The water crisis in Crimea: a sign of the future?

 

This article is dedicated to the World Water Day (22/03/2021)

The stationed Russian troops in Crimea from 2014 have raised issues, one of them concerns the water shortages. The decision of the Ukrainian government to pause the water flow towards Crimea, led to a crisis in a very competitive environment.

The North Crimean (Water) Canal

During the 1950s, the Soviet state designed a canal which could transport water from the river Dnieper to the Crimean peninsula with the terminal station the city of Kerch. It was a complicated structure, including a main canal, enough pipelines and deposits for water storage. The aim was the provision of water for the population and its activities in the peninsula due to the short quantities of it. In 1975, after some years of construction, this structure, named The North Crimean Canal, was ready for use. It belonged to the Soviet Union and, after its dissolution in 1991, to the independent Ukrainian government. 

The Russian invasion and the water crisis

In March 2014, Putin's government commanded the Russian Armed Forces to invade Crimea in order to prevent the severance of Russia from Europe via Ukraine. The invasion was successful. The Russian armed men prevailed in the battles and on March, a referendum was held in the peninsula with the question of autonomy inside the Russian Federation. The result was in favor of the union with "mother- Russia". This caused the violent reaction of the Ukrainian authorities. The battles continued, while the flow of water via the above mentioned canal was paused. This happened because Dnieper's water cross mainland Ukraine and the unit of water flow's circulation is on Ukrainian soil. The main target was to force the Crimean population because of the lack of water to ask Russia for leaving the region and to make difficult the life of the Russian units depriving this vital element for life. As a consequence, the Crimean population faced the possibility of running out of water, although there were serious shortages. 

For 7 years the Crimean population had no serious problems. However, in the beginning of 2021, the lack of water is one of the top priorities for the autonomous Crimean Authority and Russia, along with the threat of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The water crisis is ongoing, causing an internal migration from the countryside to the urban centers, where the offer of water is larger. The main reasons for this development are the long-term presence of Russian soldiers who consume remarkable quantities of water, the drier climate (especially from 2018 onwards), the increased agricultural activities and the bigger number of residents, adding the Russian migrants who arrived after 2014. 

The Russian response

As it is natural, Moscow waited for this reaction. Shortly after the union, money was spent for building infrastructure and a bridge uniting the two banks of the Kerch Strait started to be built, to the transport of goods be undisturbed. 

When the situation worsened, the Russian response was immediate. Firstly, infrastructure for the storage of the water started to be constructed, targeting the supply of the soldiers and the residents. Furthermore, funds were channeled for the construction of desalination units. Also, the underground water was used about to maintain the agricultural production. In addition, a regulation on the usage of water was imposed, providing water for a specific time per day. Another movement regards the legal solution: the Russian authorities, with the support of local businesses appealed to an arbitral tribunal against the Ukrainian government for the pause of the water flow. At the same time, Russia blamed on Ukraine for this development at the UN and other international organizations.

Whats' s next?: the geopolitics of the water

It is evident, that the decision of Ukraine to stop the channel of water towards Crimea was one of great importance. As well as the Russian response, it can be said that it is early and decisive. However, it can be problematic. The living conditions of the Crimean population become more difficult than in the past and some of the solutions, for example the use of underground water, can lead to aridity in the long term. The completion of the ambitious, but effective program of building infrastructure maybe is the best solution, especially now where the new US President holds a tough stance against Russia and possibly will support Kiev to its decision concerning the water affair.   

Can we talk about a humanitarian crisis in Crimea? The answer is no, yet. Though, if the solution is going to prove in vain, that time we will have a humanitarian crisis and a change in the political scene. As the Ukrainian conflict is not resolved, the living conditions in Crimea will get worse. This affair reminds us that who control vital resources, are very strong. Moreover, that affair is similar to the tense relations between Egypt and Ethiopia as a result of the Ethiopian Dam in the Nile river. The question still remains: we are in front of a new world who will fight for water, especially the moment when the global temperature increases?

