.
Asia
Gaza
13.02.2025 How does the Gaza redevelopment plan tie into maritime politics? What seems like a humanitarian policy for Gaza may be a stepping stone towards a battle for the control of a maritime trade route. Gaza’s reconstruction is a strategic cover leading to a contestation in maritime control. Critics assume that the “Riviera of Middle East” project is about the US vying for domination of the Suez Canal or potentially a covert policy that takes a step towards the Ben Gurion Canal project initiated by Israel to divert maritime trade in its favour. This route is also expected to pass through the Gaza Strip. This redevelopment and reconstruction project can be used to justify US and Israeli military assets being stationed in the Gaza Strip to secure the region and naturally give them direct access to the Ben Gurion Canal route. If Gaza is cleared, this plan removes the political and logistical obstacles; the initiators of this project may go as far as altering the demographics and infrastructure to pave the way for the canal. Propping up the Ben Gurion Canal as a competitor to the Suez Canal would prove to be a scintillating phenomenon in the geopolitics of the Middle East. This redevelopment plan for Gaza, leading to the creation of the Ben Gurion Canal, will alter trade and maritime patterns away from the Suez. The Suez Canal handles almost 12% of global trade, connecting Europe, Asia, and the Americas, being a critical choke point for Gulf oil exports to Europe and North America. China’s Belt and Road Initiative relies on this particular route. For Egypt, the Suez Canal is a strong national asset, which reliably generates 9-10 billion dollars annually. Hypothetically, if the US’s underlying strategic objectives are to control the canal for its geopolitical interests, it may need to draft some serious strategic manoeuvring and agreements with President Sisi. Already the US provides Egypt military aid worth around 1.3 billion dollars annually. A new deal could increase the aid in exchange for operational oversight of Suez, or even broker IMF-backed debt relief if Egypt grants that sort of influence over Suez. But let’s say diplomatic overtures fail to convince Egypt, then certainly, the US could potentially disrupt the Suez’s revenue model by backing the Israel-led Ben Gurion Canal project. If Gaza’s reconstruction leads to the successful build-up of the Ben Gurion Canal, it will shrink Egypt’s dominance in maritime logistics. China has noteworthy investments in Egypt’s Suez Economic Zone, with over 140 Chinese companies operating and contributing about 1.6 billion dollars in investments, along with the investments in Egypt’s Ain Sokhna Port. Today 60% of China’s exports to Europe pass through the Suez. Any shift in the control of Suez will impact China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) investments. If the US manages to exert dominion over the Suez or promotes the Ben Gurion Canal, China could face higher transit fees, more US-controlled inspections, and potential trade slowdowns during geopolitical conflicts. For China, the hyper-dominance of Washington on the Suez Canal will likely hamper its BRI projects in the region, even including those with Africa. US-backed Ben Gurion alternative would divert trade dynamics away from the usual routes. If the US gains influence over both Gaza and Suez, it dominates the global trade flows. We can expect the Chinese to respond by negotiating with Israel or deepening its strategic ties with Egypt and Iran. Several instances from Cold War era confrontations: In 1956 the UK, Israel, and France attacked Egypt to take back control of the Suez, leading to a US-Soviet intervention. Today China could come through as a counterbalance. In the 1970s and 1980s, the US sought control in the Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean to secure oil routes - in response the Soviets expanded their naval presence throughout Yemen and India to counterbalance. Today if the US aims to dominate Suez, China would potentially strike a deal with Israel. If the US tries to sway maritime controls through Ben Gurion, China, would expand its naval presence in the Red Sea and Egypt. Will Egypt’s decision-making determine the balance of power between the US and China? If the Ben Gurion dream is achieved, it will become a turning point in global trade patterns. (Source: Valdai Discussion Club - Russia / Reuters - United Kingdom)
by Aatif, a participant of the Valdai – New Generation project
North America
United States
Feb. 13, 2025 Trump says Saudi Arabia may host talks with Putin on Ukraine. “We expect that he’ll come here, and I’ll go there and we’re going to meet also probably in Saudi Arabia the first time,” Mr. Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. (Source: The New York Times - U.S.)
