House lawmakers on Thursday pressed Pentagon officials on the impact of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, raising doubt over efforts to combat terrorism from afar and whether the U.S. is compensating civilian casualties of the 20-year war.
President Joe Biden set out to finally complete the “pivot to Asia,” a long-sought adjustment of U.S. foreign policy to better reflect the rise of America’s most significant military and economic competitor: China.
But Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine has made that vexing move even more complicated. China’s government has vacillated between full embrace and more measured responses as Russian President Vladimir Putin prosecutes his war, making the decisions for Biden far more layered.
The Quad-China rivalry and ‘scramble’ for Indo-Pacific have made the region, especially South Asia, geopolitically significant within a few years. For the last two decades, the region had the least priority in the US foreign policy as it was busy with its costly Middle East policy. But after the rise of China, the region has become important to the US foreign policy to ‘contain’ China.
eyond the suffering and humanitarian crisis from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the entire global economy will feel the effects of slower growth and faster inflation.
Impacts will flow through three main channels. One, higher prices for commodities like food and energy will push up inflation further, in turn eroding the value of incomes and weighing on demand. Two, neighboring economies in particular will grapple with disrupted trade, supply chains, and remittances as well as an historic surge in refugee flows. And three, reduced business confidence and higher investor uncertainty will weigh on asset prices, tightening financial conditions and potentially spurring capital
Regardless of whether Beijing had advance warning of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s decision to issue a statement last month outlining a “no limits” partnership with Moscow was arguably the single biggest foreign policy blunder of his nearly ten years in power. Russian President Vladimir Putin will receive the overwhelming share of the blowback for his unprovoked assault on Ukraine, but Xi’s public declaration, coupled with Beijing’s continued diplomatic support for Moscow, has undermined China’s reputation and provoked renewed concerns over its global ambitions. Indeed, the intensifying war in Ukraine has already prompted calls for Taiwan to improve its defense capabilities and has given security partnerships such as NATO, the Quad, and AUKUS a renewed sense of purpose.
What Xi Gains—and Loses—From Backing Putin
The Ukraine crisis is primarily a standoff between Russia and the West, but off to the side, another player stands awkwardly: China. Beijing has tried to walk a fine line on Ukraine. On one hand, it has taken Russia’s side, blaming NATO expansion for causing the crisis and alleging that U.S. predictions of an imminent invasion are aggravating it. On the other hand, especially as the risk of military conflict has grown, it has called for diplomacy over war.
Japan’s experience in reconstruction and economic development could benefit states in the region that face multiple challenges.
As external partners struggle to find appropriate responses to the many challenges facing West Africa, Japan’s approach to peace and security may be an interesting option to explore.
The current developments related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine can only be considered the tip of an iceberg, showing itself in the form of the collapse of the US-centered security system. This order has already proven to seek to make small powers pay the toll to maintain and achieve the system’s cohesion. Just a look at the repeated statements of US officials a few days ago regarding the daily announcement of the imminent Moscow invasion of Ukraine and the lack of a military reciprocal response to the Russian expansionist model to counter the NATO (in other words, USA) security agenda, above all, raises the question of whether we are going to have another Afghanistan in American politics or not. In other words, is US policy seeking to extend the pattern of Afghanization to other parts of the world to commence destabilization of Europe?
When President Donald Trump lost the 2020 US presidential election to democratic candidate Joe Biden, many leaders in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) saw an ominous warning that democracy may again take center stage in US foreign policy, with autocrats trying to consolidate power in their hands.
The Western nations and especially the United States awoke today to a new world today.
After decades of hearing US politicians boastingly describe the US as the “exceptional nation,” justifying its repeated violation of international law with invasions of Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Panama, Grenada, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, El Salvador, and “regime change interventions in a host of other countries, because it could, all the while telling the rest of the nations of the world that they had to strictly obey the “rules-based order” of international relations, that countries do not invade or violate the borders of other countries, suddenly there is another nation that has decided it is “exceptional.”