing against autocracies requires winning hearts and minds globally, as much as among Western constituencies.

The well-deserved condemnation and punishment of Russia notwithstanding, the conflict could have been better used by the EU as a unique chance to give content to its widely claimed strategic autonomy, particularly by pushing harder for negotiated solutions while maintaining the support to Ukraine.

The EU has instead opted for being the US’ junior partner, and a Polish-Baltic traction institution. It is dismaying that even the recently exited UK seems having a greater political influence in Brussels than before.

A quite successful re-strengthening of the transatlantic relationship has been accomplished. It is a crucial outcome considered the uncertain times ahead.

Maybe it could have been achieved better.

If the price that Europe, especially, has paid was worth will become clearer only in the coming years.

L'articolo The war in Ukraine and the Transatlantic Partnership proviene da InsideOver.

The United States has levied new sanctions on Iran. Thursday’s move now excludes eighteen Iranian banks from the international system.

These Iranian banks that had thus far evaded the majority of re-imposed US sanctions were the specific target of the new measures. Foreign, non-Iranian financial institutions now also face penalties for conducting business with Iranian institutions. Earlier sanctions banned most major commercial sales and limited Iran’s oil trade.

Iran is Now Mostly Cut off From the Entire International Financial System

The latest sanctions increase the pressure on Iran and prevent the Iranian government from “gaining unlawful access to US dollars,” said Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. The measures virtually cut off Iran from the international financial system.

The sanctions target 16 Iranian banks for their role in the country’s financial sector, one bank for being owned or controlled by another sanctioned Iranian bank, and one military-affiliated bank, Mnuchin said in a statement. Foreign companies that execute business with those financial institutions have 45 days to cease relations or face “secondary sanctions.”

“Our sanctions programs will continue until Iran stops its support of terrorist activities and ends its nuclear programs,” Steven Mnuchin said in a statement, adding the administration seeks to cut off Iran’s “illicit access to US dollars.”

Europe Criticizes the Strict Sanctions

The extension of the punitive measures to foreign banks faces criticism from within Europe. European banks can now be subject to sanctions for conducting business with Iran that were previously permitted.

The sanctions are due to come into force in 45 days and thus after the election. Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden announced during the election campaign that he aims to focus on renewed diplomacy in the conflict with Iran. The multitude of active sanctions makes resetting relations between Tehran and Washington difficult, even under a potential Biden Administration.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Jawad Zarif criticized the sanctions.

“Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the US regime wants to blow up our remaining channels to pay for food and medicine,” Zarif wrote in a recent tweet. “Iranians will survive this latest of cruelties. But conspiring to starve a population is a crime against humanity. Culprits & enablers—who block our money—will face justice.”

What Economic Options Does Iran Have Left?

The White House conducts a “maximum pressure” strategy against Tehran. President Donald Trump unilaterally terminated the “The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action,” known commonly as the Iran nuclear deal or Iran deal, in 2018, and reintroduced several sanctions against Iran while it coerced third countries away from Iranian oil under the threat of sanctions.

Iran’s business is thus almost exclusively limited to deals with China and the United Arab Emirates. The country’s overall foreign trade, barring oil, is estimated to have amounted to $24.6 billion between March to August of this year.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo reaffirmed the White House’s commitment to the current approach on Thursday, stating that “our maximum economic pressure campaign will continue until Iran is willing to conclude a comprehensive negotiation that addresses the regime’s malign behavior.”

Implications of the Latest Sanctions

Critics of the maximum pressure approach point out the redundancy of sanctions. Iran is already so heavily sanctioned that another set of restrictions does not make a considerable difference to the government. Tehran’s resilience may instead make it turn even more firmly to China, undermining the West’s leverage even further.

However, the reality is that with companies from other countries now facing US sanctions for conducting business with Iranian banks, the latest sanctions are likely to isolate Iran further and to an unprecedented extent. The Iranian banks are now effectively excluded from the international financial system, depriving Iran of desperately needed financial oxygen.

With the country already scrambling for dollars to pay for its imports, the new sanctions create an urgent liquidity crisis for the regime by making foreign exchange challenging to access. The results will be accelerated inflation by a double-digit rate and more expensive imports, all while the Iranian rial has hit record lows in recent weeks and with an Iranian population that is no longer impervious to the consequences of the regime’s conduct.

L'articolo America Intensifies Pressure on Iran with New Round of Crushing Sanctions proviene da InsideOver.