February 13, 2025, Thursday Trump confirmed that he and Putin discussed the war and agreed that their administrations would begin negotiations “immediately.” Meanwhile, the Kremlin stated that Putin emphasized the need to address what Russia sees as the fundamental causes of the conflict and expressed agreement with Trump that a long-term resolution could be reached through diplomacy. During his phone call with Zelensky, Trump reportedly shared details of his conversation with Putin. When asked at a press conference whether he considered Ukraine an equal participant in peace talks, Trump reiterated that Ukraine must seek peace. When pressed about whether he supported territorial concessions by Ukraine, he noted that Zelensky would "have to do what he has to do" and commented on the Ukrainian leader’s declining approval ratings. The Kremlin has firmly rejected any proposals for territorial exchanges. Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Medvedev dismissed the idea as nonsense. Kremlin spokesman Peskov stated that Russia would never discuss the exchange of its territory. (Source: Novinite - Bulgaria; 'Ukrainska Pravda - Ukraine; ISW; WSJ' = U.S.)
Thu February 13, 2025 Scores of firings have begun at federal agencies, with terminations of probationary employees underway at the Department of Education and the Small Business Administration. Until now, federal employees across all government agencies had only been placed on paid administrative leave. The move came the same day as a federal judge allowed the administration’s deferred resignation program to proceed. About 77,000 employees have accepted the offer, which generally allows them to leave their jobs but be paid through the end of September. A form letter sent to Department of Education employees, informing them of their termination stated: “The Agency finds, based on your performance, that you have not demonstrated that your further employment at the Agency would be in the public interest.” On Friday and Monday, probationary employees across the Small Business Administration had received an unsigned draft notice of employment termination, according to internal agency emails. Notices of termination were then sent to probationary employees the next day, according to the union representing the employees. Probationary employee firings were also expected at the US Energy Department today evening. There are around 2,000 probationary employees at DOE. The Energy Department’s acting general counsel had a today meeting with heads of department offices and asked offices to compile lists of “mission-critical” probationary employees who could potentially be exempt from the layoffs. But those lists hadn’t been finalized as of today afternoon. Probationary employees are defined as federal employees who have been with the department for less than a year. A recent Office of Personnel Management memo also stated federal employees working for less than two years could also be considered probationary. On January 20, the acting head of OPM sent a memo to all agencies ordering them to compile a list of all their probationary workers and send it to the office. Agencies should focus on those who have been underperforming, the advisory shows. The firings are part of the administration’s multipronged effort to slash the size of the federal workforce. Trump began the planning process for widespread layoffs on Tuesday, when he signed an executive order telling agency leaders to start preparations for reductions in force, or RIFs. The president is also hoping to push federal staffers who work fully remotely or telework on certain days by requiring them to return to the office full-time. Plus, he has targeted federal employees involved in diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility initiatives and at the Education Department, the US Agency for International Development and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. (Source: CNN – U.S.)
February 13th, 2025 Musk, apparently disgruntled by a Reuters article arguing DOGE cuts were politically motivated, asked followers to find out how much federal money the organization had received. DOGE’s agency head Musk boosted a post on X claiming the contract showed the “news agency received millions for social engineering.” Today Trump posted on Truth Social: DOGE: Looks like Radical Left Reuters was paid $9,000,000 by the Department of Defense to study “large scale social deception.” GIVE BACK THE MONEY, NOW! Issued by the Department of Defense through the Air Force Research Laboratory and DARPA, the contract is described on the government’s USA Spending website as being in relation to Active Social Engineering Defense (ASED), Large Scale Social Deception (LSD). ’The ASED program aims to create scalable systems capable of detecting, analyzing, and mitigating threats to bolster cybersecurity’. ’The contract in question, issued in 2018 during the first Trump administration, was actually awarded to Thomson Reuters Special Services for cybersecurity research’, ’ which operates separately from Reuters News and specializes in fraud detection and risk management’. Trump made it closer to the truth in saying that the contract was to study it. ’In a statement, Rubley, CEO of Thomson Reuters Special Services, said the following: Thomson Reuters Special Services (TRSS), LLC is a separate U.S. legal entity governed by an independent Board of Directors, that operates independently from Reuters News. Recent public discourse has conflated these entities and has inaccurately represented the nature of the business between TRSS and the Department of Defense’. ’Thomson Reuters commercial agreements, including Reuters News commercial agreements, have no influence over or impact on Reuters editorial coverage’. (Source: Mediaite – U.S.)
