Category: World

  • Does Georgia Help Russia Bypass Sanctions?

    Does Georgia Help Russia Bypass Sanctions?

    It is dubious that, while people in Georgia aspire to European integration, politicians are not taking significant action toward this goal. Instead, they are drafting laws like the foreign agents bill, which make the country increasingly authoritarian and similar to Russia in terms of governance and media control. This situation is largely attributed to the significant business ties between Georgian politicians, businesspeople, and their Russian counterparts. Although Georgia was expected to align with Ukraine, given its own loss of substantial territory to Russia in the 2008 war, it is now accused of circumventing Western sanctions imposed due to Russia’s war with Ukraine – an accusation that could jeopardize Georgia’s European aspirations.

    The investigative outlet iFact recently published an article revealing troubling patterns. Journalists posing as parties interested in shipping dual-use goods to Russia found that sending items like drones and computer processors faced few obstacles. The report acknowledged existing inspection protocols designed to prevent illicit goods from crossing the Georgia-Russia border but pointed out that the effectiveness and thoroughness of these checks can vary. Moreover, couriers could potentially bypass Georgian restrictions by routing goods through Azerbaijan, Armenia, or Central Asian countries before reaching Russia. This pattern suggests that such circumvention is unlikely to occur without some level of cooperation from Georgian authorities.

    Georgian government officials have yet to directly address the report published earlier this month. Instead, their focus has shifted to other allegations linking them to Russia. Recently, the ruling Georgia Dream party has been preoccupied with damage control following an August 9 OCCRP investigation into the property holdings of Honorary Chairman Bidzina Ivanishvili’s family in Russia. Georgia’s Revenue Service has rejected the report, claiming that this is not the first instance of investigative journalists making baseless accusations about uncontrollable entry of sanctioned goods into Georgia and their subsequent export to Russia. Georgian Dream Party leaders have previously denied allegations that Georgia facilitates the shipping of sanctioned goods to Russia, citing a lack of conclusive evidence. Former Prime Minister Irakli Garibashvili asserted in June 2023 that the government is absolutely transparent and declared with full responsibility that no evidence has been presented showing that Georgia has helped anyone evade sanctions. However, this claim remains hard to believe.

    Georgia has not joined Western nations in sanctioning Russia since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, citing concerns that such measures would severely impact its economy. Businesses often exploit loopholes to circumvent sanctions, a tactic historically common through rerouting trade via allied or neighboring countries. Georgia has been accused of such practices, along with other countries close to Russia like Kyrgyzstan, despite its recent protests against Russia and aspirations for EU membership. 

    Georgian leaders insist that the country is not being used to bypass Western sanctions. However, dual-use goods, such as certain mechanical and electronic components, are among Georgian exports to Russia, despite limited production capacity in Georgia. iFact’s report suggests that the presence of these goods indicates exploitation of legal loopholes and logistical routes to support Russia’s war effort. While some argue that sanctions circumvention is minimal, as shown by trade data, and that stricter restrictions could harm Georgia’s economy, others believe that Georgian authorities, closely linked with Russia, are deceiving both Western nations and their own citizens for business interests.

  • Who Will Become Japan’s Next Prime Minister?

    Who Will Become Japan’s Next Prime Minister?

    As Japan’s Prime Minister Fumio Kishida decided to step down in September following his poor approval ratings, it has become certain that Japan will have a new prime minister next month. The ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), a conservative party despite its name, is facing challenges in finding a successor. Their previous attempts, including Kishida, to continue the legacy of Shinzo Abe, who served as LDP’s prime minister from 2012 to 2020, have failed. The election to choose Kishida’s successor will take place during an LDP meeting in September.

    Kishida’s decision to step down has triggered one of the most unpredictable leadership races for the LDP in recent history. The selection process has turned what was once a competitive race with a vulnerable incumbent into an open contest with numerous credible contenders but no clear frontrunner. Among the potential successors are party insiders, unconventional ministers, and, in a rare move for Japan, two MPs under the age of 50. The presence of two women in the race also raises the possibility – however slim – of the country’s first female prime minister. This uncertainty is fitting, as it comes at a time of significant instability for the LDP, a broad coalition of conservatives that has governed modern Japan for most of the time since its establishment in the mid-1950s.