Will the coronavirus pandemic affect the international relations? An attempt to foresee the developments of the next day

The world in quarantine (Source: Pixabay- https://pixabay.com/el/illustrations/covid-19-%CE%B9%CF%8C-coronavirus-%CF%80%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%B4%CE%B7%CE%BC%CE%AF%CE%B1-4960246/)

As the period which will sign the end of the emergent situation due to the COVID-19 spread comes to an end, the question of whether the international relations will have been transformed, appears. Although the analysis concerning the international affairs was very limited, a prediction of the future can be made.

The international environment prior the COVID-19 pandemic

Before the worldwide quarantine, the international affairs framework was characterized by a lot of incidents. First of all, the rivalry at almost all sectors between China and United States had affected the main body of the world politics. That competition was military for the building of new weapon systems, technological regarding the domination in the environment of the 4^th Industrial Revolution, the importation of new technologies (5G) and the Artificial Intelligence and geopolitical-geoeconomic as it comes to the confrontation for areas in the southeast Pacific and the energy resources of that region. In addition, the economic field was another major area of friction. The emergence of the “Chinese Dragon” as the new economic power shocked the Trump’s administration. The latter, hold and still does it a very inelastic stance and it tries to defeat the Chinese and reclaim the past economic glory.

The historic hostility between the West and Russia was another characteristic. The Syrian Crisis, the Civil War in Ukraine, the economic war (sanctions, the price of the oil) and the strife for domination in the Balkans and the eastern Mediterranean are the main points. The relations between Trump and Putin were very tense and the willing of the two leaders for world domination made clear that the confrontation will be continued.

Another event was the regional competitions in the context of multi-polarization. The Syrian Civil War between the pro-Russian Assad regime and the anti-Assad forces and the radical Islamists, the rivalry between Greece and Turkey in the eastern Mediterranean and the Balkans, the Libyan Civil War, the new Cold War in the Gulf (Iran vs Saudi Arabia and UAE) and the Yemeni Civil War were of major importance. If the competition for the domination over the natural resources is added, it is obvious that the situation is tense.

What is more, at a regional level, the economic crisis the European Union faced seems that it will be back. Then, it was the over- indebtedness that caused a serious and deep economic crisis, which affected the lives of millions of European citizens. So, in 2019 the EU could be injured, but optimistic for the future because the crisis had passed and the damaged relations among the countries were going to be restored to the levels they were in 2008-2009.

Last but not least, the reputation of the international institutions and organizations was downgraded. The UN had several failures in handling and stopping the Syrian Civil War, the conflict in Yemen and the Turkish invasion in Syria. Furthermore, the international law had been outwitted. More specifically, aggressive actions throughout the world, for example, the US bombardment of Syria in 2018 and the intervention of third parties in other countries’s internal affairs, are some of the most serious cases.

The situation as it is going to be formed

One of the most serious questions concerns the framework of the international relations after the pandemic. Will this be changed or not? The facts speak for themselves.

The Sino-American enmity not only continues during that crisis, but it is going to be deteriorated. Except the competition over the above mentioned sectors, another aspect has appeared- that of the public health policy. More specifically, Washington blamed Beijing for creating the virus, for not handling effectively the epidemic and for the concealment of clues for the nature of the disease. China, at its turn, accused the US for creating the virus and for spreading false information. All those accusations were expressed, while China has tackled with the problem and it implements its aspirations. The coronavirus will not change for good in that tense environment.

Also, the regional conflicts have not stopped. The civil wars continue, Turkey becomes more aggressive in Syria, Cyprus, Libya and the eastern Mediterranean, while Iran has not stopped to be a threat to Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries. The tension in the South China Sea, in the Straits of Taiwan and in the Japan Sea between Japan and North Korea has not ceased. After the end of the pandemic, they will continue to strive for influence, power and resources. 