Questions are being raised again over the effectiveness of sanctions against North Korea after a recent United Nations (UN) report revealed that North Korea has successfully built miniature nuclear weapons. The UN document also states that the North Korean regime has achieved a key breakthrough in its nuclear program by creating a nuclear warhead small enough to be carried on a nuclear missile.

The Recent Revelations

The UN said on Monday that Pyongyang is violating international sanctions aimed at curbing its nuclear program by exceeding a cap on petroleum imports and sending its workers overseas, including a former Juventus footballer.

Furthermore, the UN Security Council said an annual 500,000 barrel cap on imports of refined petroleum products had been broken in the first five months of 2020 alone.

Considering US President Donald Trump has committed himself to bringing peace to the Korean peninsula, the world would normally look to his country for a reaction to a report like the one the UN has produced recently. Regardless, his administration is powerless until the winner of the November election has been declared.

Sanctions Against North Korea are Failing

Nonetheless, this news, alongside a series of revelations in the last month that have exposed how North Korea is evading US sanctions, calls into question the US’s approach toward North Korea. Earlier this month, NBC News obtained a trove of confidential bank documents which revealed how North Korea moves illicit cash across borders despite international sanctions to block Pyongyang’s access to the global financial system.

The suspected laundering by North Korea-linked organizations totaled more than $174.8 million over several years, with transactions approved by American banks like JPMorgan Chase and the Bank of New York Mellon.

Yet that does not mean sanctions have had no effect on Kim Jong-un’s regime.

North Korea’s UN Ambassador Kim Song told the UN General Assembly on Tuesday that despite his country’s “reliable and effective war deterrent for self-defense,” international sanctions were a hindrance to the North Korean leader’s plans to accelerate his nation’s economy. This could be interpreted by the Trump administration as an admission that sanctions are damaging North Korea’s economy.

Nonetheless, regardless of who wins the US election in November, peace seems unlikely for many reasons.

Cooperation with China is Out of the Question

Firstly, the West needs Beijing’s help to tackle North Korea, but a coordinated response with China is out of the question for now. Even if Joe Biden wins the US election, he will be forced to adopt a tough stance toward Beijing because of the coronavirus originating from there. Yet China provides North Korea’s economy with a critical lifeline, so assuming the current tension between Beijing and Washington does not escalate into a cold war, cooperation between the two powers may be necessary at some stage.

Kim is aware that the number of sanctions against his regime will increase if there are no cuts to Pyongyang’s nuclear program, yet that has not stopped him from supposedly developing miniature nuclear weapons. It is clear he cannot be trusted to commit himself to peace, which means negotiations are a waste of time.

North Korea’s Regime Must Go

The only way peace can become a reality would be if North Korea’s regime collapsed, and this looks like a strong possibility. A long monsoon season damaged 96,300 acres of farmland and 16,680 homes, including roads and rail lines. Also, food shortages caused Kim to respond by ordering pet dogs to be confiscated for food.

This is a regime in trouble and if it refuses to accept outside help, its end is inevitable.

The more North Korea defies international sanctions, the less likely its leader is to commit to a reduction in its nuclear program. No matter who occupies the White House from January onward, they will probably struggle to ensure Kim commits to ending his nuclear program. To give peace a chance, the current regime in Pyongyang must go, and it must go as soon as possible.

L'articolo Does North Korea’s Mini-Ballistic Missile Program Make Peace Unlikely? proviene da InsideOver.

Iran and North Korea are once again taking center stage in American politics as US President Donald Trump intends to proceed with issuing an executive order imposing fresh sanctions on Iranians linked to his country’s energy industry, despite key European nations warning that he does not have the legal power to do so.

The President has declared that anyone trading arms with Iran will remain subject to sanctions beyond October, the date the embargo was due to be lifted.

Suspected North Korean Money Laundering

Meanwhile, the effectiveness of sanctions is being questioned after NBC News obtained a trove of confidential bank documents which reveal how North Korea moves illicit cash across borders despite international sanctions to block Pyongyang’s access to the global financial system.

The suspected laundering by North Korea-linked organizations totaled more than $174.8 million over several years, with transactions approved by American banks like JPMorgan Chase and the Bank of New York Mellon.

During a time when Trump is keen to avoid war with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, the US President has resorted to sanctions as a method of economic combat with the leaders of the two rogue states.

North Korea Could Be Building up its Military Arsenal

Trump has also used sanctions as a means of persuasion to force Rouhani and Kim back to the negotiating table. Throughout the first term of his presidency, Trump’s sanctions have failed to convince the Iranian and North Korean leaders to negotiate new peace agreements that would lead to a reduction of US sanctions, in exchange for the gradual end of Pyongyang’s and Tehran’s nuclear programs.