    Shigeru Ishiba, a former defense minister in his 60s who has declared his intention to run, could play a key role in the party’s future. Although he has failed in four previous attempts to become party leader, Ishiba consistently polls well among voters and should easily secure the 20 endorsements from lawmakers required to enter the race. The final decision will be made by the party’s 1.1 million members. Ishiba may face competition from digital minister Taro Kono, a moderate, and Shinjiro Koizumi, the 43-year-old son of former prime minister Junichiro Koizumi. The candidacy of two women is also notable. Yoko Kamikawa is one of the two women who might become prime minister if she receives support from Fumio Kishida. Meanwhile, Sanae Takaichi, the economic security minister and a right-wing favorite, recently underscored her conservative credentials with a visit to Yasukuni Shrine, a site linked to Japan’s militarist past. The party’s secretary-general, Toshimitsu Motegi, is likely ruled out due to his connection with factional maneuvering that has alienated voters.

    Kishida could still influence the race, especially if he supports another potential candidate, Yoko Kamikawa, whom he appointed last year as Japan’s first female foreign minister in nearly two decades. Although Kishida is not popular with the public, he remains influential within the party. If he backs Kamikawa and secures support from others in the LDP, she could become a strong candidate.

    The unexpected decision provides the LDP with some breathing room. With a month to choose a new leader and a year before the general election scheduled for October 2025, the new leader’s top priority will be to restore public trust before the next general election. The LDP’s next leader must be able to unite the party and effectively manage the government, with experience being more valuable than mere popularity in polls. Kishida’s successor will also need to address pressing issues such as the rising cost of living, escalating tensions with China and North Korea, and the potential return of Donald Trump as U.S. president. If the LDP selects a leader without addressing public concerns over political funding scandals, the party could face a significant defeat in the upcoming election. It would be advantageous for the LDP to choose a young leader with no ties to the current administration who can offer a fresh vision for the party.

    Given that the parliament is controlled by the LDP, the new leader will not face immediate challenges from within. However, if the party performs poorly, it risks losing its administration after nearly 13 years and potentially seeing the return of the opposition. As regional tensions with the U.S. and China escalate, strong governance is essential for Japan to safeguard its interests.

  • Why Doesn’t the Islamic World Have a Superpower to Challenge Israel?

    Why Doesn’t the Islamic World Have a Superpower to Challenge Israel?

    The conflict between Muslims and Jews has historical roots extending over centuries, primarily driven by religious differences rather than just territorial disputes. This is why the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict attracts worldwide attention and involves Muslims and Jews globally. Social media is abuzz with propaganda from both sides. However, on the ground, Israel has a significant advantage as a sovereign state with advanced project management, while Hamas, which governs Gaza and initiated the fresh wave of conflict with terrorist attacks in Israel, finds itself on the defensive with only weakened support from Iran. The conflict appears to be heavily skewed in favor of one side, with the Hamas side suffering greatly.

    In terms of international politics, Israel receives support from superpowers like the United States, the United Kingdom, and France, while countries like Russia, China, and India maintain a more neutral stance. This support provides Israel with a substantial advantage. On the other hand, Hamas and Gaza mainly receive backing from Iran, whose capabilities are in question. This raises the question: why are there no superpowers in the Arab or Muslim world capable of challenging Israel?

    The answer lies in U.S. supremacy in a unipolar world. Although there is widespread anger and calls for solidarity with Hamas across the Islamic world, which stretches from Morocco to Indonesia, these are largely limited to public statements. This situation represents a clear victory for U.S. diplomacy, which has either aligned powerful countries with U.S. interests or severely weakened others. A powerful or superpower country typically has strong leadership, economic influence, political influence, strong international alliances, and a strong military, but few countries in the Islamic world possess all these features combined. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Turkey are considered powerful countries within the Islamic world today, but they are all aligned with the United States. Turkey is a NATO member with tight ties to the U.S., while Saudi Arabia and the UAE are highly reliant on business with the U.S., and their leadership maintains strong connections with U.S. diplomats. They also have military defense pacts with the U.S. Qatar, one of the wealthiest Islamic countries, also maintains a close relationship with the U.S. Despite their connections with Islamist leaders and organizations, and their roles in mediating with groups like Hamas and the Taliban.

    All the countries that previously challenged Israel are now weakened and humbled by U.S. strategies and diplomacy. Egypt, home to the largest army in the Middle East and the leader of last century’s Arab movements against Israel, along with Libya, Iraq, and Syria – countries that once challenged Israel—have lost the leadership capable of making such decisions. They are experiencing severe economic decline and face significant domestic challenges. Now, it seems that the Islamic Republic of Iran is currently the only major power from the Muslim world still challenging Israel. However, Iran has also been economically weakened by strong U.S. sanctions and faces serious domestic issues. Iran has been stunned and humbled by Israel through severe attacks. While Iran has vowed revenge, it has not taken any significant actions that are visibly effective. Nonetheless, Iran has not completely withdrawn from its ideological commitment to opposing Israel, unlike other states. Iran continues to fund organizations fighting against Israel, and Qatar is also reported to be providing support. Despite these efforts, no one is currently able to effectively challenge Israel, highlighting the weakness of the Islamic world outside of its elaborate organizations.

