In Geopolitics Today - Tuesday, June 22nd
Consolidating the Interests of NATO Allies and US Withdrawal from the Middle East
Consolidating the Interests of NATO Allies
The G-7 Summit, aiming to recover from the perils of the pandemic and vying to “build back better” together, was, particularly considering the challenges ahead, a rather inconclusive affair. If nothing else however, it was the culmination of months of diplomatic work by the new US administration to rally its allies for the coming competition with China. Leaders around the world are watching and taking notes of how the US administration and its partners negotiate a common agenda.
The last few months have been particularly active, with several high-level joint statements between US allies: the Japan-U.S. Summit in April, the G-7 Foreign and Development Ministers’ Meeting and the South Korea-U.S. Summit in May, as well as the Australia-Japan 2+2 Foreign and Defense Ministerial Consultations in June.
What these declarations had been missing, however, was a more direct mention by all partners of the Taiwan issue specifically, and the China challenge more broadly. This was amended by the joint G-7 Summit Communiqué, which included the following line: “We underscore the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait, and encourage the peaceful resolution of cross-Strait issues.” Two days later, the same mention also appeared in the EU-US Summit Statement.
According to diplomatic sources cited by a Tokyo-based news agency, France and Germany argued that since the Taiwan Strait issue had already been touched upon a month ago, it was necessary to bring up the issue in the leaders’ communiqué, both nations likely looking to mitigate any potential backlash from Beijing. But by the morning of the last day of the summit, Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel both agreed on including the Taiwan Strait issue in the communiqué.
Read more about this story here.
US Withdrawal from the Middle East
The Pentagon is reportedly in the midst of pulling out a variety of capabilities from Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and other countries in the Middle East region. According to the reports, the withdrawal will include Patriot missiles, a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, fighter aircraft and other unspecified weapons.
But the withdrawal of systems from the Middle East is not a move unique to the sitting US president. In fact, both Obama and Trump made public commitments to a reduction of US forces in the Middle East. Though perhaps a significant part of the reason behind why Biden is presiding over this long-intended withdrawal has to do with the decision of the Trump administration to bolster Saudi air defence capabilities in the wake of the drone attack on the Abqaiq oil facility in 2019.
George Friedman thinks that the Biden administration’s withdrawal is primarily driven by the need for redeployment in other regions. He considers the Pacific theatre, but notes that the US has long been conscious of a Chinese threat, and therefore sufficient capability must already be deployed there. On the Russian theatre, Friedman points out that the US has interests in both Belarus and the Caucasus, and that translates to a realistic security interest in increasing air defences in several countries, such as Poland, Romania, Georgia and Ukraine.
Read more about this story here.