.
Asia
China
September 27, 2024 4:56 pm (EST) China and Russia have strengthened ties. We can anticipate continuing advances in cooperation in the coming months. Ukraine: China continues to forward peace efforts to end the war in Ukraine. In late August, China’s Special Envoy for Eurasian Affairs Li urged more countries to support the peace plan created with Brazil, Indonesia, and South Africa in May. Russian President Putin endorsed China’s peace efforts by stating that China, Brazil, and India could serve as mediators. In a meeting with the Russian Security Council secretary on September 11, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang promised to promote “rational voices” to create the conditions for a possible political settlement in Ukraine. That message was echoed at Beijing’s Xiangshan Forum, an annual security conference in China, in speeches by Chinese Defense Minister Dong and Foreign Vice Minister Chen. President Zelenskyy dismissed Brazil and China’s efforts as ’destructive,’ claiming in an interview on September 12 that their peace initiative was disrespectful to Ukraine and its territorial integrity. Tensions between China and the United States over the war in Ukraine increased in September. On August 30, China’s Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Geng called on the United States to “make real efforts to promote peace” at a meeting of the UN Security Council. Shuang later criticized the United States for escalating the conflict and disrupting international and regional peace by continuing to supply weapons and ammunition to Ukraine. In response, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Campbell accused China of providing “substantial” support for Russia’s war effort that is being directed by top Chinese leadership. The U.S. Deputy Assistance Secretary of Defense Chase raised the issue directly with Defense Minister Jun during talks on September 15. Those heightened tensions follow the United States’ imposition of sanctions in August on hundreds of Chinese entities for supporting Russia’s military efforts. On September 24, Ukraine’s Presidential Advisor Vlasiuk told that China is supplying roughly 60 percent of the foreign made components for Russian weapons used in Ukraine. European intelligence indicates a subsidiary of a Russian state-owned weapons manufacturer has established a factory in China to produce long-range attack drones to use in the war in Ukraine. Diplomatic relations: After Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov warned, on September 1, that the country would change its nuclear policy in response to the supposed escalation of Western involvement in Ukraine, China reaffirmed its stance against using nuclear weapons. Taiwanese President Lai recently suggested that China’s territorial claims over Taiwan are driven by a desire to reshape global order rather than by genuine territorial integrity. He pointed out that China should reclaim territories lost to Russia in the nineteenth century if it is truly motivated by territorial concerns. In response, Russian officials criticized Lai, emphasizing that Russia and China settled their border disputes in a 2004 agreement and expressing support for China’s stance on Taiwan. Chinese leader Xi is set to visit Russia next month for the BRICS summit in Kazan, marking his second trip since February 2022. Beijing has supported Russia’s claim that the West provoked the conflict. Xi’s visit highlights the deepening economic and military ties between China and Russia, amid Western sanctions and geopolitical tensions. At the Xiangshan Forum on September 13, Chinese and Russian defense officials criticized the West, with China advocating for stronger military ties with developing nations and Russia accusing the United States of escalating tensions in the Asia-Pacific. The forum also addressed recent military developments, including the transit of German warships through the Taiwan Strait. Financial tensions: Following U.S. threats of secondary sanctions, Chinese banks have begun halting transactions with Russia, causing tens of billions of yuan in payments to be frozen, complicating trade between the two countries. In the second quarter of 2024, the Bank of China cut its assets in Russia by 37 percent, and the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China reduced theirs by 27 percent, citing payment difficulties. Russian companies are experiencing significant delays and increased costs in transactions with Chinese partners. Those actions have particularly affected smaller Russian companies, while major trade in commodities such as oil and grain is largely unchanged. Some Russian businesses are using intermediaries – which led to transaction costs rising to 6 percent from close to 0 percent - or alternative methods to circumvent the issues. Uranium trade probe: The United States is investigating whether China is aiding Russia’s nuclear industry by importing Russian uranium and exporting its own to the United States, despite a recent U.S. ban on Russian enriched uranium. Since the ban’s enactment, China has sent large shipments of uranium to the United States. The situation has alarmed U.S. uranium producers, who fear China could be circumventing the ban to gain a bigger role in global uranium markets while continuing to rely on Russian supplies. Vehicle ban: The U.S. Commerce Department hopes to ban connected vehicles with Chinese and Russian software or hardware by 2027 and 2030, respectively, due to national security concerns. The goal is to protect sensitive data and prevent potential remote control of vehicles. The rule would apply to vehicles driven on public roads but exclude