    As Israel is not ready for a truce, it seems likely that Gaza will be systematically annexed by Israel. This outcome appears inevitable. The stance of Islamic countries, which avoids a regional war, may bring peace, but it is clear that the position of Muslim governments does not reflect the sentiment of their populations. This could lead to a revival of terrorist organizations like ISIS in the Islamic world, which would bring more challenges in the region.

  • Is Russia Going to Lose the War?

    Is Russia Going to Lose the War?

    While Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, following a series of military operations that had previously annexed significant parts of Ukraine and involved multiple instances of intimidation, everyone expected that the mighty superpower, Russia – the heir to the great Soviet Union – under the strong leadership of Putin, would complete its objectives in a matter of months. It was widely assumed that they would overthrow the Zelensky government and erase any trace of Ukrainian identity from the earth. The initial momentum seemed to confirm this, as almost the entire coast of the Black Sea and the capital, Kyiv, were severely struck, with buildings reduced to rubble, people dying, and many fleeing the country. When the western cities of Ukraine were also attacked, many predicted that Russia’s victory was inevitable and Ukraine was doomed.

    However, the Ukrainian soldiers, along with the government led by Zelensky, a former comedian determined to defy Putin’s ambitions, resisted fiercely. With full support from the United States and Europe, in the form of money and weapons, Ukraine forced Russia to retreat from the captured territories, including areas near the capital. Now, Russia finds itself confined almost entirely to the areas it had seized before 2022. In a remarkable turn of events, and perhaps the biggest blow to Russia, a superpower once considered capable of challenging even the United States, Ukrainian forces have begun entering Russian territory and capturing land. This has become a major humiliation for Russia. And yet, it still seems unbelievable – could Russia actually lose this war?

    Ukraine’s top commander, Oleksandr Syrskyi, reports that his forces have captured 1,000 square kilometers of Russia’s Kursk region, a strategically important area for Russia. Footage has surfaced showing Ukrainian troops waving their flags on Russian soil, delivering a significant humiliation to the once-mighty Russia – Goliath brought low by David. After initial confusion, Russia acknowledged the attack. Alexei Smirnov, the acting regional governor of Kursk, estimated that Kyiv’s forces had taken control of 28 settlements in an incursion approximately 12 kilometers deep and 40 kilometers wide. While this is less than half of Syrskyi’s estimate, Smirnov’s statement represents a notable public admission of a major Russian setback more than 29 months after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The claims made by both sides could not be independently verified.

    Russian President Vladimir Putin acknowledged the situation and vowed a strong response to the attack, ordering his troops to dislodge the enemy from Russian territories. However, a week into the surprise assault, Russia is still struggling to repel the Ukrainian forces. Kyiv’s strategy of maintaining silence stands in sharp contrast to last year’s counteroffensive, which was widely anticipated for months and ultimately faltered against Russia’s defensive lines.

    It is certain that Russia will fight back with all its force to reclaim its territory and will likely launch further attacks in Ukraine to restore its strong image. Although Russia is a nuclear power with a strong arsenal, it seems that something is amiss in the Kremlin. Decisions are not being made swiftly, and there appears to be a lack of planned moves or coherent strategy from the Russian side. The Kremlin seems confused and not in a sound state of decision-making. Wagner’s who made initial momentum are sidelined after they attempted a coup, leading to the death of their leader, and the shortage of weapons and manpower on the Russian side has become evident, while Ukraine continues to advance each day.

    Even though we can’t predict who will win the war, analyzing the current situation suggests that the Ukraine war increasingly looks like a major blunder by Russia. Their economy has stalled, businesses have suffered, their superpower status is being questioned, and it now seems like Goliath is being humbled by David. From now on, Russia may need to respect Ukraine as a Slavic power capable of challenging the Russian Federation. Putin might start seeking a peace deal because they lack the manpower to deploy more troops to Ukraine and need to protect their vast country. Additionally, they don’t have enough funds to sustain the war effort indefinitely. If Ukraine continues to advance further, the Russian sphere of influence could collapse. There may even be secessionist movements within Russia if Moscow weakens, which would be easier in such a large country. Crucial times lie ahead for the Kremlin, and it is likely that the ongoing war will have a greater impact on Russia than on Ukraine.

