US Defense Secretary Mark Esper visited four North African states last week, reviving American efforts to reshape its focus on the continent. In February, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made a tour of several African nations in a bid to increase ties with Washington. The Trump administration was said to be reevaluating the US commitment to operations in the Sahel, but was clear that it wanted to do something different on the continent.

First African Trip for Esper

Esper has held his position as head of the Defense Department since July 2019, but his trip to Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Malta was his first visit to the continent. It’s not unusual, however, for his department to not pay the continent the same attention to Africa that’s afforded areas such as the Middle East and Asia; the last time a defense secretary from Washington visited any African state was in 2006, as CNN reported.

However, with operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria driving terrorists out of the Middle East, many extremist fighters have found refuge in the Sahel. Recently, France has been the primary Western state spearheading counterterrorism operations out of Mali, but that battle has been uphill, a problem exacerbated by Malian tribal politics.

Whereas Pompeo’s trip was more economically and politically-oriented, Esper’s naturally sported more military overtones. The main purpose for the Trump administration dispatching Esper was two-fold: to strengthen military partnerships to enhance the counterterrorism security apparatus on the continent and convince states to choose the US over China and Russia for their needs.

Esper’s greatest challenge for his trip lied in Algeria where Washington is hoping to capitalize on shifting political waters that might be more favorable to the US. For the past 60 years, the state has predominantly relied on the Soviet Union and Russia for military supplies. Although the US is always seeking stronger military alliances, often these entail weapons purchase agreements, and could be viewed as the driving factor.

In return, Washington also gains a foothold wherever it sells arms and technology. Not only can it gain a friend across the globe and more options from which to stage operations, it also gains insight into other nations’ internal defense workings.

China and Russia Are On Washington’s Mind

In Algeria’s case, the US relationship has essentially been nonexistent, giving the Trump administration a far-out goal to strive for.

“We don’t engage them quite as much because their ties have been towards others,” a Pentagon source explained to CNN. “There’s a chance to maybe push the door open a little bit in expanding our bilateral relationship with them.”

Behind Russia, China is the next largest supplier of weapons for Algeria.

“Today, our strategic competitors China and Russia continue to intimidate and coerce their neighbors while expanding their authoritarian influence worldwide, including on this continent,” Esper said at an event at the North American Cemetery in Carthage, Tunisia. “At the same time, violent extremists continue to pose a threat not only to regional stability, but also to our homeland. The United States’ enduring partnership with like-minded countries — including here in North Africa — is key to addressing these challenges.” 

Washington’s goal is to partner with other states to offer an alliance that isn’t hostile and malicious like Russia and China, he said. Only with the the US can African states retain their sovereignty and avoid answering to Beijing or Moscow.

Algeria is at a Turning Point

Esper’s sales pitch to Algeria comes at the right time. Following pro-democracy protests that forced out President Abdelaziz Bouteflika last year, there is hope a new constitution will pass via referendum next month. One change would include the ability for the nation’s armed forces to be deployed internationally and take part in training exercises, held by the UN, African Union, or the US.

If the new Algerian government is willing once a new constitution is approved, the US is keen to make it a regional partner. The state could prove vital should Washington decide to take a more active role in combating terrorism in the Sahel. 

“Algeria has always been considered by the Americans as a ‘pivotal state’ whose vulnerability can engulf the whole region if it is affected by jihadists,” said Algerian political scientist Mansour Kedidir. Buffing Algeria with a US military partnership could also ward off a threat in the east posed by extremists in Libya.

Region Ripe for Dealmaking

To put it simply, with French and UN Peacekeeping forces unable to gain ground in the Sahel, Algeria could play a critical role should terrorism spread further across North Africa. Washington saw an opportunity open with the new political climate and Esper has made a play to that end.

The US defense secretary also signed 10-year military agreements with Tunisia and Morocco. Both states have boasted strong ties with America, particularly since the Arab Spring saw Tunisia emerge as a successful democracy. Washington considers both to be major Non-NATO allies in the region and they are key cogs in American counterterrorism operations across North Africa.

Malta Resists Agreeing to SOFA

Esper also stopped in Malta, meeting with the state’s prime minister and president. Washington’s goals with Malta are less ambitious as the island state is a comparatively smaller power in the Mediterranean. However, it does have a vital port that could be harnessed to boost maritime security.

The US has been trying to convince the Maltese government to agree to a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), which would govern foreign troops deployed within Malta’s borders. Washington wants it so American soldiers can have greater authority on Hurd’s Bank, a common smuggling route. 

Instead, the Maltese government proposed a weaker agreement which the US rejected, so the likelihood of a SOFA coming to fruition with Malta continues to elude US politicians. 

Esper’s tour of North Africa is an overt sign that Washington is gearing up to make a push to defend its influence across the region. With China and Russia gobbling up weapon sales that could be going to American producers and regional instability driving demand, it’s America’s turn to project power. Visits to Tunisia and Morocco were mostly formalities, but Algeria has great potential for future US partnerships if it can be convinced to forsake Moscow and Beijing.

L'articolo Washington Tries to Win Over Algeria as Regional Conflict Increases proviene da InsideOver.

In recent weeks, the Trump administration has made rapid progress on normalization of relations between certain countries that have been hostile to one another for decades.

