In Geopolitics This Week
Guyana Takes Border Dispute with Venezuela to the ICJ, Fissures Emerge in Ukraine's Leadership, Militias Escalate Attacks on US Forces in Iraq, and other stories.
Guyana Takes Border Dispute with Venezuela to the ICJ
The border dispute between Guyana and Venezuela has escalated, with Guyana filing a request to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for provisional measures. At its core, this dispute stems from competing interpretations of an 1899 arbitral boundary award between then-British Guiana and Venezuela. Venezuela has long disputed the award's validity, but its plans for a December referendum on annexing the resource-rich Essequibo region have brought tensions to a head. Guyana seemingly perceives a grave risk of irreversible annexation through this unilateral act.
The planned referendum directly challenges the 1899 boundary award by seeking a popular mandate in Venezuela to annex Essequibo. This violates international laws on annexing another state's territory and bypasses the ICJ's affirmed 2020 jurisdiction. Venezuela appears poised to exploit lingering ambiguities from the colonial era to strengthen its territorial claims. Although a referendum endorsing annexation would lack legitimacy, it could still heighten tensions and risk militarization.
As both states adopt assertive stances, the risk of accidental escalation and clashes in contested border areas intensifies. Without urgent diplomacy grounded in pragmatism and flexibility, legal recourse alone cannot bridge fundamental differences or impose political compromises. Lasting solutions to such complex post-colonial disputes often require mutual recognition of the futility of maximalist claims. But jingoism and unwillingness to compromise may instead precipitate a volatile situation, to the immense detriment of local populations.
The ICJ potentially maintains an important role in urging restraint through provisional measures. However, imposed legal remedies cannot resolve fundamentally political disputes alone. Even if halted for now, the referendum will not eliminate profound ambiguities surrounding the 1899 boundary award. While adjudication may mitigate immediate threats, any lasting settlement requires political pragmatism from both parties to avoid an escalating militarization that, historically, only brings suffering.
Fissures Emerge in Ukraine's Leadership
The recent public disagreement between Ukraine's civilian and military leadership over the state of the counteroffensive signals growing disunity at a crucial juncture. This rift, coupled with the dismissal of senior commanders like General Khorenko, threatens to impair military operations through political interference. While Zaluzhny highlights the need for advanced weaponry to break the impasse, Zelenskyy's team seems concerned sober assessments may shake allies' commitment.
Ukraine faces multiple complex challenges — military stagnation along entrenched frontlines, a demographic crisis, and declining international attention. Zaluzhny's public assessment sees no sign that a technological breakthrough is around the corner. With the counteroffensive stalled, retaining long-term international support remains the primary goal of the government. But perceptions of internal discord and mixed messaging could work to jeopardize this external lifeline if Ukraine appears divided or directionless internally.
As the military seeks to adapt strategy with limited resources, any perceived political interference through command shake-ups risks impairing effectiveness while breeding distrust. Meanwhile, Zelenskyy faces his own balancing act keeping foreign aid flowing by projecting strength, even as conditions on the ground deteriorate. While robust external support remains essential for the survival of the Ukrainian government, internal divisions could prove more ruinous than any battlefield reversal. Navigating these dilemmas will test Ukraine's inner resilience and cohesion.
As Ukraine contends with difficult tradeoffs amid the shifting dynamics of war, alignment between the civilian government and the military is critical to overcoming the numerous complex challenges ahead. While arms supplies are vital, Ukraine's long-term future will be determined by its inner strength and unity of purpose. For the government, any perceptions of internal disarray or mixed messaging serve to weaken Ukraine's hand.
Militias Escalate Attacks on US Forces in Iraq
Iran-backed militias in Iraq are continuing to claim attacks on US forces. The nature and frequency of the assaults, now numbering over 40 with dozens injured, reflect a calculated campaign by armed groups to target key bases like Al Asad and Tanf. Their arsenal now includes armed drones and rockets, presenting a complex threat profile. Despite US airstrikes and Iraqi government condemnation, the well-equipped militias persist in their attacks.
Israel's ongoing military campaign in Gaza has prompted escalating responses from militant groups across the region. At the same time, US military assets across Iraq and elsewhere in the region are supporting Israel's campaign. Iran-backed groups like Kataib Hezbollah in Iraq have claimed attacks on US bases in apparent retaliation for the US support of Israel in Gaza. Despite being integrated into Iraq's state-sponsored Hashd al-Shaabi paramilitary force, these Iran-backed militias continue to operate with impunity across Iraq.
The growing frequency of attacks may involve the US in retaliatory strikes, jeopardizing Iraq's stability just as Baghdad works to strengthen its institutions. While Washington holds Tehran responsible for enabling the attacks, Iran relies on the ambiguity of its ties as political cover. With both US and Iranian allies part of Iraq's government, miscalculations by either side could unleash a regional conflagration. Iraq's prime minister Sudani is caught in an increasingly untenable position, trying to de-escalate while walking a tightrope between his US and Iranian partners.
The expanding militia attacks underline Iraq's continued vulnerability to tensions in the US-Iran relationship, despite efforts in recent years to chart an independent course. Absent concerted diplomacy for de-escalation, Baghdad has limited means to prevent its territory becoming an arena for dangerous regional brinkmanship. The costs of alignment with competing powers are rising as armed groups override Iraq's national interests.