    The chances of an all-out war, as anticipated by Russophiles, now seem to be simmering down. It appears that Putin doesn’t have strong support from Russian authorities, and the image of Russia has been damaged. Kyiv’s current actions seem to be aimed at gaining a stronger negotiating position in potential talks to end the war and halt Moscow’s offensive in eastern Ukraine. However, one thing is clear: the United States and NATO’s strategy has proven effective. They avoided a world war and further empowered Russia, but Russia has been humbled. While Russia will not surrender, as doing so would mean the loss of its superpower status, it is now being forced into negotiations.

  • Will the Gaza Conflict Cause ISIS and Al-Qaida Revival?

    Will the Gaza Conflict Cause ISIS and Al-Qaida Revival?

    Palestine is an emotional issue for global Muslims. People who support Muslim solidarity across borders, from the United States to Indonesia, are now feeling angered. So-called rich Islamic countries and secular nations can’t do anything about the Gaza conflict, while the media in these countries continue to report Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide. The governments follow the strategy of avoiding animosity with Israel or the United States, but they are not blocking media coverage of the conflict in Gaza, and the media continue to celebrate it as usual. While Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, the state outlets of Middle Eastern governments, strongly propagate the Gaza issue, their own governments can’t do anything about it. Political analysts believe this situation will drive more young Muslims, who are desperate due to various conditions including the situation in Gaza, towards radical Islam, and they are easily swayed by Islamist organizations that fight against mainstream opinions, laws, and governments. The Islamic population feels betrayed by the world, and the media stoke emotional factors, which, combined with tough living conditions and unemployment, as well as patriotic far-right movements opposing Islamism in the West, create what is considered the perfect ground for the revival of the Islamic State, Al-Qaeda, and similar groups.

    Security services across the Middle East, including the Gulf countries, fear that the ongoing conflict may lead to a flow of radicalized youth to ISIS and al-Qaeda through social media groups. These individuals might travel to regions controlled by these groups, where they could receive training and indoctrinate more young people to conduct terrorist attacks. The United Nations has published a series of reports highlighting how major extremist groups are exploiting the war in Gaza to attract new recruits and mobilize existing supporters, even though both al-Qaeda and ISIS have condemned Hamas as apostates for decades.

    Officials and analysts are reporting an increase in Islamic militant extremism in various areas. An ISIS branch in the Sinai desert has recently become more lethal, and rising attacks by the group in Syria have raised concerns, with several plots thwarted in Jordan. In a recent attack, seven Syrian soldiers were killed in an ISIS ambush in Raqqa province, northern Syria, with 383 fighters from government forces and their proxy militias killed since the beginning of the year, according to the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Last month, Jordanian security services uncovered a plot in Amman when explosives detonated while being prepared by extremists in a poor neighborhood. Subsequent raids led to the detention of a network of predominantly young men who were apparently radicalized by ISIS propaganda. Reports from India indicate that the Islamic State is trying to recruit Muslim youth willing to fight against the nation and Israel. In Turkey, authorities arrested dozens of people last month to combat an increased threat from an ISIS affiliate with a strong presence there. Meanwhile, al-Qaeda’s branch in Yemen has launched a new effort to inspire followers to attack Western, Israeli, Jewish, and other targets. The issue extends beyond existing terrorist organizations, as increasingly radicalized youth may choose to join new groups or form their own in areas historically free from such threats, due to the borderless nature of the internet.

    The Gaza war may serve as a seminal cause for radicalizing the next generation of jihadis, as they are increasingly exposed to volatile images and videos from Gaza through the internet. Although the immediate consequences may not be apparent, they are likely to manifest over the coming years. The conflict has significantly heightened the terrorism threat and elicited a strong emotional reaction. Regional officials emphasize the impact of continuous exposure to images of suffering from Gaza, available 24/7 on television and the internet, describing the conflict as a ‘Push Factor’ that encourages extremist violence across the Middle East and beyond. According to Palestinian health officials, more than 38,000 people have died in the Israeli offensive into Gaza, with about half of those identified being women and children. 

    A vast regional occupation by the Islamic State, similar to their previous control stretching from Iraq to Syria, is expected to reestablish itself. Despite the opposition forces in this area being highly equipped and prepared for battle, ISIS has launched over 100 attacks on government forces and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in Syria in recent months, with violence peaking in March at levels not seen in several years. ISIS cells are operating at higher levels than before. Kurdish forces opposing ISIS face severe challenges from the armies of Turkey, Iraq, and Syria. In this complex war zone, combined with poor governance, the presence of individuals willing to fight and die for the cause could contribute to the creation of a caliphate and expansion into new areas. As more Islamic factions demand separate regions and attempt to overthrow democratic governments, anarchy is resulting. Consequently, the emergence of a more effective caliphate can be expected.