In Europe, the situation becomes worse. The good relations between the states of the north and the south, which were shaped by the termination of the economic crisis, seem to be deteriorated. A political confrontation has broken out regarding the circulation of medical equipment, the economic management of the quarantine’s negative economic consequences and the future of the Eurozone and the EU itself. It can be admitted that the dichotomy of the Northern and the Southern countries has been resurrected, with Germany denying an overall economic survival package and states such as Italy and Spain promoting that idea. As well as, the German authorities blocked the arrival of surgery masks in Italy, while the “satellites” of Berlin such as Austria and Holland are negative to the without terms economic aid towards the south European countries.

The situation regarding the international institutions and organizations remains the same. They are downgraded and the strong countries use them whenever they want according to their interests. A small exception is the WHO, which is the bastion internationally of the fight against the coronavirus, but the actions of some countries such as the US have darkened their status and their function.  

Lastly, the rival between the West and Russia has not ceased as well. The European Union holds the sanctions while it supports the American foreign policy of Russian containment in the Balkans. In the end of March, amid the pandemic crisis, Republic of North Macedonia entered NATO which signed a blow on the Russian presence in the region. There is not any sign that the stance of the West will change- maybe it will become tougher.     

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic will be a landmark in the modern history. It proved the inadequacy of many health systems and, at the same time, the ineffectiveness of the neoliberal economy. Moreover, it created a humanitarian crisis. Yet, the virus is strong and there is no one medicine to destroy it.

Though, a sector that the pandemic will not affect seriously is that of the international relations. This crisis doesn’t change the attitude of the most countries. The rivals and competitions are preserved; the wars and the ethnic-cleansings around the globe remain, while the international institutions underperform. Nothing changes with an exception in Europe in which the North-South gap reemerges.

The pandemic neither changes nor transforms the international environment. It is still the same. Deterioration is conspicuous; however its cause is not the virus. Even if the virus didn’t exist, this impairment would be a real scenario. The next day will be the same or much worse than good. The global humanitarian crisis doesn’t persuade the leaders to abandon their interest which cause a lot of problems to their countries and their people.  

Recep Erdogan’s “Islamic” foreign policy and the Ottoman past: the rise of Turkey as a crucial factor into the Islamic World and the challenges ahead

The recent visit of Turkish President Recep Erdogan at Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia for an Islamic Summit was indicative of the Turkish strategy towards the Muslim world, which is almost the same as that of the Ottoman one. At the same time, it showed that the Turkish intensions might not be unanswered.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan during a speech. His vision for a strong and independent Turkey with an outstanding role in the Muslim world has become a state policy. (Source: Wikimedia. Commons  https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Prime_Minister_of_Turkey_Recep_Tayyip_Erdogan_cropped.jpg) 

The Islamic Summit

Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad organized in late December 2019 the “Kuala Lumpur Summit 2019”, a meeting of Islamic countries. The hosts were the leaders of Turkey Recep Erdogan, of Iran Hassan Rouhani, of Pakistan Imra Khan, that of Qatar Emir al- Thani and politicians of Algeria.

During the proceedings, issues concerning Islam were discussed, such as the inhuman treat of Chinese Muslims from China, the case of an Islamic economy based on the consumption of Muslim products by the Muslims and the threat of the Islamic community from the Western world. On the other hand, some issues, such as the rise of the Islamic State, the mistreatment of the Muslim community in Myanmar and the war in Yemen, were not examined.    

This Summit caused tensions inside the Muslim world. Saudi Arabia condemned the mentioned meeting because it seems that it tries to be an alternative to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) based on Jeddah. In addition, the Pakistani leader abandoned the Summit after Saudi pressure. The Pakistani government stated that it doesn’t want to be engaged at a political institution different from the OIC. The Malaysian government declared that it has not any intention to be a competitor of the other Muslim states and that it is not an alternative to OIC.  

In a nutshell, the Malaysian initiative caused mixed reactions and it was not as important and successful as it was planned. It can be said that this Summit was a “victim” of the different geopolitical interests among the Islamic countries.