Firstly, US President Donald Trump signed a deal that normalized relations between Israel and the UAE, which was then followed by a deal that strengthened economic ties between Kosovo and Serbia.

And now, the US President has done it again by announcing a landmark deal to normalize relations between Bahrain and Israel.

This is a Historic Achievement for Trump

For decades, most Arab states have boycotted Israel, insisting that they would only establish ties once the Palestinian dispute had been resolved.

Bahrain has become the fourth country in the Middle East – following Egypt, Jordan and the UAE – to recognize Israel since its founding in 1948.

Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu both welcomed the deal, as did the UAE.

However, both Palestine and terrorist group Hezbollah were quick to condemn the agreement.

This is a historic achievement for Trump and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who has been instrumental in forging these deals for his father-in-law in his capacity as senior advisor to the US President.

The Bahrain-Israeli Deal Could Affect the US Election

The Bahrain-Israeli deal will affect Trump domestically. Although the latest opinion polls suggest that the US President is on course to lose this year’s election, Middle Eastern politics could have an impact on specific groups of voters that the Republicans need to win over if they have any hope of ensuring Trump returns to the White House in November.

A Pew research poll in July showed 8 in 10 white evangelicals still intend to vote for Trump. Mark Tooley, editor of Providence, a journal that focuses on Christianity and foreign policy, believes that the US President’s foreign policy successes will convince those who were “tottering on the edge that God’s support remains.”

Time reports that Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council, one of the largest evangelical advocacy organizations in the US, says that Trump’s Middle East accord that was signed earlier in the year is unlikely to dissuade many evangelicals from voting for Trump, even if Israel suspended its annexation of Palestine.

A major Jewish donor also told Time that peace in the Middle East “is a real feather in his (Trump’s) cap with the Jewish voters.”

Iran and Turkey Will Feel Increasingly Isolated

The significant impact of the Bahrain-Israeli deal will be felt in the Middle East. The pact will isolate both Iran and Turkey further.

The growing threat from Tehran has no doubt pushed many nations who used to be hostile toward Israel further into Jerusalem’s arms before the Palestinian dispute has been fully resolved. Growing insecurity made it easier for Trump to sign peace deals with both the UAE and Bahrain.

There will now be increased pressure on Saudi Arabia to normalize its relations with Israel too.

The Times of Israel suggests that Bahrain would not have proceeded with the Bahrain-Israeli deal without Riyadh’s blessing.

Will Saudi Arabia Normalize Relations with Israel?

The Saudi Government allowed an Israeli El Al jet to fly over Saudi Arabia to the UAE for the first time on August 31, but it is unlikely that Riyadh will be normalizing relations with Israel soon.

Despite this, the more Iran poses a security threat to the Saudi kingdom, the more likely they are to forge their own deal with Netanyahu, particularly if the US pushes for one behind closed doors.

Countries that cut off their ties with Israel in the past may be persuaded to reforge them again because of the increasing threat that both Turkey and Iran pose to the Middle East. For example, in 1999, Mauritania established diplomatic relations with Israel, but severed ties again in 2010.

Either way, the Bahrain-Israeli agreement ensures that there may be more deals like this one in the future as long as Iran and Turkey continue to push many Middle Eastern nations closer together.

L'articolo What Impact Could Trump’s Bahrain-Israeli Peace Deal have? proviene da InsideOver.

Kosovo and Serbia have both thrashed out an agreement, hailed by US President Donald Trump as a “major breakthrough.” The deal has reaffirmed pledges to establish highway and railway links but left progress toward political normalization on hold.

Details of the Agreement

Both nations – part of the former Yugoslavia – agreed, for a year, to halt campaigns advocating for and against normalizing political ties.

Trump stated that Serbia had also committed to moving its embassy to Jerusalem, and Kosovo and Israel agreed to normalize ties and establish diplomatic relations.

Serbian President Aleksander Vucic said Friday’s deal represented a huge step forward, while Kosovo Prime Minister Avdullah Hoti said it should lead to mutual recognition between the two nations.

The Kosovo-Serbia Pact Will Have Historic Implications

Since former Serbian leader Slobodan Milošević brought Kosovo directly under the Serbian government in 1989, war and an ethnic cleansing broke out in the 1990s, and relations between the two countries have soured since.

After Kosovo declared its independence in 2008, Serbia refused to recognize the country’s legitimacy during that time.

The EU has tried to normalize relations between the two countries since 2011. The Brussels Agreement laid out an agreement of principles that governed the normalization of relations, one of those principles being the integration of the Serbian minority in northern Kosovo. However, it failed to get anywhere.

The Kosovo-Serbia pact signed on Friday will have historic implications. Although Jasmin Mujanovic, a political scientist who specializes in Eastern Europe, told Al-Jazeera that it does not represent a “massive breakthrough,” it is the first step toward peace between two nations that have been hostile to one another for a significant period of time.

The Deal Provides Israel with Increased Security

Following the recent UAE-Israeli agreement, Trump’s latest peace deal will provide Israel with further security as 95.6 percent of Kosovo’s population are Muslim, which shows that the US President has led the way in ensuring that nations with a Muslim majority can recognize Israel’s legitimacy.

Serbia’s move to relocate its embassy to Jerusalem demonstrates that Trump has succeeded in persuading other nations to regard the city as the capital of Israel, following his own controversial decision to relocate the US Embassy there three years ago.