    Islamic extremist groups are inundating the internet with material that supports Gaza, Hamas, and Islam, while inciting anger towards Jews, Israel, the United States, and even Islamic Gulf countries. They are spreading instructions for bomb-making, violence, coups, and Islamic methods of killing, which easily influence the youth. The foundational ideas of Islamizing the world and killing infidels are more aggressively propagated through the internet than ever before. A new generation is growing up with an ideology that threatens peaceful coexistence in many countries. As more Muslim countries descend into anarchy, radicalization becomes increasingly feasible, and the revival of notorious Islamist terrorist organizations seems imminent, posing a growing risk to global stability.

  • Is Turkey Really Going to Fight Against Israel?

    Is Turkey Really Going to Fight Against Israel?

    Turkey and Israel maintained a good relationship, while other Islamic countries, from Morocco to Indonesia, do not even recognize the state of Israel. Israel and Turkey formally established diplomatic relations in 1949, shortly after Israel was founded. Both countries prioritized cooperation in economics, diplomacy, military, and strategic affairs. Although disputes have arisen, diplomats from both sides have worked to keep the relationship intact.

    However, in recent decades, under the leadership of Islamist leader Erdoğan, the relationship between the two countries has deteriorated considerably. Relations worsened further after Israel’s retaliation in Gaza, with Turkey condemning Israel and supporting Hamas. As tensions escalate, many question the likelihood of Turkey intervening, given Erdoğan’s strong support for Hamas and his advocacy for global Muslim solidarity. Will Turkey fight against Israel to save Palestinians?

    During a meeting with his ruling AK Party in his hometown of Rize on Sunday, President Tayyip Erdogan suggested that Turkey might intervene in Israel, similar to its previous actions in Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh. In the televised address that was trending on X, he stated that there was no reason Turkey could not undertake such actions and emphasized the need for strength to pursue these steps. Although he did not specify the form the intervention might take, he confidently highlighted Turkey’s defense industry  throughout his speech.

    Erdogan has demonstrated a readiness to engage in significant interventions in the Middle East, often citing Turkey’s strategic interests and invoking a sense of Ottoman heritage. He has participated in attacks in Nagorno-Karabakh alongside Azerbaijan, showing hostility toward Armenia and advocating for a grand Turkic ethnic union. Erdogan also supports the faction in Libya that controls Tripoli, which opposes the faction backed by France and other groups. Additionally, Turkey frequently conducts operations along the Syrian border, targeting Kurdish-controlled areas, and there are reports suggesting potential intervention in Kurdish territories in Iraq. It’s interesting that while Turkey does not support the creation of Kurdistan, it actively advocates for the Palestinian cause.

    Erdoğan has been highly critical of Israel’s actions during its conflict with Hamas, accusing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of genocide. Turkey has halted all trade with Israel and recalled its ambassador. The Turkish foreign ministry compared Netanyahu to Adolf Hitler, claiming that, just as Hitler’s reign ended, so too will Netanyahu’s. The ministry also declared that those who seek to destroy the Palestinians will be held accountable and that humanity will stand with the Palestinians, who will not be defeated.

    In response, Israel recalled its diplomats from Turkey and accused Ankara of supporting terrorist organizations, including Hamas and Iran. Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz comparing Erdoğan to Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Katz suggested that Erdoğan’s threats against Israel are reminiscent of Saddam Hussein’s actions and cautioned Erdoğan to remember the outcome of Saddam’s threats.

    Turkey, where about 99.8% of the population are Muslims, was regarded as secular until Erdoğan’s leadership. If Turkey were to enter the war, it could be perceived as a reestablishment of Ottoman Turkey. While the global Muslim population is frustrated by the lack of punitive action against Israel, especially as Lebanon, Syria, and Iran face frequent attacks, Turkey’s intervention could restore some of the historical significance associated with the Ottoman Empire and potentially position it as a leading force in the Islamic world.Such a move would likely have a significant impact on the global order.

    There is no doubt that Turkey is a major military power, boasting NATO’s second-largest military and advanced munitions technology, including its renowned drones. Its involvement could present a significant challenge to Israel, unlike Iran, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia, which face geographical limitations and a lack of war experience. However, the likelihood of Turkey intervening remains low due to US influence over the country. If a conflict does occur, Turkey’s economy may struggle to sustain it, potentially leading to hardship for its people. Additionally, the US might then support the creation of Kurdistan, an expanded Armenia, or a unified Cyprus, which could threaten Turkey’s existence.

    Despite international media reports, it is more realistic to view Erdoğan and the Turkish government’s comments as part of a strategy to maintain his image as the defender of Islam. This is particularly relevant given that the Muslim population, who are staunch supporters of Erdoğan, are discontented with the situation in Gaza. If public dissatisfaction persists, Erdoğan faces a significant challenge as the opposition gains support among the people.