The Turkish plans

Despite the reactions, Turkey managed to show its intentions. They remind those of the Ottoman Empire. To begin with, the leader of the Ottoman Empire with the Title Sultan was at parallel with the Caliph, the supreme leader of all the Muslims. So, the Ottomans were the leaders of the Islamic world. Also, the Sultans were helping other Muslim countries- the Ottoman aid reached the Eastern Horn of Africa, the Indian shores and China. At the same time, the Sultans tried to exterminate any other challenge. For example, when the Saudis under the command of Saud doubted the Title of the Ottoman emperor, the latter sent an expeditionary force to destroy the Saudi Army. As a result, the Sultans proved that they were in position to protect the Muslim communities outside their lands and retain the title of Caliph for them. Last but not least, they managed to protect the Sunni Islam from the Shi’ ites. The Ottoman-Persian Wars were memorial and one of their targets was the domination over Islam. The fall of the Ottoman Empire was a combination of bad economic policies and the threat from the Christian world-Orthodox and Catholic.

Erdogan follows the Ottoman traits. First of all, he tries to become the most prominent representative of the Muslim world, especially of the Sunnis. The religious policies and the cultural diplomacy with the building of several mosques and the funding of numerous Islamic institutes in the Balkans and in Asia generally are signs that the Turkish leader aims at being an important factor in the Islamic community. As well as, as another "Sultan" he supports other Muslim states. The aid he provided to the Libyan government of Tripoli and the support of the Turkmen guerillas in Syria are some examples.

Furthermore, the rhetoric of Turkey regarding Islam marks a dichotomy between the non- Islamic and the Islamic world. So, on the one hand, there is a non–Muslim West which is a threat for the Muslim community. On the other hand, there are other countries such as China which mistreat their Muslim minorities. Mr Erdogan talked about this at the Summit. 

Moreover, Erdogan does not hesitate to confront with the leader of the Sunni Islamic faction, Saudi Arabia. The relations between the two Middle Eastern countries have been deteriorated due to several events. The only difference is the approach of Iran from Turkey. In contrast with the Ottoman leaders, Erdogan maintains good relations with the Shi’ ite Iran and both countries collaborate.

The challenges

It is evident that the Turkish plan for dominance in the Islamic world is very ambitious. Not only there are different interests but also the dynamics inside it can halt the Turkish policy. More specifically, the policy of Erdogan will be challenged by Saudi Arabia and probably by Egypt, two of the most powerful Sunni countries. It is known that Riyadh will not let Turkey become a leader of the Muslims, especially the Sunni ones. Additionally, the Turkish support to radical Islamists in Syria has caused a suspicion among several Islamic states of the true intentions of the Turkish presidency.

What is more, the growing Turkish influence worries some of the Islamic governments. The policy of independence by those governments probably won’t allow the Turkish influence to be established. A basic example is the attitude of Imra Khan. Although the Turkish- Pakistani relations are very good, the Pakistani prime minister didn’t take part at the whole dialogue, while the Turkish president did the opposite. 

Last but not least, any alternative political institution except the OIC is not going to have the appropriate nomination of the Muslim communities and their leaderships, while the “war” from the Saudi government will be very intense. In other words, if this Islamic Summit becomes an institution, it will not be in position to replace the OIC, not even will reach the resonance of that organization.    

In conclusion

From the above, it is obvious that the Turkish government and its head Recep Erdogan follow the road of the Ottoman rulers. Erdogan tries to project political Islam and become a prominent representative and a protector for the Muslims from the Balkans to Africa to Central Asia and the Far East. His stance during the Summit proved that. Already, he has taken important steps and Turkey is an important player in the Islamic political world. 

However, a policy like that is not unchallenged. Erdogan is not alone. He has fearful opponents such as the Saudi dynasty, Egypt and other members of the OIC. Also, Iran for now has good relations with Turkey, but the Shia religious elite will not accept the Turkish influence over the Iranian territory. It is very difficult for Erdogan to achieve his goal and the future will show whether this plan will be successful or not.