The Daily Mail reports that South Korea’s incoming military chief Won In-choul is monitoring developments in North Korea, after satellite photos have revealed a flurry of activity at the Sinpo South Shipyard where Pyongyang builds submarines. This could be the first time that the country’s regime will showcase its largest missiles since 2018.

With only less than two months before a presidential election, it is unlikely that Trump will achieve a landmark deal with North Korea to convince voters that he is the man who can tackle Kim.

Sanctions Can’t Do Everything

When President Obama issued fresh sanctions on Iran in July 2010, Nicholas Burns, the most senior professional US diplomat in the Bush administration, said they failed because countries like China ignored them. Yet the former president was able to eventually persuade the EU, Russia and China to support his 2015 Iran deal.

The BBC’s Jonathan Marcus argued that sanctions can only work if they are universally applied. This is the issue that Trump faces – no other nation is following his lead on Iran or North Korea, mostly because he has fallen out with the nations involved in the 2015 Iran deal. If the US President wins November’s election, he must persuade his country’s allies to follow his lead on Iran and North Korea.

Victor Cha, who was the director for Asian affairs at the National Security Council from 2004 to 2007, said Trump needs China’s help to tackle Jong-un as Beijing supports Pyongyang’s economy. Tensions between Washington and Beijing are only likely to escalate in the future, which means the two nations are unlikely to cooperate on peace in North Korea.

Trump Can’t Solve These Problems on His Own

Given Pyongyang’s recent problems regarding flooding and the economic effects of the coronavirus, it appears that the only way to defeat North Korea now is by hoping that its regime collapses, which means Trump could deploy more sanctions in the future to cripple Kim.

Trump bragged that he will ‘have a deal with Iran within four weeks’ of his re-election, and to do so he must persuade his allies to support a deal that cuts US sanctions in exchange for the gradual end of Tehran’s nuclear program, as outlined by French President Emmanuel Macron last October. Considering the US’s allies refused to support Washington over its latest announcement on sanctions against Iran, it remains questionable as to whether they would support such a deal.

If sanctions are a means to an end, then Trump has failed to deploy them effectively against Iran. North Korea’s money laundering scheme proves they are finding ways to break their own US sanctions. To end the threat that Iran and North Korea pose to Washington, Trump needs to be more imaginative.

L'articolo Have US Sanctions Against Iran and North Korea Failed? proviene da InsideOver.

As the Greek, Cypriot and Turkish dispute on the status of the islands and the maritime boundaries among the three countries continues, EU Foreign Ministers held a Gymnich meeting on Friday August 28 to discuss possible sanctions against Turkey.

The meeting was an informal summit to discuss about potential action against Turkey, in case the negotiations between Ankara and the EU for a peaceful solution with Athens and Nicosia reach a dead end.

Borrell’s Statements on the Conclusions of the Meeting

Josep Borrell, the High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security, provided a Press Conference shortly after the end of the meeting, summarizing the key points that were discussed among the participating Member States.

Firstly, Borrell made clear that the primary target of the participants is always the promotion of European interests, and in this respect, he expressed general solidarity with Cyprus and Greece. Also, Turkey has been advised to abstain from any unilateral action, so the appropriate climate for a productive dialogue could be achieved.

The EU High Representative carefully prepared his statements, avoiding any provoking announcements or direct threats towards Ankara. Borrell mainly focused on the mutual interests between the EU and Turkey and he highlighted that both parties should walk the “fine line” that would be beneficial for everyone involved.

In his brief statement he repeatedly mentioned the words dialogue and negotiations, indicating that first and foremost the EU is seeking deescalation through means of cooperation, and the scenario of imposing sanctions on Turkey should only be seen as a last resort.

Proposed Measures and Sanctions Against Turkey

If a compromise is not timely in a timely manner, then the European Union would be ready to expand a list with individuals and private entities, that are involved in the disputed Turkish drilling in Greek and Cypriot maritime zones. If these measures prove to be inadequate, then the European Council will possibly take further collective action which will be discussed on September 24 and 25.

Borrell clarified that the EU countermeasures would adopt an escalating and proportionate approach. For the time being only individuals, involved in the illegal drilling activities constitute the list of potential sanction targets. In later phases this could be also applied to vessels and shipping companies. The regime of economic sanctions and exclusion from corporate activities could also be extended to a ban for Turkish entities on using European ports, facilities, and technology.