    Although direct confrontation is unlikely, Turkey is exploring all possible options against Israel. Reports indicate that Turkey may formally submit a declaration of intervention in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel regarding the Gaza conflict to the International Court of Justice. As a seasoned politician, Erdoğan knows that without addressing the concerns of the Islamist populace and taking a strong stance on the Palestinian issue, he cannot maintain his political position or assert Turkey’s leadership in the Muslim world.

  • US and Japan Are Getting Ready for China

    US and Japan Are Getting Ready for China

    The United States and its top ally in the Asia-Pacific, Japan, are preparing for a potential confrontation with China in the near future. As part of this effort, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has been making frequent trips to Tokyo, where he holds essential meetings with his Japanese counterpart and signs important agreements, including plans to increase arms production to address China’s aggression.

    Most recently, Secretary Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin met with their Japanese counterparts, Yoko Kamikawa and Minoru Kihara, in Tokyo at the US-Japan Security Consultative Committee, referred to as the “2+2” talks. They reaffirmed their alliance in the wake of President Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the November presidential race. Both US and Japanese defense leaders, along with senior diplomats, agreed to strengthen their military cooperation regardless of any administrative changes, acknowledging that China remains a significant threat to both nations.

    Japan, which dismantled its military after its defeat in World War II, is now rapidly remilitarizing with the support of the US in response to threats from China. They are increasing investments in the defense sector and strengthening military cooperation with regional allies. And the US and Japan are upgrading the command and control of US forces stationed in Japan and boosting American-licensed missile production. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin noted that the command upgrade will be the most significant change to the US Forces Japan since its creation and one of the strongest improvements in the military ties with Japan in 70 years. These new operational capabilities and responsibilities will advance collective deterrence. Japan is home to more than 50,000 US troops, but the commander of the US Forces Japan (USFJ), based in Yokota in the western suburbs of Tokyo, currently has no direct command authority. Instead, directives are issued by the United States Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) in Hawaii.

    Diplomatic meetings among “Asian NATO” countries are increasing rapidly. With China making slow progress on its economic goals, there is growing concern that it might turn to its political interests. Japan, due to historical tensions and its geographical proximity, could become a primary target if China decides to act. So, Japan is taking swift measures to counter Chinese ambitions in the region. It is evident that the weakened Japan emboldens China both economically and politically. Therefore, the United States is actively encouraging Japan to adopt a more assertive stance and is prepared to offer full support. Given the strong alliance between China, North Korea, and Russia, the United States recognizes that this coalition cannot be managed alone and views Japan as its most reliable partner in the region.

    Escalating regional tensions into full-blown war would be disastrous for everyone involved. While conflict is always costly, creating fear in an opponent can be an effective strategy. Political analysts suggest that the US and Japan are working together with this strategy to counter China’s ambitions. Sometimes, showcasing military strength can be more effective in maintaining peace than negotiations alone.  Following the recent 2+2 talks with Japan, the US announced its commitment to “Extended Deterrence”, including nuclear weapons, in response to nuclear threats from Russia and China. This marks a significant shift from Japan’s previous reluctance to openly address this sensitive issue, given its history as the only country to have endured atomic attacks.

  • What Does the Influx of Western Investments in Malaysia Mean?

    What Does the Influx of Western Investments in Malaysia Mean?

    In Asian politics, two major alliances are emerging: one led by the United States, with Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, and Singapore, and the other led by China, including Russia, North Korea, and Iran. However, there are still players in the region that have not joined either side but whose moves can shift the power balance. These countries skillfully open up to both parties, using the rivalry as an opportunity. Malaysia can be counted among these.

    Malaysia is a country that always keeps close ties with the US; it has strong military and economic relationships with the US and is a place where many Western companies Asian businesses operate. However, unlike other United States allies in the region, Malaysia does not distance itself from China, economically or politically. Malaysia maintains a warm relationship with China and is part of the Belt and Road Initiative. Even though Malaysia receives significant investments from the United States, China is now Malaysia’s biggest trade partner. There are many doubters who believe that Malaysia’s Islamic identity and increasing authoritarian nature in administration could lead it to side with China or remain neutral. Being strategically located, Malaysia’s neutrality would be a setback for the USA.

    However, the influx of investments, including in the semiconductor industry, is flowing to Malaysia from the West. These investments are not only meant for economic growth but also serve as a political strategy. This substantial amount of investment could help Malaysia join the list of developed countries and ultimately become part of the Asian NATO.