Trump’s latest deal will also strengthen the economic ties between Serbia and Kosovo. At the end of 2018, Kosovo increased custom duties on imports from Serbia to 100 percent, after Belgrade blocked Kosovo’s attempt to join Interpol. In addition to this, Kosovo decided to upgrade its security force into an army, which Serbia regarded as a threat that could trigger a military response from Belgrade.

By agreeing to establish highway and railway links, the Kosovo-Serbia deal will pave the way for economic integration.

Progress Still Needs to be  Made Toward Normalizing Relations

France and Germany tried to find a concrete solution to the impasse between Kosovar and Serbian presidents, Hashim Thaçi and Vučić on April 29, 2019, after talks were suspended in 2015, but the discussions failed as Kosovo refused to lift its tariffs on Serbia.

The Kosovo-Serbia agreement shows that the US still has a role to play in bringing peace to the world. However, the deal failed to fully normalize relations between Kosovo and Serbia. Progress still needs to made here. In 2016, Vucic said Belgrade must resolve the dispute between Kosovo and Serbia. This signifies that the political will to achieve peace has been there among his administration for some time.

Full Normalization Has a Long Way to Go

Ms Anne Guegen, Deputy Permanent Representative of France to the United Nations, said in 2019 that full normalization will depend on dialog between Belgrade and Pristina. Hopefully Trump’s agreement is the first step toward dialog, but that also depends upon the political will of the Serbian and Kosovar governments.

Whilst not as significant as the UAE-Israeli deal, the Kosovo-Serbia agreement should boost the morale of the two countries’ leaders to normalize relations in the future. Either way, it is an excellent diplomatic maneuver from Trump before the 2020 election.

L'articolo Trump’s Kosovo-Serbia Deal Will Have Historic Consequences proviene da InsideOver.

Granted, it has become somewhat easy to dismiss anti-Trump comments by Democrats and the progressive media as mere partisanship, biased dislike or ideological blindness. However, the narrative changes if loyal, life-long conservatives turn their backs on a supposedly Republican president, fight him and openly call for the election of a Democrat in lieu of the own candidate.

Introducing the Lincoln Project

The latter is not the script of the latest political TV show, it’s a reality in the modern US. The Lincoln Project is campaigning against Trump and in favor of Joe Biden. And while Trump’s base will not be deterred by the apparent failures of the president and likely die politically on the Trump hill, many Americans are now being encouraged in realizing that they, and indeed, the nation, deserve a better president. The Lincoln Project thus strives to illuminate undecided and former — now dissatisfied — Trump voters.

The Lincoln Project is presently the talk of the town when it comes to American politics. Ironically, the group is utilizing the president’s weapon of choice: social media. Here, the president’s cerebral inaptitude, general embarrassments, lack of empathy and often inhumane moments are posted in all their glory. The Lincoln Project has highlighted the President’s missteps with significant success. The videos are liked and shared by millions of people including liberals.

Provoking Trump and His Supporters

The Lincoln Project videos being used with the aim of making Joe Biden the 46th president are deliberately provocative and insulting — just like the president himself. A sophisticated, well-crafted, in-depth message founded on science or coherent policy will hardly be found — again, also resembling the president’s “messages”. The attempt of trying to beat Trump at his own game is apparent and visibly savvy.

The group behind these efforts is operating as a Super PAC — a political action committee. Therefore, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) campaign contribution limits do not apply, with the result that the Lincoln Project has raised $ 19.4 million to this point. This gives it plenty of liquidity, which the project continues to invest in videos and lobbying efforts.

Who is Behind the Lincoln Project?

The puppet masters are, among others, Steve Schmidt, former advisor to the late Senator and Republican presidential candidate John McCain. Other members include Rick Wilson and John Weaver, who previously worked for the Bush campaigns. Then there is George Conway, the rebel husband of Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway. All are establishment Republicans who are appalled by the Trump phenomenon that appears to have overtaken the Grand Old Party’s traditional values.

The Conways, in particular, illustrate the zeitgeist of today’s conservatism in America: division. The Lincoln Project is the public representation of this division within the GOP that had existed long before Trump but now has turned into deep, unbridgeable trenches. Several Republicans now see Trump as a threat to the dignity of the presidency and consider his policies irresponsible at best and utterly un-American at worst. From Mitt Romney and Liz Cheney to John Kasich and Colin Powell, well-known Republicans are deserting Trump amid his poor performance during the pandemic.

Trump’s Troubles at the Polls

Moreover, the miserable poll numbers ​​of the president are now making even Trump loyalists on the Hill nervous. They, unlike the Never Trumpers, have tied their professional fortunes to Trump – and so far with considerable success. A Trump endorsement almost automatically equalled a successful campaign result in the past. With Americans waking from their slumber, however, Trump’s popularity continues to decline. As a result, many Republicans are now at risk of losing their congressional seats in November. One thus should not be surprised if more Republicans make a U-turn on the Trump question.

Even if every poll is only preliminary three months before the election — and it currently looks like a landslide victory for Biden — does anyone honestly believe that Trump will turn things around over the next 90 days? The pandemic and the disastrous riots in American cities have unmasked him. Any upcoming Biden blunder can’t outweigh the 153,700 dead Americans nor the unacceptable behavior of the president.

