In Geopolitics Today: Monday, November 6th
US Sanctions on Russia Target Military Supply Chains and Arctic LNG 2, Great Power Divisions Cause Inertia at the UN, and other stories.
US Sanctions on Russia Target Military Supply Chains and Arctic LNG 2
The United States imposed new sanctions on over 200 Russian individuals and entities last week, including key defence and technology companies as well as the Arctic LNG 2 project. The sanctions target suppliers in China, Turkey, the UAE and other countries accused of assisting Russia's war effort. This represents an escalation of economic pressure on Moscow by disrupting military supply chains and a major LNG project. The sanctions aim to further isolate Russia's economy and deplete its military capabilities.
The new sanctions reflect the US strategy of steadily expanding restrictions on Russia's access to critical technology and revenue. Targeting Arctic LNG 2 could deprive Moscow of crucial energy revenue while raising gas prices. However, with Europe's storage nearly full, the impact may be limited this winter. The goal is to undermine Russia's ability to wage war over the long term by choking off sources of revenue and key components. These measures will likely further strain Russia's economy but may harden Russian resistance absent battlefield reversals or diplomatic progress.
Read more about this story here.
Ukrainian Counteroffensive Hits Stalemate
Recent statements by top Ukrainian military officials indicate the Ukrainian counteroffensive has slowed and the conflict has reached a stalemate. Commander-in-chief Valery Zaluzhny compared the current conditions to positional warfare in World War I. Ukraine has only advanced roughly 10 miles in its 5-month counteroffensive.
The stalemate suggests Russia's mobilization has bolstered its defences enough to halt Ukraine's momentum. With both sides dug in and military aid possibly declining, the conflict looks set to drag on. This raises concerns about the sustainability of Ukraine's war effort if its pool of recruits continues to age. Russia may aim to prolong the war to strain Ukraine and its NATO backers. The lack of progress toward peace talks is worrying, as the stalemate and mounting costs may harden positions on both sides.
Read more about this story here.
Tenuous Peace Prospects in Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict
Armenian officials have indicated a peace deal with Azerbaijan may be close, with agreement reached on principles of mutual recognition of territorial integrity, border demarcation, and transport links. This follows Azerbaijan's seizure of remaining Armenian-held territory in Karabakh in September. Meanwhile, rhetoric around a “Western Azerbaijan” stokes Armenian fears of further territorial losses.
A deal could bring much-needed stability after recent fighting, but risks inflaming nationalist sentiment on both sides. Azerbaijan's military gains have shifted the balance in its favor, allowing it to dictate terms. Questions remain around the fate of displaced Armenians from Karabakh and the nature of new transport links. Border delimitation also risks fresh controversy over contested boundaries. While chances for peace have improved, mutual distrust persists and implementation will be challenging. External guarantors may be needed, but competing Russian and Western influence complicates mediation efforts.
Read more about this story here.
Limits of North Korea-Russia Military Cooperation
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un's September summit with Russian President Putin fueled speculation of enhanced military cooperation, including weapons flows to aid Russia's war in Ukraine. Kim also toured Russian military sites during his week-long trip. However, the countries announced no concrete agreements, and their relationship remains limited despite renewed engagement. Historic mistrust and economic ties with South Korea constrain substantial cooperation.
While Kim seems willing to provide arms and accept technical aid, expectations of a robust Russia-China-North Korea axis appear overblown. China dominates North Korea economically and likely views the relationship as primarily transactional. For Russia, cooperation may be symbolic rather than strategic. Still, any collaboration on military technology could raise regional tensions. But neither Moscow nor Beijing wants to embolden North Korean aggression that could destabilize Northeast Asia. Despite shows of camaraderie, deep divisions remain that will hinder a meaningful alignment.
Read more about this story here.
China's Delicate Balancing Act in the Israel-Palestine Crisis
China is navigating a delicate balancing act in the Israel-Palestine crisis. Beijing has adopted a more pro-Palestinian posture, calling for ceasefires and a two-state solution. This contrasts sharply with China's deepening economic entanglement with Israel in recent decades. While condemning attacks on civilians by both sides, China pointedly refuses to align its position with Israel by designatating Hamas a terrorist group. Despite offering to mediate, China lacks meaningful leverage with Israel to bring effective diplomacy to bear.
China's shifting stance reflects competing imperatives. A tilt toward Palestine burnishes China's standing in the Arab world. But too hard a line risks its burgeoning economic links with Israel. With limited influence on either party, China's ability to de-escalate appears minimal. The crisis spotlights the constrained nature of China's influence in the Middle East, despite its growing power. As the US staunchly backs Israel, the conflict may hinder China's regional outreach. Nevertheless, pro-Palestinian posturing still yields diplomatic dividends for Beijing across the Middle East and elsewhere. China is left to carefully balance its increasingly complicated ties.
Read more about this story here.
Great Power Divisions Cause Inertia at the UN
The United Nations is struggling to fulfill its mission of resolving international conflicts amidst deepening great power divisions. This is evident in stalemates over the Israel-Palestine and Russia-Ukraine conflicts, which have exposed dysfunction in the Security Council. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres acknowledges today's crises are exceptionally complex, while geopolitical mistrust between major powers is at historic highs.
The advent of multipolarity is straining the UN system designed for a different era. As the UN reaches an inflection point, its ability to tamp down crises is hampered by outdated structures and widening rifts between major powers. Overcoming inertia to reform the Security Council is a monumental challenge. While the UN has weathered past trials, the current global transitions may be more than it can manage absent serious overhaul. Yet prospects for major reforms seem doubtful unless creative solutions can be found to safeguard multilateralism amidst entrenched great power competition.