The EU High Representative also stated that priority will be given to the dispute over the drilling activities across the Eastern Mediterranean and the presence of Turkish vessels within Greek or Cypriot maritime zones, as those issues entail a constant danger for the peace and security in the region.

It should be mentioned here that the EU officials seem ready to discuss additional issues with Turkey as part of the proposed negotiations at a later point, even though Greece has insisted that the talks should only focus on the disputes around the maritime rights, the continental shelf and the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) of the countries involved.

Lessons from the Past: Lukewarm EU Sanctions Against Turkey

The rising discord in the Aegean Sea since late July 2020, is not the only example of the regional Turkish aggressiveness in the recent past.

By July 2019, the European Union has repeatedly urged Turkey to cease immediately at least two illegal drilling operations west and northeast of Cyprus, but Ankara kept showing no intention of compliance. The unauthorized drilling activity has been taking place not only in the country’s internationally recognized and clearly defined EEZ but also in the immediate proximity of the Cypriot territorial waters – occasionally overlapping them.

In response the European Council decided to proceed with a number of restrictive measures against Turkey; among others, the negotiations on the Comprehensive Air Transport Agreement stopped, blocking an important step for Turkish aviation, since a possible agreement could bring billions of euros as revenue for the Turkish air transports, enhance the connectivity between Turkey and major European destinations, and significantly decrease the price of the air tickets.

Financial assistance to Turkey for 2020 would also be decreased while the European Investment Bank was advised to limit its loaning in-country activities. In addition an asset freeze and a travel ban have been imposed on two individuals that were directly involved in the unlawful drilling process.

Turkey Has Violated the Sovereign Rights of an EU Member State

As mentioned above, Turkey has openly violated the sovereign rights of an EU member state, and constantly ignored the European calls to stop the provocations and join the negotiating table. The European Institutions decided to response in a very mild way, that barely affected Ankara.

The sanctions imposed in 2019 showcased that Europe had no real intention to send a decisive message in order to block the Turkish aggressive agenda, and the whole process has been actually aiming to mitigate the political reactions of certain member states.

European Institutions have proved that sanctions can work as a great means of pressure in the field of international politics. For instance back in 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea, the EU adopted a set of aggressive sanctions against Moscow, from targeting hundreds of key individuals through asset freezing and travel bans, to significantly restricting the bilateral trade relations in numerous sectors, that have been vital for the Russian economy.

This action led to the rapid deprecation of the rubble and a significant financial crisis across the Russian Federation. It should be highlighted that Ukraine is not an EU member state.

The example of the 2019 measures combined with the current EU rhetoric towards Turkey clearly indicate that the sanctions under discussion will not be too harsh and Ankara would easily handle them.

We will have a more solid picture by late September once the Special European Council has been completed; if a solution has not been reached by then, the most probable scenario is that Turkey will keep pushing its current claims without changing anything in their practices, and the response from the European Union will be nothing more than a symbolic one.

L'articolo Is the EU About to Sanction Turkey? proviene da InsideOver.

For decades, North Korea has proved to be a menace on the international stage and many US presidents have struggled to reach an agreement with Pyongyang to curb its nuclear program.

Is North Korea Collapsing on its Own?

Despite this, events over the last couple of weeks seem to suggest that the North Korean regime led by Kim Jong-un may be beginning to collapse from within.

According to North Korea News, the country’s ruling Workers’ Party elite will convene a plenary meeting on August 19th “to consider an issue of crucial significance.” Kim is expected to attend and possibly announce significant domestic and foreign policy changes. ABC News reports that the Workers’ Party intends to ‘develop the Korean revolution’ and increase the party’s “fighting efficiency.”

North Korea’s Many Challenges

During the December 2019 plenum, the North Korean leader warned citizens to expect economic hardship as his regime would no longer pursue talks with the US or seek sanctions relief for taking steps toward denuclearization. Kim was right to anticipate that 2020 would bring a plethora of issues that his regime would face later on in the year.

North Korea has received no sanctions relief as the US’s efforts to persuade Pyongyang to roll back its nuclear program in favor of the lifting of sanctions has failed. But North Korea has been able to resist the crippling effects sanctions have had on its economy thanks to its trade with China, even though that has declined in recent years.

In 2018, Chinese imports from Pyongyang plummeted by 88 percent. UN numbers show that Chinese imports of North Korean coal, iron ore and other natural resources increased dramatically from 2010 onward. Yet Beijing imported no coal from North Korea between January and March 2018. This shows that North Korea depends upon trade with China.