        

The Yemen epidemic: when geography and war lead to famine

Yemen, from time to time, gains a place in international news. The war raging for years in the Asian country has caused an international outcry. However, another fact that is not mentioned is that since the fall of 2016, the Yemeni people have been suffering from an outbreak of infectious diseases and especially cholera. This situation sounds the alarm in the scientific community, and it tends to turn into a humanitarian crisis. This article examines how geography and war together have a share of responsibility for this situation.

The "curse" of geography: a country not favored

Yemeni landscape. Those highlands offer an opportunity for the development of agriculture, but are not many and cannot help boosting the production. As you can see, except the green fields, the other territory is infertile. (Credits: Commons. Wikimedia)

Yemen is located in the southern part of the Arabian Peninsula. It borders east to Oman, north to Saudi Arabia, west by sea to Djibouti and Eritrea. It is flowed by the Indian Ocean to the east and south and by the Red Sea to the west.

To the west, to the south and to the southeast, that is, to the seaside, lies the heart of the country's economic life. These areas are home to the largest urban centers, with large ports that allow trade, while fishing is also highly developed. Agriculture is also developed as fertile ground is found in those areas.

But the country is a little favored by geography. Most of the interior is deserted. In particular, this Arab state has mainly a mountainous terrain with many mountains as one goes inland, extending from west to east and occupying a large area. In the north, an area of ​​land is formed, called the 'Empty Square'. It is one of the largest desert areas in the world, a continuation of the vast desert of Saudi Arabia, named Rub al-Khali. It is characteristic that Yemen has no rivers and only when it rains there are streams that become dry when the weather warms. In this rough soil, there are some areas that offer opportunities for cultivation, but not enough production. Still, there are issues of water supply and drinking water, which aggravate the position of the Yemenis.

The fate of the country will be analogous to geography. The Arab country is a hot country, plagued by frequent sandstorms and the process of desertification. The climatic phenomena do not allow the development of agriculture and reduce it, as the fertile soil is constantly decreasing. Consequently, food crises are fatal, while mitigating the negative geographic-climate impact are the major ports in the Indian Ocean favoring imports of food and essentials. Nevertheless, Yemen is known for its problems in the field of nutrition and health.

The Arabian Desert. The same desert continues inside the Yemeni territory, making the soil rough and infertile. (Credits: FREE-PHOTOS- Pixabay)

The factor of  the war

The year 2011 is an important year for the Arab world. Then, a series of uprisings broke out in many Arab countries against the long-standing authoritarian regimes that led to their downfall in some of them and caused to others a civil war with regional and international implications. Yemen was supposed to belong to the latter category.

In January of this year, protests erupted against President Ali Abdullah Saleh with demands similar to other demonstrations. The government exercised violence and repression, and local conflicts erupted. At the same time, armed Islamists seized parts of the region to act as bases for their action. The country was on the brink of anarchy and collapse.

The peculiar civil war raging in Sana'a resulted in the assassination attempt on Saleh. It failed, but the Yemeni president fled to Riyadh injured and left Vice President Al-Hadi in his place. Meanwhile, the opposition formed its own political coalition, leading to a total government-opposition rupture. Finally, the government withstood the pressure and in the winter of 2012, a truce was signed. In the short term, peace returned to the country.

In autumn 2014, political developments in Yemen would take another turn. The Houthis, with their homonymous religious movement, from their bases in the northeast, a not so fertile part of the state, began to spread. They backed the outgoing President Saleh, opposed President Al-Hadi, who was in the meantime backed by the Saudi leadership and received support from Iran, who found the opportunity to undermine its rival, Saudi Arabia, in its “soft underbelly”.

The momentum of the Houthis worried the government and its foreign allies. The descent of them led to a new cycle of civil strife, which this time would prove disastrous for the country and its people. The first success of the Houthis was the capture of the capital. In other areas, the Houthis occupied government bases and parts of the territory. In January 2015, the Hadi government resigned and the split was complete.