A Return to Normalcy

Trump’s presidency has led to parts of both major parties to seek a return to normalcy in American politics. If Republicans like those in the Lincoln Project are campaigning for a Democrat it is a sign of a failed Commander in Chief, but it is also a step in a direction that can partially overcome the divide in the United States. The latter is desperately needed.

If a president, after nearly four years in office, continuously tweets “make America great again!” during a national crisis — despite having done almost nothing to accomplish the latter — his body of work is summed up brilliantly.

L'articolo The Lincoln Project: Republicans Versus Trump proviene da InsideOver.

The COVID-19 crisis has killed over 686,000, including more than 153,700 in the United States. Alongside this tragic statistic another crisis is playing out: economic devastation, lost jobs and looming homelessness and poverty including in developed countries such as the US. A recent story from Annie Nova at CNBC paints an alarming picture of an upcoming eviction and homelessness crisis.

The $2.2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was made law in April and put a pause on any evictions for those who have federally-backed mortgages and are living in government-assisted apartments and houses. Those protections ended on July 31.

As BBC noted, an “avalanche of evictions” is on its way for the USA.

The Coming Eviction Crisis

The resumption of evictions on those with federally-backed mortgages and government-assisted living is projected to hit about 30% of those renting in the US. Although the Trump Administration says it is working to once again hit the pause button on evictions, there is now a gap during which they can take place. This coincides with an end to $600 unemployment checks that also occurred at the end of July, impacting about 25 million citizens. The official US unemployment rate fell to 11.1% in June, down from its spike at 14.7% in April, but an estimated 33 million Americans were receiving unemployment checks as of June 20.

Nova’s article cites that up to 40 million Americans could face eviction during the coming months of the pandemic in an unprecedented crisis not seen since the Great Depression. By this October an estimated 23 million Americans could be out of a place to live. This includes in many major urban centers which are already bracing for a second wave and where homelessness and housing insecurity will increase the risk of more spread of the virus. From 2000 to 2016 there were approximately one million evictions per year in the US, which is already a very high number. A jump to 23 million in one year would be intensely disruptive economically and socially.

As Aimee Picchi noted for CBS, “a surge in homelessness also could raise the risk of infection because evicted families often double up with relatives and friends, stay in shelters or end up on the street.”

Who Will Be Hardest Hit?

States have widely varying projected evictions, with states like California readying for a “tsunami of evictions.” Fully 58% of renters in Tennessee at risk of eviction but only 27% in Massachusetts and 22% in Vermont, for example. Still, even in Vermont and Massachusetts these numbers are extremely high and the economic and social fallout of even one-third as many people losing housing as experts are projecting would be unprecedented. Furthermore, around 70% of renters not protected by CARES will also be potentially vulnerable to losing a roof over their heads if they can’t find a way to come up with money and lose work or their income. Nine states, including Missouri, never adopted the CARES restrictions and have also still been allowing local courts to decide on evictions.

Furthermore, despite the moratorium on eviction under the CARES act in most states, many landlords — who are also in many cases struggling from the economic impact of COVID-19 — have been moving forward with the court cases and legal process to evict tenants during the moratorium and thus will be able to kick tenants out more rapidly now that enforcement and finalization of court orders is once again possible. Milwaukee, Wisconsin has already seen a 37% increase in evictions compared to last year.

People of color, Hispanics and lower-income Americans are projected to be hardest hit by the coming evictions and even if the extension is put back in rapidly by the government many of these renters and those holding federally-backed mortgages are at long-term risk of housing insecurity, severe poverty and eventual homelessness as the pandemic and its effects continues to create a vicious cycle. African Americans, many of whose communities have already been swept up in political unrest following the killing of George Floyd will be the most demographic group which will be most severely impacted by evictions, particularly black single mothers.

The coronavirus has already crushed huge swathes of the middle class and service sector in the US: adding in mass eviction just makes the nightmare even starker. There is also the real possibility that a wave of evictions could worsen the ongoing financial crisis in even more “catastrophic” ways that would affect the real estate sector and economy as a whole. If this challenge is not adequately addressed it could make the 2008 economic crisis look like a cakewalk.

University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Director of the Institute on Inequality and Democracy Ananya Roy put it even more bluntly: “This will be worse than the Great Depression.”

Stories of Struggle

Eviction courts generally lean towards the interests and legal advantage of landlords. The stories of struggle and eviction emerging from the US are heart-wrenching, such as that of Jade Brooks from Boston who is facing eviction along with her mom and young cousin who she lives with. Her mom lost her job due to the pandemic and Brooks says she is “completely scared” about homelessness and eviction for herself and her loved ones.

Another example is Chris Hammond, an 18-year-old teenager who lives with his mom in Hampshire, Illinois. Despite starting a GoFundMe page to raise money for rent, Hammond lost his job months ago and his mom works for minimum wage. They have an aunt they can possibly stay with if they’re kicked out but otherwise would be staying in a homeless shelter.

The legal process for eviction requires a notice, lawsuit, hearing, court order and finalization of the order by law enforcement. Tenants who have been ordered to leave their residence by a court will receive a notice informing them that law enforcement will escort them and their belongings out if they don’t leave in a matter of days.The whole process can go as fast as several weeks or as long as three to four months depending on the state and the backlog of cases in the system. In some cases landlords will just change locks to evict a tenant or another strategy is to do loud construction in the building to make it untenable to continue living there or getting any sleep (a “renoviction.”)