The Coronavirus Has Devastated North Korea’s Trade Relationship with China

Nonetheless, China’s economic fortunes this year have been affected by the global fallout caused by the coronavirus. Jong-un also took drastic action to curb the spread of the pandemic in his own nation. He ordered the city of Kaesong to be locked down last month, suspecting a defector who crossed back over the border from South Korea of introducing the virus to the north. But it is COVID-19’s economic effects that have had a more severe impact on North Korea.

The New York Times suggests that the country’s exports to China, impacted by the border shutdown, sank to $27 million in the first half of this year, a 75 percent drop from a year ago. Imports from China dropped to 67 percent, or $380 million.

There is some good news for Kim, as a Bloomberg report highlights that China’s industrial production has picked up growth and stopped shrinking in the retail sales sector. But China’s strong economic performance alone won’t save North Korea.

North Korea is in Severe Crisis

North Korea’s fortunes have also been affected by external factors. An unusually long monsoon season, as well as torrential rains in August, triggered floods and landslides in the nation. The natural disaster had damaged 96,300 acres of farmland and 16,680 homes, including roads and rail lines. To make matters worse, Kim refused to accept any international aid.

This is a regime that is in trouble. For decades, North Korea has been able to withstand sanctions and isolation from the outside world, but its luck may be running out now. As the country struggles with food shortages as well, the North Korean leader has ordered pet dogs to be confiscated in Pyongyang so that they can be used for meat. He claims that the pooches represent “Western decadence” and ‘a trend tainted by bourgeois ideology,” yet this is more of a desperate sign of a government that has reached its peak while failing to feed its own population.

North Korea’s situation is alarming. If its regime does not find a way to spark an economic recovery and fast, it is more than likely that both the economy and the government will collapse internally. As US sanctions are a contributing factor toward North Korea’s economic growth, Kim must ask himself an important question: are nuclear weapons more important than a starving population?

L'articolo Is North Korea Starting to Collapse from Within? proviene da InsideOver.

For seventy-five years, the US has maintained a significant military presence in Germany. These troops are a vestige of the force that defeated Nazism and held Soviet expansion in check during the Cold War. Today, they symbolize America’s enduring commitment to European peace and stability, and help project Washington’s power worldwide. But that could be about to change.

US Troop Reduction in Germany

Consistent with his pledge to dial down US military deployments overseas, US President Donald Trump is on the cusp of recalling almost a third of America’s German garrison, reports suggest. This would see upwards of 9,000 troops based in the central European country either returned home or redeployed elsewhere. 

Money, it seems, is the critical factor. Germany, like many of Europe’s NATO states, is failing to meet the defense bloc’s requisite military expenditure, 2% of GDP. Indeed, spending just 1.4% of national income on arms, the government of German Chancellor Angela Merkel is among the group’s most miserly members.

Should this frugality be punished with military withdrawal, however? It’s a question that has Washington divided. 

Proponents of Trump’s approach point to the nation’s changing geostrategic priorities. No longer is a bulwark needed to ward off Soviet encroachment from the East, an omnipresent danger that dissipated with the end of the Cold War. 

Republicans Oppose Trump’s Move

But for those on the other side of the argument, the threat from Russia remains potent enough to merit an armed presence in Germany. 

“[Withdrawing troops] would significantly damage US national security as well as strengthen the position of Russia to our detriment,” wrote 22 Republican lawmakers in a letter to the White House, adding: “We believe that signs of a weakened US commitment to NATO will encourage further Russian aggression and opportunism.”

Containing the Kremlin’s expansionist instincts is but one function of America’s German garrison. From the Ramstein Air Base outside of Mannheim — a city in the country’s southwest — operations in Africa and the Middle East are launched and coordinated. Likewise, the neighboring Landstuhl medical center cares for US service personnel injured in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan.

Downsizing these facilities would be a blow both to America’s projection of global power and to Germany itself, which has always welcomed the stabilizing presence of US troops. Russia, critics say, would be the only winner from Trump’s proposed military withdrawal.   

Russia Welcomes Trump’s Decision

Little surprise, then, that Moscow’s foreign ministry welcomed the news with enthusiasm. “We would welcome any steps by Washington to scale down its military presence in Europe,” said spokeswoman Maria Zakharova. “Such steps would undoubtedly help reduce confrontational potential and ease military and political tensions in the Euro-Atlantic region.”