specialized ones such as agricultural equipment. Military cooperation: On September 10, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Campbell had accused China of providing "very substantial" military assistance to Russia, including direct support for Russia’s war efforts in Ukraine. That assistance reportedly includes advanced military technology. In return, Russia is sharing submarine, missile, and other sensitive technology with China. Campbell expressed concerns that those developments could pose a threat not only to the United States but also to other countries such as Australia, India, Japan, and South Korea. He urged Europe to take a firmer stance on China’s support for Russia, suggesting that increased scrutiny of the financial institutions involved could have significant impacts. On September 11, Russia stated that its partnership with China is not aimed at other countries but is a defensive measure against potential threats, particularly from the United States. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zakharova emphasized that their strategic partnership is not aggressive but is intended to counteract potential U.S. military action, such as the possible deployment of missiles in Japan. The partnership, formalized in a no-limits deal in 2022, focuses on strategic cooperation but does not constitute a formal military alliance. China’s Defense Ministry has announced joint naval and air exercises with Russia, called the Northern United-2024 exercises, starting on September 21 in the Sea of Japan and his month in the Sea of Okhotsk. The drills aim to enhance strategic cooperation and address security threats. The Defense Ministry will also conduct joint naval cruises in the Pacific and participate in Russia’s Great Ocean-24 exercise for the fifth time. On September 9, Kirby, a National Security Council spokesperson, described the drills as long planned and not a cause for concern. The exercises come amid a perceived sea power gap in the western Pacific, with some U.S. aircraft carriers diverted from the region. (Source: cfr *)
* Council on Foreign Relations
Iraq
9:16 PM CEST, September 27, 2024 The U.S. announced an agreement with the Iraqi government today to wrap up the military mission in Iraq of an American-led coalition fighting the islamic state group by next year, with U.S. troops departing some bases that they have long occupied during a two-decade-long military presence in the country. In the first phase, which runs through September 2025, the coalition mission against isis will end and forces will leave some longstanding bases. In the second phase, the U.S. will continue to operate in some fashion from Iraq through 2026 to support counter-isis operations in Syria. But the Biden administration refused to provide details on how many of the approximately 2,500 U.S. troops still serving in Iraq will remain there or acknowledge it will mark a full withdrawal from the country. Ultimately, the U.S. military mission would transition to a bilateral security relationship. The Iraqi officials said some American troops may stay at Hareer base after 2026 because the Kurdistan regional government would like them to stay.Bases housing U.S. forces and contractors have been regularly targeted by Iran-backed militias over the last several years, and those attacks intensified late last year and early this spring after the Israel-Hamas war broke out nearly a year ago. For years, Iraqi officials have periodically called for a withdrawal of coalition forces, and formal talks to wind down the U.S. presence in the country have been going on for months. Iraq has long struggled to balance its ties with the U.S. and Iran, both allies of the Iraqi government but regional archenemies. The presence of American forces in Iraq makes it more difficult for Iran to move weapons across Iraq and Syria into Lebanon, for use by its proxies, including the Lebanese Hezbollah, against Israel. The agreement marks the third time in the last two decades that the U.S. has announced a formal transition of the military’s role there. (Source: apnews)
North America
United States
September 27, 2024 Ukraine’s desperate 'Victory Plan.' UK prime minister Keir Starmer recently visited U.S. president Biden to approve a green light to Kyiv. Several European countries, including Poland, the Baltic States, Sweden, and Finland support the UK. In contrast, German chancellor Olaf Scholz has ruled out permission for Ukraine to use its Taurus cruise missiles. Kyiv wants permission to fire long-range missiles (300-400km) into Russia. President Zelensky visited Washington this week to pitch his “victory plan,” which involves deep strikes and new weaponry. Will the United States greenlight Ukrainian “deep strikes” into Russia? The Biden administration appears very cautious while it weighs the costs, risks, and benefits of long-range strike approval. There is a sense of déjà vu here. We have seen similar “sagas” of Western weapon supplies throughout this war. Recall the hesitancy to send HIMARS, then NATO tanks, ATACMS, and F-16s. Each time, America and Germany demonstrated reluctance only later to agree. While these stories keep Ukraine in the news cycle, in military-strategic terms, it is far from a success. Kyiv’s desire for Western approval for long-range strikes within Russia will not bring about anything close to a decisive victory for Ukraine. Giving too little, too late has been the recurring theme of the West’s dysfunctional support of Ukraine’s war effort. NATO weapons systems are expensive and in short supply. Drip-feeding them to Ukraine means they can only be used in sporadic and indecisive ways. In addition, this approach