What Can People Facing Eviction Do About It?

There is not an enormous amount that those facing eviction can do about it, however, there are some approaches that can be helpful. There are some local protections for renters that have been put in place that can help renters know their rights available online (takes a moment to load) as well as resources for where to stay if you no longer have a place to live. In certain states like Arizona, Delaware, Montana, Ohio, Iowa and New York there are also relief funds available to people on the state level to help get assistance to pay rent which can be a temporary help. Those facing eviction are encouraged to get a lawyer if possible, including sometimes with no cost. No matter what, those facing eviction should always do everything possible to show up for their hearing: if not they automatically lose.

The Bottom Line

The US Census Bureau already estimated in 2018 that 40.6% of renters were paying 35% or more of their monthly income on rent and one quarter of US households in 2018 were spending half or more of their monthly income on housing. Many of those having trouble paying for rent also have to cut down on food or food quality, leading over the long-term to negative health impacts including for those who may not have sufficient healthcare cover or any at all. The pandemic and mass job loss that has now occurred has put a strain on those numbers that is not supportable. Stagnant wages meeting steadily rising rental rates and widespread job loss and economic disruption are a recipe for disaster. Mass evictions, transiency and homelessness — including likely spikes in crime and public disorder — are the obvious outcome of people who’ve lost a place to live and a stake in the future of society. Although increased federal intervention can offset some of the coming crisis, the effect of the coming eviction emergency is likely to be generational in scope and it will be necessary for entire communities, religious organizations and municipal governments to come together at the local level and care for the individuals around them in order to make a difference during these difficult times.

L'articolo Massive Eviction and Homelessness Crisis Looming in US proviene da InsideOver.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently called on “free nations” to triumph over the threat of what he calls “a new tyranny” from China. The speech was intended to be provocative and US-Chinese relations are set to deteriorate further.

Pompeo’s Provocative Timing

His remarks coincide with Washington and Beijing’s tit-for-tat over the closure of consulates in their respective countries. On Friday, the Chinese Government ordered the closure of the US consulate in the south-western city of Chengdu. They argued it was a “necessary response” to the US, which ordered the closure of the Chinese consulate in Houston, Texas, on Tuesday, July 21, giving the embassy 72 hours to shut down all operations.

The Trump administration argued that its decision was provoked by unidentified individuals being filmed burning papers in bins in the building’s courtyard.

The Coronavirus Has Changed the West’s Relationship With China

The coronavirus has cast a light on the West’s relationship with China and the one nation that has been the most proactive in following the US’s lead is the UK. During his first foreign visit since lockdown restrictions across the world started to ease, Pompeo complimented the British Government for recent actions on China when he visited British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Tuesday. The US Secretary of State heaped praise on British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab for his government’s decision last week to ban equipment supplied by Chinese technology giant Huawei from the country’s high-speed wireless network.

Other decisions that the British Government has taken in recent months have also provoked anger from Beijing. China’s ambassador to London Liu Xiaoming, had lashed out at Britain on Monday night, accusing its government of meddling in Chinese internal affairs and violating international law in its opposition to China’s new security law that clamps down on Hong Kong’s freedoms. China’s behavior in Hong Kong triggered the British Government into offering the island’s 3 million inhabitants passports.

Pompeo faces many challenges elsewhere

Whilst the US can always depend on the UK as a close ally, Australia is also shifting its strategic approach toward China. Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison launched the Defense Strategic Update and the Force Structure Plan in response to the deteriorating security environment along the Indo-Pacific region.

However, Pompeo’s greatest challenge lies in convincing the US’s European allies to support Washington’s stance toward China. The EU faces a dilemma over China as it intends to prioritize trade whilst defending the rights of Hong Kong’s citizens.

The European Council and China’s diplomatic mission to the EU announced that a bilateral trade agreement had been signed between the two mega markets. Considering relations between US President Donald Trump and the EU have soured over the last three years due to differences over trade tariffs, Brexit and quite recently over Trump’s decision to pull US troops out of Germany, his administration has had a difficult time persuading the EU to support his stance toward China.

This is NATO’s Opportunity to Play a More Proactive Role

Despite this, the EU is carving out its own defense policy because of the growing threat of China. In response to the Hong Kong security law, Brussels is preparing to restrict the sales of products that could be used for “internal repression.” This coordinated package is expected to be enacted before the end of July.

Although he has been critical toward NATO in the past, Trump needs this alliance more than ever to tackle Beijing and there are many ways he can deploy its effectiveness against China. For example, he could establish a NATO-China Council that would respond to China’s growing influence. The alliance should also deepen its engagement with its Pacific partners with more regular military exercises. NATO should also establish military headquarters in the Indo-Pacific region. But given that his relationship with so many of his NATO allies has deteriorated in recent years, Trump has a lot of rebuilding to do here.

The West is gradually waking up to the threat of China and Pompeo’s words have not completely fallen on deaf ears. But Washington still has a lot of work to do in building up a coherent strategy against China.

L'articolo Will Pompeo Succeed in Uniting the West Against China? proviene da InsideOver.