But for Russia, there could be a sting in the tail. Rumours in Washington suggest that soldiers siphoned from German garrisons could be redeployed to Poland, bolstering an ever growing US military presence in the Eastern European state. For officials in Warsaw – which meet NATO’s 2% defense spending benchmark — this is promising news.

“If you look at the strategic needs of the alliance, it’s obvious that we should have more troops and more defensive capabilities on the eastern flank,” said Pawel Jablonski, Poland’s deputy foreign minister.   

Moscow, unsurprisingly, has strongly warned against such action, branding it flagrant provocation by the West. This rebuke ought to worry the German government, which has invested a huge amount of time, effort, and capital into the Nordstream 2 project, a gas pipeline that runs from Russia into Europe via the Baltic Sea. Fraying East-West relations threaten to put the brakes on the scheme, which is months away from completion. 

The Growing Rift Between Europe and the US

Fearing the consequences of Moscow’s deepening energy dominance of Europe, Washington has fiercely opposed the scheme. The dispute is emblematic of a widen foreign policy rift between NATO’s historic allies. Be it with the US’s crippling sanctions regime against Iran — which European nations, including Germany, France, and Britain, are working to sidestep — or America’s showdown with Chinese firm Huawei (which much of Europe continues to do business with), it’s clear that both sides of the Atlantic are not singing from the same hymn sheet. 

With an election approaching, this matters more to Trump than ever before. In 2016, he struck gold with a simple message: why should American taxpayers subsidize the security of parsimonious partners? If he can do that again — starting with Germany’s US troop contingent — he’ll likely come out a winner once again. 

L'articolo Worries Around Trump’s Plan To Pull US Troops Out Of Germany proviene da InsideOver.

Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro said he was open for talks with his American counterpart Donald Trump with hopes of improving ties with the US and ending a prolonged political crisis in Venezuela. However, it is uncertain whether the US is willing to do so due to Trump’s hard stance on Venezuela’s socialist government.

During the interview with the Washington Post, Maduro said he was willing to sit down with Trump, suggesting that both countries can benefit from the recovered ties based on mutual respects.

 “If there’s respect between governments, no matter how big the United States is, and if there’s a dialogue, an exchange of truthful information, then be sure we can create a new type of relationship,” the former bus driver told the Post.

Maduro also slammed the White House’s hardliners such as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and former national security adviser John Bolton for supporting economic embargoes that have worsened Venezuela’s financial crisis (triggered by the sharp drop in global oil prices in 2014).

“I believe Mike Pompeo has failed in Venezuela and is responsible for Donald Trump’s failure in his policy toward our country. I think Pompeo lives in a fantasy. He’s not a man with his feet on earth. I think Trump has had terrible advisers on Venezuela. John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, Elliott Abrams have caused him to have a wrong vision,” Maduro added.

How did the US react?

In response to the Post interview with Maduro, Bolton tweeted that negotiations are unlikely, adding that Maduro should be an exile in either Cuba or Russia, among the countries that back the former aide to the late Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez.

“Maduro tells the Washington Post he wants negotiations with the United States? The only negotiations we should have with Maduro are what he wants for lunch on the plane that will take him to permanent exile in Cuba or Russia. Viva Venezuela libre.”

Maduro tells the Washington Post he wants negotiations with the United States? The only negotiations we should have with Maduro are what he wants for lunch on the plane that will take him to permanent exile in Cuba or Russia. Viva Venezuela libre. @JGuaido

— John Bolton (@AmbJohnBolton) January 19, 2020

An Overview of Venezuela’s Crisis

The economic crisis in the oil-rich nation turned into the political discontent due to the growing distrust in the socialist regime. In 2017, mass rallies took place to protest against Maduro’s new constitution, which was seen as a threat to democracy.

In May 2018, Maduro won re-election against his contender, Henri Falcon, meaning that the socialist politician would secure another six-year term in office.

Maduro’s victory divided Venezuela, as well as Latin American nations and the world. Venezuela’s opposition groups and the West accused Maduro of rigging the vote. They called for a fresh election, while countries such as China, Russia, Turkey, and some of the leftist nations such as Bolivia supported Maduro and slammed the West for interfering in Venezuela’s domestic politics.

An unknown politician from the opposing side Juan Guaido became a self-proclaimed president, the US, and its European allies supported. Earlier this month, the 36-year-old man was sworn in as the head of the National Assembly despite being blocked from entering the parliament building.

Will the talks with Trump be a reality?