In March 2015, a new civil war broke out between the Houthis and the faithful forces in the old government. The focus was on Aden's vital port, where the Houthis were defeated. In return, they occupied the third largest city in the Arab state, Tait, after a general attack. In the West, but also in the kingdoms of the Arabian Peninsula, the strengthening of the Houthis and, by extension, Iran, caused fear. The forces faithful to Hadi had to endure. External involvement would not be late.

The intervention of third countries was expressed by the creation of an Arabian coalition led by Saudi Arabia. Immediately, an air bombardment campaign swept Yemen with Houthis bases, water tanks, crop farms, food depots, civilian homes and other government buildings to become targets. At the same time, Al-Qaeda managed to conquer parts of the country after a victorious march. In the fall, the Houthis abandoned their efforts to capture Aden. Now, life for the Yemeni people would become unbearable.

In late 2015, and while the civil war raged along with outside intervention, Riyadh imposed a naval blockade on Yemen. This move was made in the context of a total war, since the Houthis, despite their efforts, could not be exterminated. Food, first aid and other goods could not be imported into the country either by land, by air or by sea. In the fall of 2016, the United States decided to join the embargo in an effort to pressure the Houthis to leave power, while eliminating Iranian influence.

External intervention was not the only cause of famine. Unable to obtain the goods necessary to continue their struggle, the Houthis launched a campaign of the seizure of those by ordinary citizens. Drugs, food, precious objects and drinking water became a target for Houthis’s men. It was an unpleasant situation that was supposed to prove disastrous for the society.

The outbreak of cholera

Yemenis waiting to buy fuel in the black market. Due to the naval block, the black market thrives in Yemeni cities, causing a lot of problems to the Yemeni people.  (Credits: Wikipedia.org)

In December 2016, the first outbreaks of cholera occurred in the country. The number of people infected has been rising since spring and especially in summer 2017 when there was talk of a pandemic. In 2017, about 910,000 people became infected with cholera, with deaths exceeding 2,500 individuals.

Not only had the situation in 2018 not improved, but it worsened. Overall, it is estimated that more than 1,200,000 people were infected with the germ of the disease, with deaths rising to more than 2,500, with 58% of those infected and dying being children.

For 2019, there is no sound evidence yet, but it can be assumed that things are not going to be better as the conflict continues. Another worrying thing is that cholera in the country is spreading very fast. It is the fastest expansion of the germ since 1949, when it is monitored by the WHO.

What eventually caused cholera? An overall account

It is clear from the above that the rapid rise and spread of infectious disease in Yemen is due to two key factors: geography and war. Geography has made Yemen a barren country, with little room for growth in production and climatic phenomena that facilitate a food crisis and the emergence and spread of diseases. Lack of water also causes water scarcity, while inadequate sanitation policy leads to inadequate water purification, a disastrous situation for the public health. The war, in turn, has led to the destruction of food storages, the decline in agricultural production, the destruction of critical public health infrastructures (water distribution and purification plants, hospitals etc), the contamination of goods for consumption, the absence of imports of essentials and looting of the minimum goods available. Therefore, the outbreak of infectious diseases and cholera was a natural continuation of the two factors mentioned above.

What does the future hold? It seems that the future will bring misery. The conflict does not seem to end. The interests are many and the stakes go beyond the internal political balances of the Arab state. In this context, cholera will continue to spread, infecting people and causing death. Coordinated energy and willing are needed at the local, regional and international level to address the current humanitarian crisis. However, there seems to be no such willing, at least for the time being.

What Trump’s administration wants for the Pacific?: detecting the American “Pacific” strategy towards China

The confrontation between China and the USA will be the main issues in international policies in the near future- may be and beyond. (Pixabay: Tumisu)

Nowadays, China is a very strong country in all sectors. As it is usual, it has expansionist views not only in the region of the Pacific Ocean but also globally. So, it is normal that fatefully it will confront with USA for dominance.