Bringing peace to the Korean peninsula could have been one of US President Donald Trump’s crowning achievements during his first term in office. He has gone to extraordinary lengths to try and secure a peaceful outcome with North Korea and taken unprecedented steps that none of his predecessors would ever have dreamed of. For example, he symbolically entered North Korean soil to shake hands with the country’s leader, Kim Jong-un.

Peace is Still a Long Way Off

With a presidential election only months away, it is looking increasingly unlikely that Trump can brag to his electorate that he has become the first American leader to officially end the Korean War. Instead of clamping down on its nuclear program, CNN reports that there has been activity at an undeclared North Korean facility that researchers suspect is being used to build nuclear weapons.

The Korean Peace Process is at a Stalemate

The peace process has reached a stalemate for other reasons as well. The US is ready to continue stalled nuclear negotiations with Pyongyang, according to Stephen Biegun, Washington’s envoy to North Korea, who made the comments during a visit to South Korea. He is hoping to get talks started again before the US general election in November.

Meanwhile, Kim has been making far fewer public appearances than usual. On Wednesday, it was reported that he marked the anniversary of the death of his grandfather, North Korea’s founding leader Kim Il Sung, by visiting his mausoleum at Pyongyang’s Kumsusan Palace of the Sun. The North Korean leader has also recently refused to meet with his US counterpart again.

However, Trump’s attention throughout his entire presidency has been distracted by another authoritarian regime in Asia- China. The US President triggered an 18-month trade war with Chinese President Xi Jinping which ended with Phase 1 of a US-China trade deal in January. Nonetheless, the coronavirus triggered another dispute between both nations.

Trump Cannot Have it Both Ways

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo hinted earlier this week that the US must adopt a different approach to Beijing which contrasts with the one previous administrations have taken to open up China’s economy to the world. Without revealing too much in advance what the American President wants to do with Beijing, the Secretary of State suggested that the Trump administration is considering banning Chinese social media apps like TikTok. This was then confirmed by Trump himself on Thursday as part of a series of measures his administration will be rolling out to punish China for its handling of the coronavirus pandemic.

The problem with the Trump administration’s twin-track approach of tackling China whilst attempting to end the Korean War is that the US President needs Chinese involvement in the Korean peace process to ensure the latter reaches a successful conclusion. Unless US-Chinese tensions can end peacefully, it will be difficult for the Trump administration to ask Beijing to help them in Korea in any meaningful way.

Trump Needs China On Side if He Wants North Korean Peace

Victor Cha, the former director for Asian affairs at the National Security Council from 2004 to 2007, also believes that Trump needs China to restore peace in Korea. If China and the US could cooperate more on this issue, then the Trump administration could persuade Xi to end his country’s payments to Pyongyang until the latter has cut back on its nuclear program.

At some stage, Beijing should also be persuaded to clamp down on Chinese individuals doing business in North Korea. For example, the US successfully shamed four Chinese citizens who attempted to evade US sanctions in September 2016.

The simple truth is that Trump cannot have it both ways on China and North Korea. Pyongyang has no incentive to end its nuclear program while Washington continues to deploy sanctions against them. The peace process needs more stick now, and only China can provide it because Chinese payments to North Korea help preserve Kim’s regime. For now, the Korean peace process will continue to remain an unresolved problem that will haunt future US presidents.

L'articolo Why Trump Can’t Have Peace with North Korea while Also Tackling China proviene da InsideOver.

A 25-year China-Iranian strategic partnership has been on the cards for some time. Last August, Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Zarif paid a visit to his Chinese counterpart Wang Li to forge a new agreement that builds upon a previous deal that was signed in 2016. Oilprice.com managed to uncover many of the secret elements of the pact at the time. According to the publication’s secret sources, the Iranian Petroleum Ministry confirmed that the deal has been signed and that Beijing has added in a new military element, with substantial global security implications.

It is a Continuation of the ‘One Belt, One Road’ Initiative

One element of the first five-year period of the new 25-year pact is that China will invest $280 billion in developing Iran’s oil, gas and petrochemicals industries. There will be another $120 billion of investment for upgrading Iran’s transport and manufacturing infrastructure. Furthermore, Chinese businesses will be provided with the first option to bid on any new gas, oil and petrochemicals projects in Iran.

The new deal also represents a continuation of China’s ‘One Belt, One Road (OBOR)’ geopolitical project as Beijing will be involved in building Iran’s vital infrastructure. Chinese manufacturing companies will build factories using cheap labor in Iran to manufacture products that can access Western markets via new transport links created by China.

Cooperation Between Iran and China will be Extended

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has agreed to the extension of new military elements that were proposed by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) that will involve complete aerial and navy cooperation between Tehran and Beijing, with Moscow taking a central role. These deployments will be accompanied by the launch of Chinese and Russian electronic warfare capabilities originally designed to neutralize NATO’s C4ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance) systems.

While the rest of the world grapples with the coronavirus pandemic, the 25-year agreement is a threat to the Trump administration and America’s post-WW2 hegemony for many reasons. It is a continuation of the OBOR initiative which is designed to take advantage of Beijing’s central position along the Eurasian rimland. For a long time now, China has been building up its maritime forces in East Asia and the South China Sea. The 25-year deal has extended China’s influence in the Middle East.

As The Diplomat argues, China’s geopolitical partnership with Iran is strategically important to both countries. Thanks to its large oil and gas reserves, Tehran could help Beijing withstand an American attack on its Sea Lines of Communication. The continued existence of a strong regime in the heart of the Middle East thwarts Washington’s ambitions of maintaining its hegemony in the Middle East.