    The semiconductor industry is increasingly important in the digital era, and the world seeks alternatives beyond Taiwan. Malaysia understands this opportunity and is setting up infrastructure to capitalize on it. However, it’s not just about business; investing in such an important sector also requires considering the country’s political and economic policies. Investments will flow into the country only if it is politically stable and aligns with Western interests. It is important to note that Malaysia has successfully attracted Western companies in this sector. Prominent companies like Intel and Infineon have invested $7 billion, NVIDIA is preparing to invest $4.3 billion in an AI data center, and Texas Instruments has allocated $3.1 billion for two new semiconductor assembly facilities. Other significant investors include Bosch, AT&S, Ericsson, and Simtech. This aligns perfectly with Malaysia’s aim to become a high-tech economy.

    It needs to be considered that the U.S. is giving a green light to investments because they want to keep Malaysia aligned with them. Malaysia holds an important geopolitical position, connecting the South China Sea to the world. Supporting Malaysia and facilitating its semiconductor ambitions is part of the United States’ strategy. Although Malaysia is already involved in the semiconductor industry with local firms like Tera and Upstar, which handle high-end technologies such as wafer fabrication and IC designs, Malaysia is expecting $107 billion in investments to position itself as the next Taiwan. The “Kuala Lumpur 2030” initiative aims to establish the country as a global hub for semiconductor manufacturing. All this is possible with foreign investments, and the influx of money from the West will help achieve this dream. Through these investments, Malaysia will become increasingly dependent on the United States, paving the way for its inclusion in the emerging Asian NATO. The investment pattern, which includes not only Western countries but also South Korea and Japan, highlights the broad scope of collaboration among these nations and supports the United States Asian NATO initiative.

  • China, the New Global Mediator, Unites Palestinian Factions

    China, the New Global Mediator, Unites Palestinian Factions

    Even though it has reasons, Gaza is facing one of the worst humanitarian crises. So-called modern valued countries in the West have failed to address the issue, or they fear Israel. Arab countries are found ineffective, and Islamists exploit the situation to cultivate hatred and boost the revival of notorious Islamist organizations. Though everyone, including Arab countries, now knows that a two-state solution is the most feasible solution, the West can’t even suggest it to Israel, as Israel plans to annex Gaza and the West Bank and eliminate all threats.

    At the same time, The Palestinian Authority  is split, with different factions focusing on personal interests rather than addressing the basic needs of their people. However, an interesting development has emerged: China has decided to unite these divided factions. China has effectively mediated talks and meetings to consolidate the Palestinian factions, advancing their two-state demand with greater assertiveness and authority.

    For the Palestinian cause and the movement towards a two-state solution, this is a major development. On Tuesday, leaders from Notorious Hamas, the West Bank’s main party Fatah, and other Palestinian factions reached an agreement after three days of talks in Beijing. They have pledged to enhance collaboration, continue discussions, and establish a national unity government at an unspecified future date. This agreement between Fatah and Hamas represents a significant advancement from previous agreements since their 2007 conflict, which led to Hamas ousting Fatah from the Gaza Strip. The “Beijing Declaration,” signed by 14 Palestinian factions, is a notable step forward in negotiations, though it lacks specific details on how to achieve Palestinian unification. Notably, the agreement emphasizes that the factions should work together to unify Palestinian institutions in the West Bank and Gaza and prepare for national elections.

    This move is a significant diplomatic win for China, who are seeking global leadership status. They have achieved what Western countries and Arab states, despite having closer relationships with the factions, could not. Bringing long-fighting factions to the negotiating table and proposing more practical plans has bolstered China’s status as a global mediator and increased its influence in the Middle East.

    However, there are many criticisms. Some argue that this move does not affect Israel’s actions in Gaza and that without including Israel in the negotiations, it is a waste of time. The involvement of Hamas, responsible for the brutal attack last October, which killed, raped, and kidnapped many and caused chaos in Israel, is unacceptable to both Israel and the US. Any collaboration with Hamas is unlikely to be accepted by Israel, as evidenced by the collapse of previous peace plans pushed by the United States. Israel’s politics are also now linked to actions against Hamas. On Tuesday, Israel’s Foreign Minister Israel Katz reacted angrily to the inclusion of Hamas in the Beijing Declaration. In a post on X, Katz stated that the agreement for joint control of Gaza after the war “won’t happen because Hamas’s rule will be crushed.”

    Although there are doubts about whether the meetings of Palestinian factions – due to their lack of popular support, corrupt leaders, and luxurious lifestyles abroad – can bring real change in Palestinian lives or unity, China’s emergence as a global mediator and key power broker in the Middle East is nonetheless significant. China has shown increasing interest in the Middle East in recent years and is trying to assert more influence in the region. Last year, Beijing successfully mediated a detente between Saudi Arabia and Iran, raising concerns in Washington about the diminishing influence of the US in the region. Therefore, China’s involvement in this situation appears less focused on resolving the crisis itself and more on Beijing’s effort to establish itself as an alternative global leader to the US.