Maduro’s call for talks with Trump came as no surprise, given that in early 2019 he confirmed that Venezuela’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Jorge Arreaza had secretly met with the US envoy to Caracas in New York. The incumbent expressed his readiness to talk with Trump anytime, anywhere, without specifying more detail.

Two senior Venezuela officials confirmed Maduro’s statement, but they had no authority to talk publicly about the meeting. Both officials admitted that Arreaza and the US envoy Elliott Abrams had met twice at Washington’s request.

In August, Norway mediated the talks between Venezuela’s government and opposition representatives. However, the negotiations faltered.

In the recent interview with the Washington Post, Maduro hoped that he could meet with Trump and asked the POTUS to remove the economic sanctions that have worsened the crisis.

Despite Venezuela’s mismanagement in the oil sector and corrupt government, the US-backed sanctions have killed tens of thousands and halted Venezuelans to access food and health care, according to the Centre for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) report in 2017.

The sanctions are depriving Venezuelans of lifesaving medicines, medical equipment, food, and other essential imports. This is illegal under US and international law and treaties that the US has signed. Congress should move to stop it,” the report said as The Independent quoted.

Unlike Bolivia’s President Evo Morales who resigned following protests against his re-election, Maduro’s position is still strong thanks to the military support he has enjoyed so far.

Trump has yet to respond to Maduro’s call so far. However, as long as the US does not want to recognize Maduro as Venezuela’s legitimate leader and insists on sanctions, the talks (if they take place) unlikely to create peace for Venezuela.

L'articolo Maduro’s Ready To Talk To Trump, No Response From The White House So Far proviene da InsideOver.

North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un has announced: “offensive measures” which he says are necessary to ensure his country’s security and sovereignty. The deadline he has set for the US to respond expired on Dec. 31. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is staying patient.

Kim Jong-un: It’s Time For ‘Military Countermeasures’ Against The USA

In the ongoing nuclear dispute with the United States, North Korea’s dictator Kim announced Dec. 30 that it will be necessary to take “military countermeasures” for the country’s security and sovereignty. His statements were made at a meeting with senior members of the North Korean Communist Party in Pyongyang on Monday, according to state media. Kim reportedly spoke for seven hours at the meeting, which was held to discuss an unspecified “important document.”

Also, at the party meeting, Kim reportedly said that the time had come for a “decisive turn” in economic development. North Korea’s economy is being crushed, not least because of international sanctions. The central committee proclaimed a change of political course last year, agreeing that the country must concentrate more on the economy in the future.

Traditional North Korea New Year Speech Jan. 1

Kim seeks to deliver his traditional New Year speech on Wednesday, which is considered a highlight of the year in North Korean politics. Two years ago, Kim threatened the world with nuclear weapons, but at the same time communicated his willingness to talk with South Korea. Six months later, Kim met with President Trump at their first summit.

Most recently, Kim gave the United States until the end of the year to resolve the dispute over the nuclear armament of North Korea by mutual agreement. Negotiations have not progressed since Kim’s failed meeting with Trump in Vietnam in February. If no agreement is facilitated, Kim said he will take an unspecified “new path.”

What To Expect In Kim’s New Year’s Speech

Observers are eagerly anticipating Kim’s speech, as it will likely provide the world with clarity as to what precisely the “new way” eludes to. However, it can be expected that it may include the announcement of testing a long-range missile with nuclear warheads. Moreover, South Korea anticipates that North Korea may lift its moratorium on testing nuclear bombs and long-range missiles.

Any of these occurrences would be a major issue for the US, not merely due to security concerns, but as a testimony for what former National Security Advisor Bolton in his recent interview called “no visible process” despite continuous contrary claims from Trump. Since 2011, Kim has launched more than 100 missiles and conducted four nuclear weapons tests, which is more than his predecessors Kim Jong-il, and Kim Il-sung launched over nearly three decades.

The Trump Administration’s Position

Despite the potential implications, the Trump administration has pledged not to be pressured by Pyongyang. US National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien said he did not want to speculate on possible missile tests; however, he did say the US was willing and able to counteract any measures taken by the regime in North Korea.

Trump himself has warned North Korea not to break its commitment to nuclear disarmament. With a view to Kim, Trump wrote on Twitter: “Kim Jong Un is too smart and has far too much to lose, everything actually, if he acts in a hostile way. He signed a strong Denuclearization Agreement with me in Singapore.”

Where The UN Fits Into The North Korea Picture

Meanwhile, the UN Security Council is scheduled for an informal meeting on Monday to consider a Russian and Chinese proposal to ease sanctions against North Korea. It will not be more than a diplomatic gesture, due to the virtual certainty of a US veto. The sanctions imposed on North Korea in 2016 and 2017 aim to make it financially harder for Pyongyang to conduct its nuclear and missile programs.