The present article examines the strategy of the US towards China in an effort to tackle the gradually bigger power and influence of Beijing in a specific part of the globe, the Pacific Ocean. It can be assumed that Trump’s government has a strategy, which consists of a net of alliances and strategic partnerships, the presence of military forces in the region and the approach of countries which were not friendly to the US.

At first, this text mentions briefly the reasons why China is a threat to Washington. After that, the American strategy against the Chinese threat is presented. A note is important here: I know that maybe there are a lot of other aspects of this strategy, but I will try to inform you about the backbone of it. In the end, there will be a conclusion with a critical review of the mentioned strategy.

Understanding the Chinese threat

China is a rival some years now of the American interests in East Asia and in the world in general. As far as the Pacific Ocean’s region is concerned, the biggest problem appears. First of all, China has a flourishing economy. This allows it to increase its trade, to build strong armed forces and to fund foreign actors, lobbies and governments. Also, its soft power, which is projected by the Confucius Institutes around the world, can be added here. Additionally, its technological advance is of the utmost importance and many times US intelligence officials have warned their government about the new jeopardy is appeared. 

Its relations with Russia have been ameliorated, and this collaboration creates a “headache” in the White House. In addition, Chinese ambitions for world dominance are expressed by the OBOR Initiative. This project is about to upgrade the geopolitical significance of Beijing and to aid its economy. A lot of money has already been given to investments in poor countries which will help the plans of China. Some of the most important installations where the Chinese have invested are ports in southeast Pacific Ocean. If the militarization of several small islands in the South China Sea will be added, a Chinese zone will be created. In this zone, China will control whatever is moving or is happening and, of course, it will prevent any foreign activation. In the long run, the Chinese presence will be total and as a consequence the American one will be ceased.

In a nutshell, China is a threat for USA in all sectors. The fact that it pressures traditional American allies in the Pacific’s region makes the Washington’s counter-measures planning inevitable.

The American movements

Donald Trump follows a foreign policy a bit different from that of his predecessors. This fact, of course, has triggered a lot of conversations and reactions. However, we cannot say that there is a lack of strategy, it's just another approach. (Pixabay:Gerd Altmann)

One of the countries that is important for Washington is Taiwan. From 1949, when the communists took power in mainland China and persecuted the anti-communists who found shelter in Formosa Island (Taiwan), the latter is America’s bastion against China. The two countries have mutual cooperation treaties and the US Armed Forces have created a safe net around the Asian country. Beijing doesn’t recognize the nationalist government of Taipei and it states that it is a region of mainland China. The Chinese threat has led Trump’s administration to endorse a $2 billion sale of military equipment to the Taiwanese Armed Forces in order to strengthen them. This sale includes armored vehicles, anti-aircraft systems and others. Also, the president Tsai Ing-wen is going to meet the US president in July, an indication that the bilateral relations continue to be excellent. It is obvious that, except the military sector, USA tries to strengthen its ally diplomatically as well.

It can be assumed that Trump will support the candidacy in the upcoming elections of the president mentioned before, because she is pro- American and she has a very good relationship with her. However, this scenario causes nervousness in Beijing. The enhancement of Taiwanese- American relations is perceived as a counter-measure and a threat to Chinese interests. Even though a war is not very possible to break out, the intensification of an economic- diplomatic warfare from China is anticipated.

The US government cannot underestimate another ally, maybe, the only country in the region which can counterbalance the Chinese economic power, Japan. After WWII, Japan became at its turn an important ally for Washington. Now, its role is as vital as during the post- war period. There are numerous American troops stationed on Japanese soil in order to offer protection from China and North Korea. Also, there is collaboration at the sectors of cyber-defense, ballistic technology, economy and trade. Although, some problems arose because of American sanctions on Japanese products importing in the United States, in general, the relations are very good. Two another reasons which proves that are the sale of a number of F- 35 fighting aircrafts to the Japanese Air Force and the mediation of the American diplomacy to the confrontation between Japan and South Korea, both allies of USA, to be tackled.