February 13, 2025 Hundreds of world leaders and delegates are set to attend the Munich Security Conference this weekend - with conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, and simmering tensions in the Indo-Pacific, on the agenda. All eyes will be on the approach of the U.S. delegation under the new administration of President Trump. /Video/ (Source: VoA - U.S.)
NATO
13/02/2025, Thursday In a joint news conference with NATO chief Rutte in Brussels, Hegseth recalled US President Trump's call, and said: 'The president has said 2% is not enough, and we are going to argue that up to 5% is the necessary investment from NATO countries to ensure we are able to meet the threats of the future.' Rutte, for his part, backed Hegseth's remarks, saying: 'We have to ramp up defense spending because we know we cannot protect ourselves four or five years from now if we do not.' He also said all allies agreed that there must be peace in Ukraine, that it must be durable, and that Ukraine must be in a position of strength. (Source: Yeni Safak - Turkey)
13/02/2025 Hegseth rules out Ukraine's NATO entry. Pantagon chief: Unrealistic to return to 2014 borders. Trump and Putin had essentially started bilateral peace talks. Pretty 'stunned', German and French foreign ministers said that Europeans 'cannot be ignored in this process'. It is the US that calls the shots. (Reports from NATO headquarters in Brussels). /Video/ (Source: France24)
13.02.2025 Ukraine 'must be closely involved' in everything happening about Ukraine, the NATO chief Rutte said at the doorstep of the defense ministers meeting in Brussels today. (Source: Anadolu Agency - Turkey)
13.02.2025 While the US remains committed to NATO, Europe must take greater responsibility for its own defense as the US shifts focus to Indo-Pacific threats, US Defense Secretary Hegseth emphasized at the Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting in Brussels, yesterday.'There are no plans right now in the making to cut anything,' he said later, during a media availability in Stuttgart, while urging NATO allies 'to boost defense spending to 5% of GDP'. (Source: Anadolu Agency - Turkey)
Global
February 13, 2025 To avoid escalation, neutral countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America should play peacekeeper in Ukraine, providing troops - rather than the EU. An EU deployment lacks credibility. The consistent unwillingness, aside from rhetorical flourishes from Macron, to send troops to Ukraine during an ongoing conflict suggests that should fighting resume between Russia and Ukraine, the EU will lack the will to commit. A pan-European force would remain indistinguishable from a NATO one for the Russians. Combined with the bellicose rhetoric of some Western leaders, including supporting direct strikes inside of Russia, such a deployment would be seen as NATO expansion by stealth. On Feb. 12. U.S. Secretary of Defense Hegseth confirmed the Trump administration’s opposition to Ukraine’s membership in NATO and instead called for “capable European and non-European troops” to provide security guarantees - without U.S. troop involvement. The wide number of peace initiatives and proposals - coming from countries such as Indonesia, Mexico, and the African delegation that visited Kyiv and Moscow - suggests that there is a real willingness by these nonaligned states to play a significant role. The ever-expanding BRICS+ group, alongside members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, now have a genuine opportunity to help define a new era of international security. The African Union, meanwhile, has gained decades of experience by conducting its own peacekeeping missions. Even Persian Gulf countries could send military and political officers to help defuse tensions as they have been able to cultivate trust with both Russia and Ukraine by organizing several rounds of prisoner exchanges. An effective force does not have to be large since its goal should not be to be able to fight one of the parties but rather to simply keep the peace. A cease-fire has to be agreed to before peacekeepers arrive. Additionally, a clear demarcation of the front line needs to be made before their arrival. A withdrawal by both sides from the front will also reduce the risk of accidental clashes. There remains a wide scope for participation. Chile, for example, has offered to assist with demining. Some European countries may be able to play a role. Hungary and Slovakia, may even be welcomed given their stance on the Russia-Ukraine conflict. More likely, however, is that the EU can help finance a peacekeeping force. The EU should embrace this as an opportunity to create space between its troops and Russia’s. Rather than trying to monopolize the structures of international security, Europe would be better off embracing the global south as an integral part of the solution to stabilizing its own backyard. (Source: Foreign Policy - U.S.)
By Habtom, a former guest researcher at the Swedish Defense University and a doctoral candidate on contemporary European military and diplomatic history at the University of Cambridge.
.5 2 14 14:39