provides Russia with a sandbox environment in which to study Western weapons and work out technical countermeasures. Having adapted to each wave of NATO weaponry deployed against it, Russia continues its grinding and methodical war of attrition. There are increasing signs that Ukraine is reaching a breaking point. Kyiv insists on permission for deep strikes, claiming this can stem the tide. The Biden administration has good reason to doubt the effectiveness of deep strikes. The range of Storm Shadow and ATACMS missiles is around 300km. They cannot threaten Russia’s military-industrial heartlands, energy system, or wider war-making capacity with strategic bombing on a mass scale. On the tactical and operational level, however, such strikes can cause significant inconvenience to Russia. Such missiles can hit Russian bases, supply dumps, transport, and energy systems in the logistical rear of the frontlines. This could disrupt Russia’s progress in the Donbas for some period. But can Ukraine really be supplied with enough of these costly missiles to slow Russia for a long enough time? And how will this stop Russia’s ongoing destruction of Ukraine’s energy grid and its deepening humanitarian tragedy? How do deep strikes solve the problem of Ukraine’s shrinking population or the lack of basic military materiel to equip Ukrainian brigades and hold the line? Zelensky is looking for escalation permission, as Ukraine runs out of time and options. Washington is worried about the bigger picture. They know approving deep strikes may not only derail chances for peace negotiations - 'an option Washington wants to keep open" — but also open a Pandora’s box of escalation scenarios. Putin has declared that a greenlight for Ukraine’s deep strikes would mean 'the United States, NATO, and the European countries are at war with Russia,' which would take 'suitably matched' countermeasures. Alongside Russia’s new and less restrictive nuclear doctrine, what might these be? On September 16, the Houthis successfully hit central Israel with a long-range ballistic missile for the first time. It is unknown who supplied them with this missile system. If Moscow sends the Houthis Iskander (400km range) ballistic weapons or Zircon (range 1000km) hypersonic missiles, it could spark a massive escalation in the Middle East. U.S. naval assets in the Red Sea would suddenly be very vulnerable. Their sinking would transmit a shocking message of U.S. weakness in the region at a critical time. Russia could also try to bring the war home to Europeans, whose taxes pay a large part of Ukraine’s war effort. The most extreme scenario would be if Russia retaliated with deep strikes on Ukraine’s own logistical rear, which is partly located on the territory of NATO members Poland and Romania. The triggering of Article 5, whether intentional or not, would lead to a critical moment of decision. Would the United States follow through with a devasting conventional strike on Crimea? Would Russia then use tactical nuclear weapons as its final attempt to restore deterrence? "Thankfully, there is reason to believe' that Washington sees these dangers and will work with Moscow to manage the risks. This clearly disgusts a great deal of analysts and commentators in the West who are gung-ho about deep strikes and united in seeing Russia as a paper tiger whose bluffs can be ignored. The historians of the future will likely commend the restraint of the Biden administration. It has kept the world safe from unpredictable escalation between two nuclear powers. 'Even if deep strikes are greenlighted, Washington will ensure they come too late and be on too small a scale' to help Ukraine. It is at this point that Biden and the company will also be judged less favorably by the same historians. Their policy of limited support is failing, and Kyiv cannot achieve success within the parameters imposed upon them. (Source: nationalinterest)
by Blackburn, a Senior Researcher in Norwegian Institute of International Affairs’ (NUPI) Research Group on Russia, Asia and International Trade. He is also an affiliated researcher at the Institute of Russian and Eurasian Studies at Uppsala University. He is engaged in research on Iran-Russia-China cooperation for the Norwegian Geopolitics Centre and is a research coordinator for the Civilizationalism Project based at Stanford University.
(26.9.2024 18:00) The US, EU and Kyiv all lambasted Russian President Putin's plans to amend Russia's nuclear deterrence doctrine in a manner which might consider a 'massive' aerial attack on Russia supported by a nuclear state as a 'joint attack,' even if the attacker is a non-nuclear state. The update was proposed yesterday by President Putin, who has the right to pass it. Putin gave the example of Russia receiving "reliable information of a massive launch of air and space attack weapons and their crossing our state border,' as a case where Russia might consider nuclear retaliation. It is seen as a clear reference to Ukraine, as Kyiv presses its Western allies to grant it permission to use the long-range weapons they provide to strike deep within Russia. US Secretary of State Blinken criticized the proposed amendment on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly today as 'totally irresponsible'. 'Russia has nothing left but nuclear blackmail; it has no other instruments to intimidate the world', Yermak, head of the president's office, wrote yesterday evening. He said attempts to spread fear would not work. European Union foreign policy spokesman Stano rejected the plan as 'reckless and irresponsible.' The Kremlin meanwhile defended the move, describing it as a warning to the west. (Source: dw)
.