Whatever Kim may or may not reveal on Wednesday, the US has minimal options at this stage other than buy time and contain the threat North Korea poses through continuous appeasement. North Korea, at the same time, will lose the leverage it holds over the situation in precisely eleven months and the presidential election, especially if Trump wins.

L'articolo North Korea Threatens Offensive Measures Against The United States proviene da InsideOver.

Ever since the United States pulled out of The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and followed it up with sanctions on Tehran, the Islamic Republic has found itself gripped in an economic crisis. The JCPOA, better known as the Iran nuclear deal, was a linchpin of Iran’s potential re-entrance into economic prosperity and international status. Now that dream is a nightmare. Negative growth rates, falling oil exports and the non-materialization of promised foreign inflows have put the country in a tough spot, forcing it to seek mediation from elsewhere. 

Iran Wants Japan To Help Out

First it was France’s Emmanuel Macron that Tehran placed its hopes in to help salvage the nuclear deal and ease US pressure. This time, it’s Shinzo Abe of Japan. And for that purpose, Iran’s Rouhani touched down in Tokyo to meet his Japanese counterpart. 

Tokyo enjoys close relations with Washington, especially the current president, while still maintaining friendly ties with Tehran, putting it in a good position to be a possible mediator between the two countries. In fact, earlier this June, Abe became the first Japanese prime minister to visit Iran since 1978. There was hope that he could help calm things with the US, albeit an unrealized hope.

Another meeting in just a year suggests growing desperation in Tehran on the economic front, which has time and again brought Iranian citizens to the streets en masse as financial belt-tightening hits them hard. The most recent instance occurred when Iran’s government raised fuel prices to pay for social support benefits, resulting in massive protests that saw over 160 Iranians killed. In an attempt to quell unrest and salvage its nuclear deal, Tehran has been knocking on the doors of different powers which could help alleviate the crisis or possibly break its impasse with Washington. 

What Transpired During The Abe-Rouhani Summit?

The meeting between Rouhani and Abe saw the announcement of Japan’s plans to send naval troops to Middle Eastern waters to protect its vessels. However, this won’t be part of the US-led coalition announced earlier in November after a series of attacks in the Gulf on international merchant vessels, including the capture of a British tanker by Iran. 

According to Reuters, the planned Japanese operation is set to cover high seas in the Gulf of Oman, the northern Arabian Sea and the Gulf of Aden, but not the Strait of Hormuz. Given the deployment won’t be associated with US-led coalition, Tehran hasn’t opposed it. 

Rouhani also sought the help of his host in maintaining the nuclear deal with Washington. But Abe made clear his expectations that Iran will abide by the agreement and “fulfill the constructive duty for peace and stability in the region.” He also said the Japanese would “try to fulfill our role to ease and stabilize the tension in the region.”

After the meeting, Rouhani tweeted a photo of him and Abe with the caption: “I welcome any effort that could boost economic exchanges, especially in the energy sector, and increase oil exports. As long as it preserves our national interests and be in the #JCPOA context. Other parties must also keep up to their commitments.”

Japan used to be a major buyer of Iranian oil, but the issue was not addressed at the recent bilateral meeting.

Iran Announces Plan To Restart Nuclear Program

On Monday, Iran revealed plans of redeveloping its Arak heavy water reactor which, though short of breaching the terms of the JCPOA, shows Tehran’s growing appetite for pursuing the nuclear road. The closure of Arak was part of the 2015 nuclear deal. This isn’t the first such instance either. In early November, the country stopped an International Atomic Energy Agency inspector from visiting its nuclear site while also injecting uranium gas into its Fordo plant. 

Treading A Fine Line

Rouhani is currently in an awkward position with an unhappy population on the one hand that wants economic recovery and the hard-line military-religious leadership on the other pressuring him to be tough on the United States. Although Rouhani has ruled out any negotiation as long as the US-led sanctions remain, he has yet again shown willingness to reach out to Washington with his actions in Japan. In fact just after the meeting, Abe had a call with President Trump briefing him about the summit. 

Nonetheless, the takeaway here is that Tehran is slowly signalling its intent to restart the nuclear program, while largely avoiding the blame, too, since it is Washington that tore up the mutually agreed upon deal and has been playing hardball ever since. 

L'articolo Iran Seeks Japanese Help For Truce With US proviene da InsideOver.