Trump Finds Himself Increasingly Isolated

The 25-year agreement also challenges the Trump administration’s policy of ending the 2015 Iran Deal that Barack Obama, the current US President’s predecessor, signed. Both China and Russia are members of the UN Security Council and Beijing is using its membership of this body to call on Washington to end its sanctions against Tehran. Zhang Jun, China’s permanent UN representative, provided the Security Council with a statement that urged America to stop its “illegal unilateral sanctions” on Iran and to voice his opposition to the US’s plea that the arms embargo on Iran be extended beyond October.

As the EU continues to trade with Iran, Trump has no allies left who are willing to support his stance on the Iran deal. It is unclear whether Beijing and Moscow would support a lack of sanctions in exchange for Tehran surrendering its nuclear program, but the 25-year pact means both China and Russia have a vested interest in preventing the US and NATO from undermining their Middle Eastern ally. This makes it harder for all sides to revise the terms of the 2015 Iran deal.

It would be wise for the Trump administration not to underestimate the impact of this 25-year strategic partnership because its attention is focused elsewhere.

L'articolo China and Iran: 25-Year Agreement proviene da InsideOver.

John Bolton’s book the Room Where It Happened is making waves internationally. To date, a plethora of books on the Trump administration have been published — including by former government officials such as Sean Spicer and Sarah Sanders. The latter are favorable to Trump. The prominent unfavorable books up to this point were written via secondary and tertiary sourcing and conducted via interviewing administration members such Fire and Fury and Fear: Trump in the White House.

Why Bolton’s Book is Different

John Bolton’s book is different. As Trump’s former National Security Advisor, his writing is based on his days in the administration during which he spent most days right next to the president. Bolton’s most significant reproach that runs like a thread through the book is that Trump has no concept of strategy, no philosophical starting point and a complete lack of aptitude. All of Trump’s decisions were thus based on gaining personal advantage, never on the best interests of the republic.

Bolton also writes about chaotic conditions in the White House, in which staff came and went at the beginning of Trump’s term as if it was a “student dormitory.” He describes how Trump’s working days often only really start around lunchtime and that the president lacks knowledge of important political areas. Intelligence meetings were also never useful, according to Bolton. The majority of the time was spent listening to Trump instead of Trump listening to the experts.

Moreover, according to Bolton Trump was primarily concerned with his popularity and re-election. When his employees were unable to offer him a quick, legal solution for a complete closure of the border with Mexico in 2018, for example, Trump responded that he had been elected for it and that he would be voted out for it if he did not deliver. Trump’s biggest goal, re-election, is, therefore, the only “guardrail” that prevents Trump from showing his true nature. In a second term, this guard rail would be gone, Bolton cautions. Besides the well-documented ineptitude of the administration, Bolton also covers other key areas in his book.

COVID-19

For example, Bolton sharply criticizes Trump’s behavior and response during the COVID-19 crisis. Trump’s only reflex was to talk his way out of issues, not solve them. More importantly, however, Trump had previously defended a restructuring of the National Security Council (NSC) that eliminated the Office of Pandemic Prevention. According to Trump, the latter was irrelevant. Bolton, however, writes the NSC has tracked pandemics correctly and issued an early COVID-19 warning in 2020, which was ignored by Trump. The NSC’s biosecurity team worked precisely as it should. However, the president was incapable of recognizing their valuable work, Bolton writes.

China

International relations are covered in-depth in Bolton’s book. On page 181, for example, Bolton writes that Trump repeatedly blocked public, critical statements on other, adversaries including nations such as Russia or China for the sole purpose of not wanting to jeopardize his good personal relationship with their leaders. Moreover, Trump’s personal interests have remained at the forefront, particularly with regard to China, Bolton writes.

Politics with China were made “in a chaotic way by random, repetitive meetings,” Bolton writes. At two meetings, Trump tried to utilize Xi Jinping for his re-election. In December 2018, Trump offered to significantly reduce tariffs on China if the Chinese bought more American products. The main focus was on agricultural exports and thus was aimed at boosting Trump’s chances in agricultural states. Trump’s willingness to lower tariffs in his own political interest was “breathtaking,” Bolton notes. At another meeting in Osaka, in 2019, Trump asked Xi to help him directly by alluding to the Chinese economy and asked Xi to help him win the election. Trump spoke directly about the interests of American wheat and soybean farmers. If they could sell more goods to China, it would also help his re-election. Bolton also writes that Trump had approved the Uighur camps in China, which are often referred to as concentration camps in America.

North Korea

Bolton’s details on North Korea are not much more flattering either. On page 82, Bolton writes about his appearances in various TV programs. Trump had told Bolton that he was doing well on television, “but should praise him more,” particularly for his diplomacy with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un. Trump also compared his relationship with Kim Jong Un with his dating life: when dating women, he prefers to break up with them before they can dump him, Bolton writes. So he demonstratively cancelled the summit in Singapore before Kim could do it. In the end, he still took part in the summit. Bolton describes Trump as “desperate” in his relationship with Kim. He wants to meet him “at all costs” but is continually changing his mind about how to proceed.