Another aspect of the American strategy is the approach of Vietnam. This is not random. Vietnam, due to its rivalry with China, tries to protect itself. It hosted the bilateral dialogue between USA- North Korea in an effort to be presented as an actor of pacification and in order to boost its status. It can be said that Vietnam is emerging as a front-runner factor. Being in the underbelly of China, it is a key factor in the navigation in the South China Sea and basically for the American Indo- Pacific strategy. This is why Trump accepted to meet Kim Jong-un in Hanoi and, as well as he approved the sale of military equipment to the Asian country. To the question of why Hanoi wants collaboration with its former enemy, the answer is the Chinese threat. Washington has noticed that and there is a common ground for the two countries to secure their interests.

The meetings between the leaders of USA and North Korea are a new phenomenon for the US foreign policy and for the global affairs. They are indicative that there will be some changes in the American strategy. Though, it is too early to talk about a total smoothing of the bilateral relations. (Commons Wikimedia)

The smoothing of the USA- North Korea rivalry is very high on the State Department’s agenda. Trump’s meetings with the North Korean leader signify that turn on the American foreign policy. Though, until this time there is not a positive result and the situation is getting worse with the American movements concerning South Korea. The relations between the USA- South Korea are old. USA supports this relationship, and this is why Seoul purchased modern military equipment, including the very effective F-35 fighting aircraft. This sale angered Un’s government, and it declared that it will develop the appropriate systems in order to face the new aircraft. It is evident that the White House wants to enhance the military capabilities of South Korea because it’s a bastion against China and North Korea.

The American foreign policy cannot overlook Oceania. The Chinese influence has arrived and spread to the whole region. It appears with many forms- tourism, Huawei, pro- Chinese lobbies and the projection of military power against the not so strong Australian and New Zealand Armed Forces. Although the two countries are benefited economically from the interactions with Beijing, they are under pressure from Washington to abandon any good attitude towards China. For this reason, the US is about to sell modern military systems to Australia, including F-35 aircrafts and armored vehicles. What is more, Australian ships sail to the South China Sea in order to show that this maritime region is not a Chinese lake. The American pressure has borne results because it has caused a severe blow on Australian/ New Zealand- China relations and bilateral trade.

Last but not least, Philippines are a riddle for the American policy making. They have a strategic importance due to the proximity to the South China Sea and the ongoing spread of Chinese influence. They offer a stable base for US troops to operate against the Chinese ones. Also, their leader Duterte although he has a close strategic partnership with USA, at parallel, he strengthens the relationship with China. The stance of Manila has caused anger and alarm to the White House and it is very interesting to see how the American policy makers will handle the situation. Until now, the American presence on the island is undisputed, but faces challenges.   

In conclusion

In conclusion, which is the Pacific Ocean’s strategy of Donald Trump’s government concerning China? As it seems, the hypothesis above is right. The American strategy is a mixture of forging the previous alliances with other Asian states and creating new ones with countries not so friendly towards the United States, a policy of pressure to ally governments in order to stop their approach with China and the sales of weapons to other countries with the aim to strengthen the preventive capability of friendly states, boost the national production and economy and that strategy predicts the mediation during tensions among American allies to stabilize the bilateral partnerships.

Important position in this strategy has North Korea. The latter is not as big a threat as it is perceived in the West. It has only nuclear weaponry and it will use it in case it will be a target of an attack. It cannot threaten the US interests severely. On the other side, China can harm US interests in all the sectors, including the nuclear one. Also, China is the main partner of North Korea. Normalizing the bilateral relations with North Korea, the American government not only helps its allies, who feel the danger of the North Korean nuclear program, but also reduces the bilateral tensions and it can distract the communist country from the Chinese sphere of influence. Having that completed, it can focus on tackling the “Chinese problem”. It is obvious that China is benefited from the tensions between Washington and Pyongyang because they work as a diversion and Trump wants to deprive this chance from the Chinese government.