  • UN Court Orders Against Annexation of Palestinian Territories

    UN Court Orders Against Annexation of Palestinian Territories

    The hilly land known as Samaria to Israel and the West Bank to the rest of the world is a center of complex geopolitical tension. This land, reclaimed by Israel from Jordan during the 1967 war, is considered part of the territory designated for an independent Palestine, alongside Gaza. However, both Israel and Palestine remain unwilling to compromise on their stances, failing to reach an agreement on a widely accepted two-state solution. Consequently, Israel has unilaterally begun annexing the West Bank, often involving the forcible removal of the local population and the facilitation of Israeli migration, thereby undermining the prospects for a Palestinian state.

    Although Western countries permitted Israel to proceed and Arab nations showed little interest, the UN’s International Court of Justice (ICJ) disagrees with Israel’s actions. The ICJ has now ordered Israel to end its occupation of the Palestinian territories as swiftly as possible and to provide full reparations for its internationally wrongful acts. Alongside the ICJ’s moves to charge against Netanyahu in light of war crimes in Gaza, it appears that the ICJ is taking a tougher stance against Israel, though Israel is likely to disregard its orders.

    Nawaf Salam, President of the ICJ, stated that the court views Israel’s violations of the prohibition on acquiring territory by force and of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination as directly affecting the legality of Israel’s ongoing occupation of Palestinian territory. He emphasized that Israel’s persistent abuse of its position as an occupying power, through annexation, asserting permanent control over the territory, and continually obstructing the Palestinian right to self-determination, breaches fundamental principles of international law and makes Israel’s presence in the occupied territory unlawful.

    The court identified several breaches of international law by the government of Israel, including forcible evictions, widespread house demolitions, and restrictions on residence and movement. It also noted severe violations such as the transfer of Israeli settlers to the West Bank and East Jerusalem with excessive government support. Additionally, the court highlighted Israel’s failure to prevent or address settler attacks on Palestinians, restrictions on Palestinian access to water, and the exploitation of natural resources in the West Bank. Furthermore, the court observed the extension of Israeli state law to the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The Hague court also found that Israel was in breach of Article 3 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

    Palestine welcomed the court’s order. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, ruling from the West Bank, described the decision as historic and a victory for justice, urging that Israel be compelled to implement it, fearing Israel might neglect the order. Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad Al-Maliki called it a “watershed moment”. However, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a firm supporter of West Bank annexation, expressed discontent. In a statement, Netanyahu emphasized that the Jewish people are not occupiers in their own land and asserted their ancestral heritage in Judea and Samaria. He criticized the ICJ decision, stating, “No decision of lies in The Hague will distort this historical truth, and the legality of Israeli settlements in all parts of our homeland cannot be disputed”.

    Israel did not participate in the proceedings, which involved arguments from an unprecedented 52 states, but it submitted a written argument in July of the previous year, urging the ICJ to dismiss the request for an opinion. Israel also accused the court of prejudice and of failing to recognize Israel’s right and duty to protect its citizens, citing the October 7th attack as an additional point of contention.

    In addition to ordering an end to the occupation as soon as possible, the court, composed of 15 judges, stated that Israel must cease all unlawful acts, including halting new settlement activity and repealing legislation that maintains the occupation, particularly laws that discriminate against Palestinians or alter the demographic composition of any occupied territories. The court also mandated the evacuation of all settlers from existing settlements and the dismantling of sections of the wall constructed by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory. Furthermore, the court called for the return of all Palestinians displaced during the occupation to their original places of residence.

    UN Secretary-General António Guterres will promptly transmit the advisory opinion to the 193-member General Assembly, and it is for the General Assembly to decide how to proceed in the matter. However, the matter is likely to remain unresolved as Israel is unlikely to agree with the ICJ order due to concerns that withdrawing from the West Bank will pose severe security threats to Israel, similar to those from Gaza. Although Israel withdrew its military and settlements from Gaza in 2005, the terrorist organization Hamas strengthened its position there, leading to attacks on Israel.

    Now, Israel is taking back control of Gaza and may act rapidly in the West Bank as well. Right-wing parties are pushing for more settlements, and Israeli politicians with real estate interests have their eyes on the West Bank, further diminishing the prospects for a Palestinian state. As a result, the ICJ decision is unlikely to be accepted by Israel, and they will not work in the direction of the order. However, this decision will mark an important chapter in the history of the Israel-Palestine conflict.