Ukraine

According to Bolton, Trump suddenly became obsessed about Ukraine wanting to get him. He urged Bolton to call the President of Ukraine and ensure that Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph Giuliani was at the meeting to verify that Ukraine was safe. Giuliani, according to Bolton, fed the president “nonsense” that Trump believes. Moreover, Trump did not want to have anything to do with the President of Ukraine and its people, although Bolton concluded that they were “people to work with.”

NATO

Bolton also writes that Trump wanted to threaten the United States’ exit from the alliance within a few months at the NATO summit in July 2018. Accordingly, Trump informed him on the morning of the second summit in Brussels on the phone. As a justification, Trump said that allies like Germany did not meet NATO’s two percent target, but at the same time paid Russia billions of dollars for energy supplies. According to Bolton, Trump read to him what he wanted to say. Accordingly, the president wanted to announce that by January 1, 2019, all member states would have to spend at least two percent of their gross domestic product on defense spending, “or we will go and not defend those who have not.”

Will Bolton’s Book Help the Democrats?

With Bolton’s book, new questions regarding the Trump administration have been raised. While a president cannot be impeached for incompetence or ineptitude, the details on foreign policy have caused raised eye-brows among Democrats already. However, Democrats still despise Bolton for his unwillingness to give testimony before the impeachment. Now, Bolton has put Democrats in another pressurized position by sharing what he knows too late to be used in their impeachment inquiry. The question now is whether they will try to call Bolton for testimony again and essentially restart their quest against the president.

However, Bolton has not indicated any willingness to cooperate at this stage. Moreover, Democrats are likely cognizant that the election is theirs to win at this point. Dragging the American people through another Trump-mania, will not be wise – Bolton’s revelations notwithstanding.

L'articolo John Bolton’s ‘the Room Where It Happened’: a New Chance for Democrats? proviene da InsideOver.

There was much confusion emerging from the White House over the US-China trade deal on Monday. Before the coronavirus pandemic worsened relations between both nations, US President Donald Trump and Chinese Vice Premier Liu He signed Phase One of a US-China trade agreement that slashed some US tariffs on Chinese goods in exchange for Chinese commitments to purchase more of American farm, energy and manufactured goods.

However, COVID-19 shifted the US’s attention away from establishing a free trade agreement with China. The US President’s rhetoric toward Beijing subsequently worsened. In April, Trump claimed to have evidence that the coronavirus started in a Chinese lab, but he offered no details. Later on in the month, he also stated that China “will do anything” to stop his re-election as the row between the US President and Chinese President Xi Jinping worsened.

Trump’s China Stance Thrown Into Confusion

But as Trump’s priorities started to shift toward liberalizing trade between America and China, which was one of his central campaign pledges, trade advisor Peter Navarro did not help matters when he declared that a trade deal between both countries was over this past Monday. Navarro told Fox News that the turning point came when the Trump administration learned about COVID-19’s existence after a Chinese delegation left Washington following the signing of Phase One of the deal on January 15.

The comments caused US equity futures to drop on Monday night, but they soon rebounded on Tuesday as major future indexes indicated a gain of 0.9 percent, coming back from being down 400 points on the Dow. Asian markets like Japan’s Nikkei responded with gains as well, adding 0.5 percent on Tuesday.

Navarro’s Fox News interview also provoked a reaction from the US President himself, who tweeted later on Monday evening that the trade deal is still in place.

Phase One of the Trade Deal is Still Intact

The special advisor provided CNN with a statement that his comments “had nothing to do with Phase One of the deal,” and said that they were targeted at the lack of trust Washington has in the Chinese Communist Party for hiding the true extent of the coronavirus’s impact.

A trade pact between the US and China will improve trade between both countries in the long-term to a certain extent. It halves tariff rates on $120 billion worth of goods, but most of the steeper duties — which affect $360 billion of Chinese goods and more than $100 billion worth of US exports — remain intact. This trade agreement is only the first step toward improving trade relations between both sides and foreign relations in general. But it will be difficult to achieve the former unless the latter improves substantially, and there are still many factors hindering that outcome.

Not only has the coronavirus caused a rift between Beijing and Washington, but the Guardian’s Patrick Wintour refers to a “new cold war” between both sides. As China asserts itself in Hong Kong and on the border with India, the US realizes that it has a new menace to deal with. Trump is already inviting nations to join its anti-China alliance, but as Mira Rapp-Hooper wrote in her book Shields of the Republic, the US President has insulted so many of his country’s allies that he will find it difficult to rally them behind a new alliance to tackle China.

Trump Needs to United US Allies Against China

After 9/11, George W. Bush rallied NATO behind him to tackle the threat of terrorism before the 2003 Iraq War caused him to drift apart from certain nations. The US now needs a leader who can do the same with China, and it needs a strategy on how it is going to tackle the rising threat of Beijing.

The coronavirus has caused many Western nations to rethink their relationship with China, but should Trump win a second election, he needs to repair relations with his European allies and persuade them to support his new bid to thwart China’s rise to power. This is the opportune moment for him to do so.

If US-Chinese relations in general continue to deteriorate, it will be hard to see how both sides can cooperate on trade. Trump may have downplayed Navarro’s comments for now, but that does not mean the US-China trade pact won’t end at a later date.

L'articolo Why US-Chinese Relations Depend on More Than a Trade Deal proviene da InsideOver.